Minute Book 73At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the eleventh day of
• August, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, Parfitt, Pye,
A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A. Rodgers,
City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works,
S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations, M. Zides, Acting Commissioner of
Community Planning and Development, J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, Engineering and Works Department, H. Ellis,
Administrative Assistant to the City Manager, D. French, Director of Personnel
and Training, P. Clark, Fire Chief, and E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend K. Legassick, rector of Trinity
Church.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on July 28th
last, be confirmed.
The Mayor advised that he will give a written report on the recent trip to Tokyo and Hong Kong, and
that as an interim report, he advised that those who made the trip believe.it was successful - not to the degree
that they could say we are assured of all ships coming to Saint John, but we are assured of ships coming to Saint
• 7, John, and on that basis, those who made the trip believe themselves to be successful, and the opportunity may
�0�� exist for more ships to come to Saint John; the other companies are coming here to review our port once again, in
late September.
Yis� is
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
e /zy 00'r RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Administrative
Assistant to the City Manager, with regard to the proposal of Councillor Pye that citizens over the age of sixty-
five be allowed a reduction to the sum of $7.50 in the present $15.00 ambulance rate, advising that this proposal
n has been considered by City staff and by the Hospital staff both as to principle and application; that the
present rate of $15.00 for ambulance service within the City limits was set up in early 1974 at which time the
1 Council was budgeting for an ambulance service deficit of $35,000.00, and the deficit for 1975 has reached the
� a_kS �O r $63,000.00 level, and consequently the present user rate of $15.00 represents about 55% of the actual cost; that
'
Senior the City Manager is giving consideration to the whole matter of rate structure not only for ambulance service but
for the Fire Department emergency unit, and will be reviewing with the Fire Chief the rate that should be applied
when the Paramedical Unit comes into practical use; that the staff of the Hospital has expressed complete agree-
ment to any rate reduction or rebate structure the City might propose for sixty -five years old, but have stated
that they cannot estimate the effect such a rate reduction will have on the annual deficit now billed to the
c°M Qf�e�7Cy City - they also point out that many of their billings for ambulance service are
g paid for by Blue Cross, and the
Gty��t opinion has been expressed that Blue Cross will be one of the major beneficiaries if there is a rate reduction
CRe_5ciz e or elderly people -- and recommending, in view of the foregoing, that consideration be given to the maintaining
,/ of $15.00 as a partial rate for the elderly, at the time new and increased rates will be proposed for ambulance,
s j _ ('ems /ZV emergency unit, and paramedical services provided by the City -- be received and filed and the recommendation
,0_A,.1.,e.,.e adopted.
Mr. Barfoot advised that the meeting between himself and the Fire Chief, as above - mentioned, will take
•� /4 Mph place within a month. In reply to the question as to whether the City has any plans to make the ambulance
/ ! service pay for itself, Mr. Barfoot stated he believes it should be City policy to attempt to recover the costs
/2/ e of providing this user service. In reply to Councillor Gould's comment that the City should look at the matter
of the percentage of recovery made in the ambulance rates towards the cost of this service to correct the present
situation, the Mayor felt that this would be accomplished through the said meeting between the City Manager and
the Fire Chief. Councillor Parfitt noted that on October 1st the Province will be taking over Pharmicare for the
senior citizens, which might help any extra expenses. She stated she has learned from the Blue Cross that they
too, to compensate for Pharmicare being taken over by the Province, are going to compensate some way for the
ambulance - they pay 80% of the $25.00 fee which might be for senior citizens, and so on, which will help them in
this way. Councillor Pye explained that the motion which he proposed and subsequently discussed at the Council
meeting of July 28th last, was meant to cover all those who had attained the age of sixty -five who were not
/� covered by Blue Cross or any other type of insurance -- so, that gives us an entirely different picture (regarding
314e ` ^P$.55 any benefits accruing to Blue Cross through his said proposed motion). He stated he therefore would amend the
wording of that proposed motion to except those who are now receiving the benefit of Blue Cross coverage from the
provisions of that proposed motion. The Mayor asked that Councillor Pye allow this amendment to the proposed
motion to be accepted to be a suggestion to the City Manager and the Fire Chief for their consideration when they
Aire 641 meet concerning the subject of ambulance rates, et cetera, and the suggestion can then be brought back to Council
N_6"P P for review. Councillor Pye agreed to this procedure being followed.
`�/�ye0x�or�e Councillor Cave stated that his thought in making the above motion was that there is much study to be
' given to the matter, not only as far as the senior citizens are concerned but for those people who are outside
the area and who have no ambulance service. He stated he would like a complete study of this, and added he
understands a study is going on now by the Provincial Government, which is the reason he made the motion for
adoption of the above recommendation in the letter from the City Manager and the Administrative Assistant.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
Opwh t RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, with reference to the
request from the Grand Bay - Martinon -Morna Volunteer Fire Department for financial assistance, submitting the
comments of Fire Chief Clark by letter dated July 24th, 1975, and advising of the fact that at the time of
• / /hYP� /�➢ ®/7 — amalgamation in 1967 this volunteer group informed Common Council through Chief Millard Clifford that they wished
Arl'ArwQ to carry on as a volunteer group and that they would raise any required funds through local contributions and
llolc,rl6eer subscriptions, and that on the Chief's recommendation the arrangement was agreed upon by Council and this situation
pe oe�¢ has obtained since that date, and further advising that the area's population has grown considerably in the past
eight years and it seems reasonable to expect changes in this arrangement with more changes to be anticipated in
Fire ehieP I the future as the area continues to expand -- and recommending, in due consideration to Chief Clark's comments,
1>
w
and to the organizational background to this volunteer department, that a grant of $1,800.00 be included
in the 1976 budget of the Saint John Fire Department, and paid over to the Grand Bay - Martinon -Morna •
Volunteer Fire Department in that year -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
Power �Ohllo/- RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be granted
for payment of the invoice from the Power Commission of the City of Saint John, dated July 4th, 1975, in
!moo %s, Poorer the amount of $11,188.19, for supplying and setting six poles and installing a bank of transformers at
Lansdowne Avenue, as follows:- labour and trucks $6,221.85; stock $3,949.23; plus 10% engineering super-
vision cost $1,017.11 -- totalling $11,188.19.
�arsdoco�rr e '
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, approval be given for payment of the invoice from Imperial Industries Limited, dated June 20th,
�c/�dit 420' /PS' 1975, in the amount of $6,505.08 for the balance of the purchase of a MT trackless vehicle, as follows: -
1 only V blade attachment; 1 only snow blower attachment;
1 only angle blade attachment $ 12,190.00
Less rental /purchase instalments 6,166.78
�rl3G// /eSS� Net purchase price $ 6,023.22
Plus N.B.S.S. tax 481.86
$ 6,505.08
fiydvaelz�
170719
�yu��Mefd
rer�ta/
.� fi�•�fie /d �Z
,F9ur�on7e�i'
rem /s��
rtPor�`
has er Ere
1ay1;Vnf Seaver
Tender acc�
/IJari -11-me YJao
oS ®ddir��
�ahrasfpr
Forest f/i %/s
o/
�+
Q/7 00 /Oa1
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted
for payment of the invoice from Crane Supply, Division of Crane Canada Ltd., dated June 27th, 1975, in the
amount of $2,715.98, for the purchase of twelve No. 2 hydrant bodies with two base nozzles and one pumper •
nozzle.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
given for payment of the attached invoices for equipment rental, namely:-
D. Hatfield, Ltd. - to the Works Dept. July 1 -15, 1975
(dated July 21, 1975) $ 22,804.40
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. - to the Works Dept. July 1 -15, 1975
(dated July 17, 1975) $ 11,550.00
Councillor M. Vincent stated he feels that the question that Council had been asking for quite
some time on equipment rentals has been answered by the report that was prepared by the Commissioner of
Engineering and Works on August 7th, 1975, as had been requested at a previous meeting of Council, on the
trucks that are being rented, and their license numbers and owners - copies of this report having been
furnished to the Council members for their information.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report from the City Manager,
the Commissioner of Finance and the Purchasing Agent, the bid of Lantic Laser Ltd., Saint John, N. B. for
supplying one only Micro Grade, Grade -o -mat IV laser at a cost of $8,640.00, for laying sewer pipe, be
accepted, the tender price being $8,000.00 plus $640.00 Provincial Sales Tax, totalling $8,640.00.
Mir. Barfoot explained that the above recommendation was made following a field demonstration and
an assessment of this equipment in the field; basically, the recommendation in favour of the Grade -o -mat
IV was because it was gravity operated and could be calibrated by our own City crews; the Dialgrade was
electronically operated and it was felt that the City crews would have more trouble in adjusting this
equipment in the field than they would in using the Grade -o -mat IV and, therefore, there would be less
chance of it being out of service. He made further explanation of a technical nature regarding such
equipment, as to why the Grade -o -mat IV laser equipment was recommended, and was regarded as a superior
machine, and that this machine will be expected to save the City a lot of time and money in its use.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that funds
have been provided in the 1975 capital budget for sodding at the Lancaster Memorial Field and at the
playfield at the Forest Hills School; that Maritime Sod Ltd. have submitted a bid of $1.55 per square yard
to supply and install the sods at the said two sites and to provide maintenance for same for a period of
two months; that Memorial Field will require approximately 18,000 square yards for an approximate total
cost of $27,900.00 while the said playfield at Forest Hills School requires approximately 12,000 square
yards, at an approximate total cost of $18,600.00, and that the Forest Hills School project is to be cost
shared with the School Board -- and recommending that Maritime Sod Ltd. be awarded this contract at the
$1.55 per square yard price quoted -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Cave stated that although we know that over $100,000.00 is to be spent on the play-
ground in the Forest Hills area this year, he has not noticed any activity on this project, and that he
was hoping the Council would have some sort of a report on this project. He added that we were assured it
would be completed this year. Mr. Barfoot advised that a report will be submitted on that matter for a
future meeting of Council. Councillor Green asked how soon the work will be undertaken regarding the
Lancaster Memorial Field. Mr. Barfoot replied he would assume that this job would be undertaken almost
right away; the sod has to be laid quickly in order to get rooted this fall and be ready for next spring;
he believes that the Field is pretty well ready for this work to be done. Councillor M. Vincent stated
his question was as to whether the City Manager knows if there are any sods available at this time. Mr.
Barfoot replied that he does not have that information. The Mayor noted that the answer to this question
can be obtained.
0
L
1
•
� {3
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
• rySP////��` Seconded by Councillor Gould
S� SPijB�ry RESOLVED that the recommendation of the City Manager, for payment of the
��� G•t invoice from Stephen Construction Company, Limited, dated August lst, 1975, in the amount of $40,165.38, for
supplying asphalt to the Works Department during the period July 16th to 31st, 1975, be adopted.
6� On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
�ehQ env$ RESOLVED that bids for the used City vehicles and equipment offered for
dG°L°en sale by tender by the City be accepted as recommended in the bid summary submitted by the City Manager and the
�+ /" Purchasing Agent, and that the items on which the minimum bid has not been received be re- advertised for sale.
q+�7�e 0T/
�y vl_'4 Councillor Hodges and Mr. MacKinnon discussed the matter of evaluation that was made of the above noted
e9aiPme vehicles, to determine the amount of the minimum bid in each case. Councillor Hodges raised the question of
whether the vehicles are in safe condition when the City sells them, and whether they bear a safety sticker. In
reply, Mr. MacKinnon stated he would suggest that some of them do and probably some of them do not; he thinks
that the lowness of the minimum bid depends on the age of the vehicles and the use - some of them have 90,000 -
100,000 miles on them and some of them have as much as 120,000 miles on them. The Mayor asked if the law does
' not require that there be a safety sticker on a vehicle before you can sell it. Mr. MacKinnon replied that he
was not sure in that regard, but he knows that in order to be driven on the highway the vehicles has to have a
safety sticker. The Mayor asked if anything new is put on these City vehicles before they are sold. Mr. Mac-
Kinnon made negative reply, stating that the vehicles are made operational - however, if it is something required
in order to make it operational that is done but new tires are not put on it if the tires that are presently on
it are of sufficient rubber consistency to allow the vehicle to be on the road; we are not putting new equipment
on the vehicle unnecessarily, just to sell it. Councillor Davis stated he does not understand why re- advertising
will change the picture, there not having been many bids in reply to the first tender call; he does not think
there is anything to guarantee that people will bid higher because it is a second tender call. He felt that
perhaps the Council should consider an auction and dispose of the vehicles that way; however, he did not think
that the City could auction a vehicle that does not have a safety sticker on it, but the other vehicles should be
• auctioned, and this precludes going through the calling for tenders again. Mr. MacKinnon explained that the
matter of the equipment and its availability for the road is being handled by the Works Department, and that the
actual tendering and auctioning - if that is what is to be done - is usually being done by the Purchasing De-
partment - the Purchasing Department may have considered this in its own deliberations. He pointed out that this
was the first attempt to sell the vehicles, on a scale such as this - normally, we have traded them in and we
found that we have gotten little or no value for them, at all.
On motion of Councillor Gould
/1r u Seconded by Councillor Cave
r RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
7°�i approval be given for payment of the invoice from Chitticks (1962) Ltd., dated July 17th, 1975, for equipment
/'kS rented to the Works Department during the period July 1st, to 15th, 1975, in the amount of $5,630.00.
6102)x / -
'On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
-� ✓ Seconded by Councillor Cave
6Z e/ RESOLVED that in accordance with the report submitted by the City Manager
i���pz�ed and the Purchasing Agent, regarding receipt of bids for chip sealing approximately 130,000 square yards of City
F /ir t6to 'e streets, the lowest bids received, namely, those of Flintkote Co. of Canada Ltd., as shown on the submitted
summary of bids, be accepted, the prices quoted including all labour and material necessary to do a complete job.
c O/% SPc��h In reply to Councillor Kipping's question, Mr. Barfoot advised that this is not the first time the chip
/ l sealing work has been awarded to a private company and let out to tender - it has been done by a private company
9 for a number of years, and almost all those years it was done by Flintkote.
On motion of Councillor Green
14 hane/pl Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the month of June be received and
filed, together with statement of appropriation and expenditure for the year to date and the statement of revenue
for the period ended June 30th, 1975•
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
received and filed. RESOLVED that the report of the Fire Department for the month of June be
�epor On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report for June of the Technical and Inspection Services,
including the Plumbing Division, be received and filed.
re�QIbI) On motion of Councillor Gould
• Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services,
regarding projects that were undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic Expansion programme, namely:-
Seconded by Councillor Cave
•,��aIP 'Wg
RESOLVED
that as recommended
by the City
Manager, approval be granted for
/'WW72l L�pl
payment of the invoices for equipment rental,
as follows: -
Cg1;alc7rS
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. - to the Works Dept.
July 16 -31,
1975
(dated August
6th, 1975)
$ 5,867.00
- to the Water & Sewerage Dept. July 16 -31,
1975
(dated August
6, 1975)
$ 6,138.00
On motion of Councillor Gould
14 hane/pl Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the month of June be received and
filed, together with statement of appropriation and expenditure for the year to date and the statement of revenue
for the period ended June 30th, 1975•
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
received and filed. RESOLVED that the report of the Fire Department for the month of June be
�epor On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report for June of the Technical and Inspection Services,
including the Plumbing Division, be received and filed.
re�QIbI) On motion of Councillor Gould
• Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services,
regarding projects that were undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic Expansion programme, namely:-
M
J7e�.�Ls, 1. Courtenay Bay Causeway
OA ;_ (a) A. D. I. Limited
/ Engineering Services for Western Approaches
C'aa SBff'6"' Payments previously approved $ 160,670.55
A. `d Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 37,
dated June 30, 1975 $ 4,172.84
6? odyeat^!aa'- (b) Goodyear Paving Limited (Western Approaches)
Total value of contract
j y9 �� $ 1,285,044.50
Total work done, Estimate Number 9 1,079,309.40
Retention 161,896.41
Payments previously approved 788,830.06 '
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 9,
dated July 30, 1975 $ 113,882.93
2. Milford - Randolph - Greendale Collector Sewer System
Co // /7a�l�Keu��U Gaspe Construction
J s - Total value of contract $ 1,463,230.25
eIYJ Total work done, Estimate Number 4 452,364.90
Retention 67,854.74
Payments previously approved 345,447.43
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 4,
dated August 2, 1975 $ 39,062.73
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's query as to how many more payments the City has to make to
A. D. I. Limited for the western approach to the causeway engineering services, Mr. Barfoot explained that
these payments are on a per diem basis and will be paid, he presumes, as long as the engineers have work to
do on the construction - he therefore assumes there are several more payments to be made. Councillor M.
Vincent asked how much more work these engineers have to do, in terms of time. Mr. MacKinnon estimated
there are approximately two more weeks of work to do - however, we are well behind schedule and we have a
new completion date which was February 3rd, 1975• Councillor M. Vincent asked when is the penalty clause
factor taken into consideration in regard to the payments, to these people who have been behind in their •
contract. Mr. MacKinnon advised that it is being taken into consideration now; the penalty clauses are in
the form of liquidated damages which are, on the completion of the contract, withheld and computed as of
the new completion date that we have estimated - the original date was December lst, 1974 on the western
approach to the causeway and it is now February 3rd, 1975 - we have agreed to an extension of nine weeks
regarding the completion date. In reply to Councillor Davis' question as to whether A. D. I. Limited fee
is on a straight percentage basis of the cost of the western approach structure, Mr. MacKinnon advised that
it was a per diem basis. Councillor Cave asked for confirmation that the hold -back is sufficient to pay
for any penalty, plus any other. Mr. MacKinnon replied that this is not correct; we are computing liquidated
damages on the project and we merely hold that back from payment to contractor as a liquidated damage - we
just take it out of his contract.
On motion of Councillor Cave
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
�yr
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the following
,
L�
�e f�✓ ✓/���'
construction progress certificate be paid on the following named contract for a project that is included in
the Capital Budget: -
taCpvovd free,
1. Lakewood
'
Avenue, Pauline Street and Westbrook, 8 -inch Sanitary, 8 -inch Watermain
;su11jye Xe -,A-
Ocean Westway Construction Limited
Total value of contract $ 123,687.75
LC
Total work done, Estimate Number 1 14,126.80
!,�/ LL��
oca7% 6y�iLbVc3
Retention 2,119.02
Payments previously approved Nil
�I�SZ/TtiIC, �t
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated August 7, 1975 $ 12,007.78
On motion of Councillor Cave
Neighbourhood Association requesting that priority consideration should be given to the North End in any
•
m¢ L
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
X�' /�,
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the lower of
.
&IWP'7eee'O
two bids received for supplying one only 671 Detroit diesel engine for installation in the Number 21 Fire
e A.*
Department pumper, namely, that of Seaboard Diesel Ltd. of Saint John N, B., in the amount of $6,800.00
J
plus tax, be accepted.
leveryday
Councillor Gould asked the age of this pumper and what its new life expectancy is with this new
engine. Mr. Barfoot replied that it is a 1960 pumper. Mr. Clark advised that this pumper served for 15
years with a gas engine. Mr. Barfoot noted that the experience with diesel engines is that they are
considerably better than the gas engines. In reply to Councillor Gould's question as to the life expect-
ancy of this vehicle with this new engine, Mr. Clark stated that it is 25 years. Mr. Barfoot added that
'
this pumper is now down and it would cost $2,500.00 to prepare the present gas engine, which is the reason
for the quotation for a diesel engine; it seems logical to expend the additional funds to get a better
engine, for the life expectancy expected from this machine.
I
Consideration was given at this time to the joint letter from the City Manager and the Deputy
�yr
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services advising that last year the Province made an allocation to the
L�
�e f�✓ ✓/���'
City of Saint John for neighbourhood improvement funds and the Council allocated these to the South End and
this
programme is well under way; that the Neighbourhood Improvement Conceptual Plan is being worked on in
'
conjunction with the South End Development Corporation and it is hoped that programmes arising out of this
fi?eao�a 61,",weg
plan will be brought to Council in the near future; that the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Pro-
gramme is under way and inspections under the minimum standards and loans and grants are presently being
N• Z. %
processed; that the Province has received an allocation of funds for the year 1975 from the Federal govern-
ment and to date has made no allocation of these funds to municipalities; that the Province knows of the
City's interest in receiving funds for the year 1975 and the City has been working with various citizen's
groups to obtain an indication of where these funds could be spent in the City when the Province allocation
is received; that submitted with the letter is a report for Council's information from the North End
Neighbourhood Association requesting that priority consideration should be given to the North End in any
m¢ L
new allocation of funds; that the City Manager and the said Deputy Commissioner give their strong support
to the submission by the North End group and will make a specific recommendation to Council when the
.
0
Province allocation of funds is made. The submission from the said North End Neighbourhood Association
/
6ourhOO(rL
advises that this Association came into existence in June, 1973 with the viewpoint of improving the com-
munity spirit and overall conditions, such as housing, recreation, social and civil services, and the
leveryday
life of the community, and has seen the need for action in the North End and is trying to do
something about it. The submission advises that the Association requests that the Common Council consider
I
"..-
.
Iff, A;J{i
IlVel'!fPrlKJI-
hnl/ /l~SI
'*r6!, 6
III/. I. 'J?
/Y.;1# 1. 1I.s.ff.
/l c-C-
.Fed.~v-6,
1>/'r1if.. Ce?d.
/l/.F~d
IlYet'ffJ; j,p W"
JO(l,! 19$$
IV. T 7?
;:eef. 'if' jP,..ov.
b!pvts.
. !?€- zt7I1IJfj'
I L-
/I/pr/~ h
ments "If-
/lffenaies
A -6- tit.
ad. on
I tfa~/(3~ '7!6
/l. 2, c'1t
1i}.C'.
. ?/"(}y,C(?yt-,
OOMpal7 !f
l'eiurl1 +
f?ees
~
,,-5
the area from Clarendon Street north to Visart Street, and the area west from Adelaide Street to the St. John
River and Spar Cove, as well as the block bounded by Metcalfe Street, Main Street, Adelaide Street, and Lansdowne
Avenue - the area proposed for Neighbourhood Improvement Programme would include only the western section (that
is, Indiantown), while the rest of the defined area would be included merely for purposes of Residential Rehab-
ilitation Assistance Programme. The brief advises that the said Association will work with City staff to prepare
an application to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation through the New Brunswick Housing Corporation, acting
for the Province for cost-sharing, to carry out detailed neighbourhood planning in the area proposed, to define a
precise boundary of the neighbourhood to be improved, and a specific programme of rehabilitation; and further
advises that secondary planning is essential for the over-all development of the neighbourhood. The brief was
submitted per Councillor Kenneth Gould, President of the said Association.
Councillor Gould commented that it is nice to see another group in the city ready to take advantage of
the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme as soon as the Province decides who is going to get those funds. He
stated he understands that the South End is going ahead with its programme at the present time and is starting to
use the funds allocated for that area. He stated he also understands that the rest of the municipalities in the
Province who got funds last year were not able to get organized and, in fact, have not used their funds, and with
that in mind he intended to move the following appropriate resolution.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that when Neighbourhood Improvement Programme allocation of funds
becomes available to the City of Saint John, the City of Saint John's allocation under the Neighbourhood Improve-
ment Programme under the National Housing Act for the year 1975 be committed to the area generally known as the
North End, that area being west of Adelaide Street to the St. John River and extending north to Visart Street.
Councillor Gould advised that Mr. Leonard MacDonald, one of the members of the committee members of the
North End Neighbourhood Association, was present at the meeting and may be able to answer questions from Council
members, and would probably be very willing to do so, should the Council members need some answers.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that now that the Federal Government has made the money available to the
Provincial Government and we are waiting for Provincial allocation of funds, he is wondering why would we not
consider that, now that we have the proposal that has been supported by some Council members and by City staff,
we would go after the Province for the funds rather than wait for the Province to start to allocate. Mr. Barfoot
replied that he thinks that would be an appropriate move, that the Council supports this submission. Councillor
M. Vincent asked if the Council is prepared to make a motion to that effect, following the above motion. Coun-
cillor Gould advised that he thinks that the City staff has already made that type of feeling known to the
central body, saying that if they have nobody else who will take advantage of the Neighbourhood Improvement
Programme funds the City will take the whole two million dollars this year and give it to the North End.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Common Council go on record as endorsing the presentation
made by the North End Neighbourhood Association and that an immediate submission be made to the Provincial
Government requesting funds from the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme based on the Federal Government funding,
and that the Common Council be notified of a response from the Provincial Government.
Councillor Davis advised that the above named funds are not allocated in quite that fashion: the
programme has to be sort of well under way before the application can be made and activated; however, he does not
think there is any great harm in doing what the above motion says. He pointed out that the City is actually
working on three Neighbourhood Improvement Programmes: the South End, the North End and the West Side. He felt
that it is very gratifying to see Councillor Gould chairing the North End group because the group has put a lot
of time into this endeavour. He stated that he does not think that the funds that have been allocated to Moncton,
Fredericton and elsewhere will be transferred to Saint John automatically, unless Saint John is very far ahead.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land lying west of lots
fronting on Glenview Avenue containing approximately 20 acres, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential
district to "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district, be read a second time.
Councillors M. Vincent and Kipping voted "nay" to the above resolution.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land lying west of lots
fronting on Glenview Avenue containing approximately 20 acres, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential
district to "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate
Common Seal affixed thereto.
Councillor Kipping stated that during the Council's discussion of the above matter on August 5th last,
at first reading of the re-zoning amendment, he thought it was very significant that those opposing the re-zoning
had pointed out that Alpha Investments and Agencies Limited were not in good standing with the Provincial Govern-
ment. He stated he would like to know if there has been any follow-up on the part of staff in order to either
confirm or have this denied. Councillor Gould asked what difference that has to do with the rezoning. Councillor
Kipping replied that it seems to him that the difference is that if the Council is not dealing with a company
that is in good standing the Council could be embarking on a course that is simply not good business, and he
would hope that the Council would not do anything like that. The Mayor pointed out that, actually, what the
Council is doing is re-zoning a piece of property and not talking about the people who are going to use it.
Councillor Cave commented that there are certain qualifications the developer has to meet before getting a
building permit, after the third reading of a re-zoning. Councillor Davis recalled that it was Mr. A. B. Gilbert,
Q. C. who stated what Councillor Kipping has just repeated, and Mr. Ralph Stephen denied it. He stated that he
asked the City Solicitor to check, and on doing so the City Solicitor found that the said company has not filed a
return, neither has it paid its annual fee. Councillor Davis in reply to the point made by the Mayor, noted tpat
the Council is re-zoning a piece of land that is not owned by a company that has not filed its annual report, and
Council would be re-zoning over the objections of a lot of people. He stated he feels that if the Council defers
the third reading and sees if that company will satisfy a simple requirement of filing its statements and paying
its fees, then it will show that the company is definitely interested in purchasing the property which the ,
Council is re-zoning.
6/
~
~
fi'e-~ on/n,ff
/llpk.Lnt/tist-
tned$+t9~.
/d-rL.
1(e-;zoJ'/f/79'
:lJ.axt-er
:JJ.air/es A~L
Re-;zpninff
1?e-~on/l7f
KC1-t-A~~ :yf>pt.
2)ru."!f f:P"ye
JRd.
/J1KI1/C'/j:Jc7/
7>~n 23i/-.(;;'w
~5t- C o.;;l:;r
/!hrerp"/se:s
ArtL to
r1, t! /:3/rwe~
+ ..sQhS .k
ife- :ZPh/H.1
IVes-c- ..5/~ e
(117H/mKJ7/~.!/
~$'p
7M4?c ~.!f-
~$el'Ye ..>-1:
rh~~he /1Vf?
Councillor Cave recalled that in the course of the discussion with the Glen Falls group at the
Council meeting of August 5th regarding this re-zoning matter, the brief from the Glen Falls Flood Com-
mittee makes reference to the trailer park on Rothesay Avenue as being now spread over almost a mile in
length and clear Over to the Westmorland Road, and stated that he obtained a map from City Hall and on
checking it he finds that the trailer park is facing on Rothesay Avenue 1,000 feet and runs in towards the
Westmorland Road 1,500 feet. Councillor Cave advised that he was bringing this information out, for
clarification of the facts. The Mayor advised that the Council will look this matter over.
.
Councillor Gould suggested that the matter be laid on the table for one week to satisfy the
interested persons on the point made by Councillor Davis.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
I
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that third reading regarding this re-zoning be laid on the
table for one week.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors Cave and Hodges voting
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning
By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning all the prop-
erties on the westerly side of Millidge Avenue from Valerie Street to the Baxter Dairies Limited head
office, from "RM-l" Multiple Residential district to "I-I" Light Industrial district, be read a third time
and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning both sides of
Manawagonish Road from approximately Catherwood Street to the small business area which includes Purdy
Motors and Atherton Business Machines Ltd., from "R-l" One-Family Residential district to "R-2" One- and
Two-Family Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land at
the northeasterly corner of Rothesay Road and Drury Cove Road with a frontage of about 600 feet on the
first road and about 750 feet on the second road, but excepting thereout and therefrom a small lot on the
corner itself and the small lot on Drury Cove Road, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential
district to "I-I" Light Industrial district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common
Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal
Plan By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing
from a Low Density Residential area and placing in a Light Industrial area the property at the northeasterly
corner of the Drury Cove Road and Rothesay Roads, now owned by East Coast Enterprises Ltd., and the A. C.
Fairweather property on the northerly side of Ashburn Road, be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law", was read in its entirety prior
the adoption of the above resolution.
I
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the site of the
West Side Community Hospital and the associated property across Prince Street, from "R-IB" One-Family
Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
I
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Traffic on
Streets in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of the Motor Vehicle Act 1973 and Amendments
Thereto", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John Made
Under the Authority of the Motor Vehicle Act 1973 and Amendments Thereto", was read in its entirety prior
to the adoption of the above resolution.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting at this time)
~
,..-
.
e~jpb~'
~5t-e.
~nti!?rf?ri
A-C-tL
Prov- b!~td-.
C!()",~n!f ~
I. 1?, //, ~.;]~!e
:T: .$. ~rui6'!I
C!fJ/I?Mt7n
C' (71.07<91/
eh7e.P,~ehc.f
V(7-6- rn!
It'eflLil'e~
.1n"toL/"Y
.
~+i:tz '
~1P7h7.#/ht7A
61'$e.h d
e(Jnf'(if {?".t-t;;,
///;-!J
I
s.J:I/s!J-
IfrU$11Jg
7&:>K FOJ"Ce
Ref)(),.-t-
.
..(al1~ {J;
&semenc-
E: .7)C}l.9fe
!l/1/.,edA(
a//. $eUlt?J"
'1
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by, Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, in reply to the Council's
request made at its meeting held on August 5th last that he establish who are the signing officers of East Coast
Enterprises Ltd. (whose re-zoning application was before Council at that time), and whether its annual fees have
been paid to the Provincial Secretary's Office in Fredericton, advising that from information received from the
Provincial Secretary's Office in Fredericton, the signing officers of the company are: R. H. Laskey, President,
and the Secretary-Treasurer, J. B. Guidrey - and further advising that the records of the company are presently
being processed by the Provincial Secretary's Office, and a spokesman for that office stated that this indicated
recent receipt of the required annual fee for 1975 -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor supplying information
to the Common Council with regard to emergency and voting requirements, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, in reply to the
request made at the Common Council meeting of August 5th last that he examine the authorities available for
Council to conduct an inquiry into a matter such as information being revealed to the public out of Committee of
the Whole meetings, stating that one of the statutory authorities available to the City which could possibly
cover this matter is the Act relating to civic government enacted in 1895 and that under Section 3 of that Act,
the City of Saint John may hold an investigation or inquiry into any civic matter, and call witnesses under oath,
and further stating that it is his opinion, that if the Council decides in its wisdom that such a matter as has
been referred, is a civic matter, then statutory authority is available for such an inquiry if Council so wishes --
be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the inquiry be conducted under oath under the 1895 statute
relating to civic government concerning the "leak" of the Legal Session and Committee of the Whole of July 28th,
1975 that Robert Lockhart discussed with Councillor A. Vincent the following morning at the Keddy Motor Inn, and
that witnesses be subpoenaed.
Councillor Davis asked what procedure the Council is going to follow in the above inquiry matter,
stating he feels the Council should have a little more knowledge before getting involved in something that
perhaps it cannot follow through with; is the Council going to follow the same procedure that was followed in the
invesigation concerning the Dock Street property (Keswick Arms hotel property), or set up a triumvirate. Mr.
Rodgers replied that if this Council in its wisdom decides that this matter is a civic matter, then he believes
it is, and the statute of 1895 provides for an inquiry into a civic matter; as to the flaws that that statute
might contain, he does not believe that he can discuss them publicly - the procedure is there in the statute as
noted in his letter - he believes he should discuss any weakness in the statute in Legal Session of Council.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent, Green, M. Vincent, Pye and
Kipping and the Mayor voting "yea" and Councillors Davis, Hodges, Gould, Cave and Parfitt voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission submitting
'a report for adoption by Common Council, which report is the result of the Commission's study of the recommendation:
of the Housing Task Force Committee Report, 1971 - be laid on the table for a further week for study.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, authority be
granted for payment by the City of $1,000.00 for the purchase of the required easement of 2,477.8 square feet of
land from Mr. E. Daigle for the Milford-Randolph-Greendale sewer line.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the
City of Saint John has been using approximately 900 square feet of land owned by Mr. J. Russell on the corner of'
1~~,e~O>Er/;' Woodward Avenue and Millidge Avenue since Woodward Avenue was paved and that the City became aware of this
~11At'~ situation within the last two months, when Mr. Russell decided to landscape his property; that in order to remedy
"./'_--, this situation the City is going to change the street and sidewalk line but will still require about 300 square
6Cr~j ~I feet of 14r. Russell's property for the new sidewalk and street and Mr. Russell will give the City the land it
~1;l1I~'-F~~ requires in exchange for landscaping between the new sidewalk and his house, and there will be no charge to the
~'-'~~~//_~ City for the past use of Mr. Russell's land; that the cost of the landscaping for the total area is approximately
~/~e~/~~ $1,000.00 -- and recommending that the City do accommodation work in the form of landscaping on Mr. Russell's
~~~ property as above mentioned in exchange for the land required from him for the new sidewalk and street -- be
l~cll.7~Cb?~' received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
hfH'PRr!$t:
37.(elJ?5
5t:
f1rlJes .7>C1~
. F/re s6r/
..6rf/Nfl: /ltb/
$rL.
s../. 7U~
C' fl. :I-t-tL
.13.;J!fsiae
:J) r.
~
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the property
at 37 Leinster Street owned by Agnes Daley is required by the City for the completion of the proposed fire
station and that due to unsuccessful negotiations with this property owner through her agent, Mr. Harry Schaven,
Canada Permanent Trust Company, it has been recommended to expropriate this property - and recommending that
expropriation proceedings commence on this property for the purpose of acquiring it for the proposed fire station
e received and filed and the recommendation adopted, and the notice of intention to expropriate be filed with
the Expropriating Advisory Board.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, stating that the property
owned by Saint John Tugboat Co. Ltd. on Bayside Drive is required by the City for the widening of this street,
8
S.:J: ~~a;d-
Cr7. '/-c-~
ky's//e :/J,..,
H/.- ",(en11?.4
k'l<pre:P1"/~-&- /~
FJ<'?rt7fJ./ltlf~/s.
PIClhn.l1lfv/s.
:B,L.
1I;,.p"P'f(?yP
Wc!i~~>#e'rJf
.t'J"~/;;;/)
{lp/l""UI7. 7'/.=llm
/let-
'Ronald F
.TOwe<<
Sa.6 -,x/v,
(/dri<:ii/')ce$
7>"Jh(:j?U~
~n~
$u6-,4'v.
/1grt?e~l7r
/ls~el7-t-- ~"
5<<6":"~/v. f7/an
FdwiilJ'l,{
iflc IV .i1miil/'f;1
S<<.b-~iv.
SUb-cliv.
q!I"eemenT
SU6-tltlv.
servlees
f'olt'c!f re.
~/J~,..;dukbon.
IYOr"'OlI1 J..qc.
lbllrEil7ff in Vs.
kt:b~// /reel
H~// oF h1l'17e
/4l7k /l-='1IY1J1
CI7{(' n. ~ye
S-trike
~ 17:i~ Wi,.
C?a6/e Ct?
broKen w/"dt.
'P17//ee :lJepc.
Ohld oF-
'Pf7(/ce r~
.~
and recommending that expropriation proceedings commence for the said property, that is required for the
widening of Bayside Drive, as an agreeable settlement for this land could not be reached -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted, and the notice of intention to expropriate be filed with the Exprop- .
riating Advisory Board.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter fro~ the Planning Advisory Committee, to
whom had been referred by Common Council on July 14th last the request made by Mr. Ronald E. Jowett for a
variance to permit the erection of single-family dwellings on property on the westerly side of Lakeview
Drive, advising that under New Brunswick law, variances may be made only by the Planning Advisory Committee I
and, conse~uently, this letter is a report on the Committee's decision on Mr. Jowett's application -- and
advising, as follows:- the City Manager and City staff have been examining a more precise location of an ,
airport expressway (also referred to as the Eastern Arterial) which would run from McAllister Drive easterly,
orth of the Loch Lomond Road, and would service the expected population growth in that area, alleviating
traffic on Loch Lamond Road by providing an alternate, although not necessarily a fast, route to the
airport, et cetera - it was found that the northerly top 100 feet of Mr. Jowett's property would ultimately
be required for this roadway, and under the Community Planning Act this means that no one can build in that
proposed right-of-way nor can permits for development on it be issued - the land can remain in its present
state or, alternatively, if the Common Council feels it is desirable, the City may acquire it; the Planning I
Advisory Committee believes that the development that is now in the area predicates lots larger than Mr.
Jowett's proposal and it believes that the lots should be approximately 90 feet in width - it is reasonable
to permit four lots, each 87 and one-half feet by 80 feet, and the Committee would be prepared to grant the
variances which would permit the sub-division of Mr. Jowett's property into four lots each 87 and one-half
by 80 feet, with the most northerly hundred feet reserved for the ,ight-of-way of the Eastern Arterial; Mr.
Jowett, like all sub-dividers, will be required to either vest in the City land for public purposes at the
rate of 6% of the area involved in the sub-division which is not a practical area or, alternatively, to pay
the City at its discretion 8% of whatever is found to be the market value of the land before sub-division
(one suggestion might be for the City then to negotiate with Mr. Jowett for the acquisition of the right-
of-way required for the Eastern Arterial, with the monies that he would have paid the City taken into
consideration); if Mr. Jowett is prepared to proceed on this basis, he should have a surveyor layout the .
necessary sub-division, prepare the sub-division plan, et cetera (the Municipal Development Officer is
waiving the need for a tentative plan in this case); a very simple, shortened version of the Sub-division
Agreement, without City financial involvement in any form, should be made a prior condition to the approval
of sub-division plans (as referred to in the Committee's letter) such as that which would have to be
undertaken by Mr. Jowett if he wishes to proceed with his proposed sub-division; the Committee will be glad
to assist Mr. Jowett in further his sub-division on the basis of this letter from the Committee -- be
received and filed and a copy of this letter be forwarded to Mr. Jowett.
On motion of Councillor Cave
,"
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the
Common Council assent to the proposed sub-division plan of the Mr. Edward McNamara Sub-division, a copy of
which is submitted, which proposed sub-division lays out extensions of Summit Drive, Willie Avenue, and
(undeveloped) Gibson Avenue, shows the reservation of the right-of-way of the Eastern Arterial (a key
arterial road proposal of the Municipal Development Plan), would vest an area south of Willie Avenue as
land for public purposes and creates 18 new lots, 13 of which, it is understood, are to be used for co-
operative housing (one-family dwellings):
I
AND FURTHER that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee in the above matter, advising
that the Common Council at its meeting of July 14th, 1975 approved the City entering into the required sub-
~ivision agreement for this proposed development, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that Saint John is the only city in New Brunswick, he believes, and
is probably one of the very few in Canada that subsidizes the developer to the amount of one-third the cost
of the services. Recalling that some time ago he made the request, he stated he is going to again request
that we review the policy. He felt that in view of what our water rates and tax rates are going to be next
year, maybe the City should serve notice on the developers that some of these developments may be too
costly for the City to participate in, or for our tax rate. He stated that he would like to see the City
staff bring in a report within three months and maybe have a dead-line as to when we can cut off such
present policy. He stated that his argument with regard to the present policy is that the City is giving
the assistance to the developer regarding services, who is not passing it on to the buyer (he thoughtthat
the City intended to give back a rebate to the buyer in this matter), and it was that revised type of-
policy he asked for some time ago, and he is still in favour of that. Councillor Kipping raised the
question of rationale on why the present services policy was instituted, in the first place. The Mayor
advised that this can also be reported to the Council.
.
On motion of Councillor Pye
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that Mr. Norman Jackson, one of Saint John's most
outstanding artists, be forwarded a congratulatory letter by Common Council on behalf of the citizens of
Saint John because of his excellent painting of the inimitable Hank Aaron having recently been accepted for
permanent exhibit by Baseball's National Hall of Fame at Cooperstown, New York, United States of America:
AND FURTHER that the letter from Councillor Pye advising that Hank Aaron had the singular honour
of shattering the long-standing seasons' and lifetime batting records of the omnipotent Babe Ruth, be
received and filed.
I
A letter from Councillor Kipping, dated August 8th, 1975, was considered at this time, which
advises that on August 6th, 1975 he was informed by the manager of the Canada Wire & Cable Co. plant that
two police officers were sitting in a police car outside the plant, having refused to cross the picket line
which striking employees have maintained since their strike began, that the police had been called to
investigate window breaking which had occurred in the plant the previous night, and that as this incident
would appear to indicate an attitude having very serious undertones, involving as it does the maintenance
of law and order by those whose duty this is, he believes that the Council should be aware of the incident
and all the circumstances relating to it. Councillor_Kipping proposed the following motion:- that the
Chief of Police supply Council with a report on the incident which occurred on August 6th last at the
Canada Wire & Cable Co. plant involving two police officers. There was no seconder to this proposed
motion.
.
report
time.
Mr. Barfoot advised that the Chief of Police has prepared a report
was ready for distribution to Council at this meeting, if the Council
Councillor Kipping suggested that the report be placed before Council
in the above matter and that
wished to look at it at this
now and the Chief of Police
~
,.....
.
, C7Jlff or
l'Pp/iee rep.
, ee,- Sollo'
I
7Jt?~ee ~
Ur!ke
6/7~#M
rca6/e C'o
broken
'wlnLI/U/
.
!'VIm 51.
f>.;N;J1~ ;11
Suu-Kk.
/111/1/"/'1$ S-f:.
~d:
15. ;r Il/~(;;,
St7eIet-y
J) r. ']) IV
G?-aJ v-ey
~ter $u
r<<-1lt~vI-
CQ11-t-CJh'J /J7,;}-
-t- /b/1
.
CYfy IIlfr.
l1?eSigIJaii
~/fi;,ce .s:
'7Up"P16u./1
S.:T.' fi,..l1aff
1( egj un :J}eve. ,
t'7o/JJm.
1&. .I. :Jjp{./n
~T &tt'/~
!VQm; J1.srClJ1'1
C()ml"'f.
1?e-~Phil1!1
fYprl71aJ7 ~
. S", it-I,
P/.;JII~. 8d'n'
(70n7n?
~
9
elaborate on it, which is the normal procedure when reports are submitted to Council, at the meeting.
Councillor Green stated that after receiving a copy of the above named letter submitted by Councillor
Kipping among the agenda items for this meeting, he went to the said plant to check on the incident and found
that there had been an incident in which the police did arrive on the following morning, he believes, to check to
see what had happened - the picket line was up and the Police Department, before crossing the picket line, went
to the chairman of the picketers on duty at the tine, and they withdrew the picket line so the police could go
in.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that because of the possible implications, he would like to know whether
the City Solicitor has seen the report of the Chief of Police, or is aware of the incident. Mr. Rodgers replied
that he is not aware of the incident and the said report was just handed to him, and until he would finish
eading it he could not make any comment at this time. He added that, before even finishing reading the report,
he was certain that it involves some incident involving the actions of policemen. Councillor M. Vincent stated
he would suggest to Council that where ~here might possibly be legal involvement that the City Solicitor be given
the opportunity to at least read the report before it is dealt with, and if, in his opinon after having read it,
there is no legal implication to the Police Department or to the Union so involved or to any other person, that
the Council deal with it - but if there is, he believes that the City Solicitor should read the report and
decide, first. Mr. Rodgers stated that he has quickly looked at the letter and he needs the combination of two
things:- the letter plus to be told the circumstances surrounding the incident - the reason he says that is, just
in case this letter does not detail all the circumstances surrounding - therefore, he needs these two items
together, before he can given an opinion. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he knows nothing of the incident and
he has not seen the report, and in view of the City Solicitor's comments he would move the following motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Kipping voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Yvon St. Coeur of POkemouche, N. B.
requesting that the road at 138-142 Morris Street Extension, Saint John West, be paved, and noting that when he
built the apartments at Morris Street, he paid $5,000.00 for a bond to build the road, be referred to the Engin-
eering and Works Department for a report.
On 'motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Executive of the Saint John Medical
Society, per Dr. D. N. Garey, President, noting that residents of the Millidgeville area once again have been
told that their water supply is unsatisfactory for drinking purposes (and that last year other areas of the city
were involved as well), and advising that the said Executive find this to be a most regrettable situation from
the point of view of public health and feel that the city and public health officials should supply answers to
two very fundamental questions:- (1) Saint John until recent times has been noted for the purity of its drinking
water - why, then over the past two or three years have we been faced with water pollution? - one would suspect
that the problem must be at the source of our water supply; (2) chlorination is an effort to disinfect a con-
taminated supply or to prevent contamination - the Executive asks what positive measures will be taken to deliver
contaminated water from the source of our drinking supply to various parts of the city thus obviating the
necessity for chlorine? --- and pointing out that the usual method of monitoring water is by measuring the
amount of coliform organisms present (coliform organisms, except for certain rare types, are not harmful to
health), but that viral agents, however, such as those causing gastroenteritis ("stomach 'flu") and viruses of a
more serious nature are not measured -- and stating that the Executive feel that a detailed study of the pro-
blem, with information made available for public scrutiny, is necessary in order to insure that our drinking
water is clean and safe -- be referred to the appropriate City staff for a report.
I~. Barfoot advised that the City staff is making every effort to ensure that water delivered to all
parts of the city is free of contamination, and that the City has increased the volume of chlorination and has
put a new chlorination sub-station into effect and the staff trusts that within the week this problem should be
resolved. He stressed that the situation is under control. Councillor A. Vincent asked that, rather than the
Council wait until its next regular meeting two weeks hence to receive this requested report, that the City
Manager try to send copies of the report to the Council members as soon as possible so that they will be informed
in the matter when receiving enquiries from citizens. Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Wallace S. Turnbull, advising that he
finds he must resign as one of the City of Saint John's appointees to the Saint John Fundy Region Development
Commission as he does not believe he has sufficient time available to enable him to discharge his responsibility
as a Commissioner in the appropriate manner, be received and filed and the resignation accepted with regret.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Board of Trade with
reference to the resignation submitted by Mr. Wallace S. Turnbull from the Saint John Fundy Region Development
Commission, submitting the name of l~. E. T. Sadler for consideration as a nominee, replacing Mr. Turnbull on the
said Committee, be referred to the Nominating Committee.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application from Mr. Norman E. Smith for re-zoning of
7.5 acres of land on the Loch Lomond Road, north of 243-261 Loch Lomond Road for the purpose of erecting thereon
an apartment building complex, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that
authority be granted to advertise the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the application from The Rocca Group Limited for re-zoning of
10
1fe- xonihff
1? t?c~ r;f"QU
;<( -6-d.
'Pltilh 1?1l r;t f/ls .
Cdmm.
'J(e- Aonih~
7r (?CC.;;/ G?,.,;UP
;<(t-d.
S. T:JJ/strie-c
A.;/b(llu' ~W1ci
Pt>/'~e /1~r-
"Prof/, &lord:
C!()h1P1. Whole
{!oun<!/I t$/1Jm.
1tej/tJd fie
'Po//ee /1t!C
s. 7:.7J/>tNC.--C-
A~J(Jl(.Y' C'Oeenel
SIJCl"'''tJ~k ~
.1lle~h l?1'
6€Clt-S
S:J:JJopt :p~
menr C()/11rn.
dnl1uP1/ brx;K-A
S.Tr:u.h~~
1?e(JiOh ..h'e.h
tneh-T Cbhl,"o
{!r,r,iI7f!rI!f7r 11
(/il7c.e/1r
ammo Wh,,/e
k?,uir!f
a'07~//
meetil1ffs
b/ep/sed
IU-"~I'f C'~J/e-
f//s/~11 /.-c-~
LEGAL
C!hie,e err pc0e
Strilre
(!~l?cu(C/ ~/
(?Cible A't~
~rokn U<'II'II/f)
P~/"ce 7Je.,P~
"
.~
land for the proposed Ellerdale Street development from "R_2" to "RM-2" classification in order to ac-
commodate the apartment buildings and townhouses as contemplated on the submitted plan, be referred to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that authority be granted to advertise the said
proposed re-zoning:
.
AND FURTHER that the letter from the above named applicant, asking that first reading of the
Zoning By-Law amendment regarding this proposed re-zoning be given, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded'by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of ~he City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning (a) the area between
the G & R apartments on Ellerdale Street (next to the Lebanese Club on Westmorland Road) and the inter-
section of Margaret Street and Ellerdale Street from "R-2" One- and Two-F8lIlily district to "RM-l" and "RM-
2" Multiple Family Residential districts, and (b) an area along and behind the lots on the southerly side
of Westmorland Road east of Margaret Street from "R-2" One- and Two-Family district to "RM-l" Multiple
Family Residential district, be read a first time.
I
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
I'
~ ,
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from The Saint John District Labour Council,
expressing the opinion that if the proposed new police act for the Province of New Brunswick is proclaimed
there is great danger that it will isolate the police of this province from the very public they serve and
that this is the most anti-labour piece of legislation ever introduced by any government, and that it will
wipe out the collective bargaining rights of the police as we presently know them, and further expressing
the view that if this act is proclaimed police will no longer be employees of the city or the municipality
but would become employees of a New Brunswick police commission -- and asking that the Common Council do
everything in its power to stop Bill 89 before it becomes law, and help protect the rights of the labour
movement in this city -- be referred to Committee of the Whole and placed on the agenda in Committee of the
Whole with the report from the special Council committee that was set up to study the said proposed Police
Act.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from The Saint John District Labour Council
asking that provision be made in the City's Recreation and Parks Department budget for facilities for
spectators at the Shamrock Park, to equip the ball field that is not now provided with viewing stands, be
received and filed and the said Department be asked to replace the bleachers that were previously located
on both sides of the ball field at Shamrock Park.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that with regard to the Saint John Port Development Commission
annual booklet, he had a commitment from everybody concerned when we made this a separate Commission from
the industry and commerce aspect of development, that at least one page of that booklet would be devoted to
the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission. He noted that this commitment was not followed out.
He stated he feels it is a waste of a lot of money, which this booklet costs, not to promote the City's
industry side in that same booklet, which is distributed allover the world. He stated he would like a
report from the City Manager as to why the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission space was left
out of that booklet. He added that he feels strongly that, while the Council divided industry and com-
merce, and the port activity, between two Commissions, the City should promote the industry as well as the
port - and particularly in regard to information that is sent out from the city, there should be a cat-
alogue of the work force available, and so on, in the building industry as well as regarding the water-
front. Councillor A. Vincent further advised that as a member of the former Saint John Port and Industrial
Development Commission, he obtained a commitment from the Mayor and all the Common Council members that in
booklet printing or in any material going out from the city, that both the above named new Commissions
would receive coverage. The Mayor advised that the above request of Councillor A. Vincent will be acceded
to, and a report will be obtained.
I
.
At this time, the Council business for open session being finished, the Council was preparing to
adjourn to Committee of the Whole, when Councillor A. Vincent asked that the meeting go into Legal Session
because he cannot, in all conscience, until after the inquiry attend Committee of the Whole meetings.
A Committee of the Whole session was held at this time, to afford the Council members an op-
portunity to view the videotaping of the foregoing Council meeting by Fundy Cablevision Ltd., which pro-
gramming had not been televised publicly. The Mayor advised the representatives of the said company, who
were present, that the Council will be discussing the matter of televising of Council meetings further, and
will be advising the company of its decision.
I
-.r
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Copies were distributed at this time to the Council members of the August 11th, 1975 report from
the Chief of Police to the City Manager to which is attached the August 11th, 1975 report to the Chief from
Deputy'Chief of Police R. Stone in regard to the Canada Wire & Cable Ltd. plant incident which was referred
to in the open meeting section of this Council meeting. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that this report is a
report from the Deputy Police Chief to the Police Chief and it could be construed as an internal report _
it is not basically a report from the Chief to.the Council. It was noted that the Council members will
give study to this internal confidential,xepo;t so that they can be informed in the matter when it is again
before Council in open session.
I
Chief Ferguson, who had withdrawn from the meeting at the commencement of the legal session, re-
entered the meeting at this time. Councillor M. Vincent asked the Chief what, to his knowledge, when the
call came in, was the complaint. The Chief replied that it was damage to property at the Canada Wire &
Cable Ltd. which had happened during the night. He added that nobody on the picket line tried in any way
to interfere with the police constable. He stated that his instructions are that if there is damage to
property the member of the Police Department ought to go in. He added that the policeman decided himself
that he was not going to cross the picket line - this policeman made a bad judgement and he has been
counselled - this man had never been into such circumstances before and had no senior officer with him to
.
~
,...
. S{;NKe
CoJm;;lv/D1
Wire t?
C.a6/e ~
6rf7ken
WII7M/(/
7Jf7/, ee:/)
I
I :z;,f~;
ammo
;7'~
t::I?i?H;t eh-
~/dl//~'y
.
C',if!:t
Sf77;eilor
t7-et?/71'eT
e/a,.~ fl, c:
5e11 ..tctf.;}/
C't7l&h'$e/
CO UI7, /7,
1//l1ccd
T /'IoOlI1SCl'ie:
IIl'f' t?fddt' ehe
re S.;l/~ eE
d1/ vs. Om
Lrwese-me
~C?fff'
TllI'iv:t~
.
I
I
.
...
1t
make a decision, and he made a decision that he thought was right. Councillor Kipping advised that it is his _'
desire that the Council be provided with a complete report publicly regarding this matter, that is, the report of,:
the Chief of Police in reply to Councillor Kipping' s request in his letter of August 8th last for such report. "
"
The Mayor advised that the Chief will submit a report to Council. Mr. Rodgers felt that the Council should bear
in mind that the Chief will be commenting in his report on the actions of one of his constables, and the actions
of a constable can affect the City indirectly - we are arguing that it does not affect the Council but the way
the proposed Peace Act is drafted, it will certainly do so, in future; also, the actions of a policeman could
lead to more trouble - use the example of this particular instance - if law and order sort of got out of control
just because the policeman failed to act and there was further damage, the City would be involved. He stated
that he does not believe the Council should restrict the Police Chief in his report to Council in that he could
very easily hold back on information by the very fact that the Council has asked for a public report; the Chief
should be free to express whatever he wants to express to Council as a Council but he might very well express
something differently if this report is submitted to Council confidentially. Following further discussion, the
Mayor noted that the Council has asked for a report from the Chief of Police, and the Council has discussed the
matter at this time, and a report is going to come from the Chief.
Chief Ferguson withdrew from the meeting during the above noted discussion.
Councillors Davis and Cave withdrew from the meeting.
Discussion then took place regarding the matter of conducting an inquiry concerning the "leak" of
information from a Committee of the Whole which had been discussed earlier in this Council meeting. Mr. Rodgers
advised that one of the clauses in the 1895 statute regarding subpoening witnesses under oath provides that if
they fail to show they are liable to a fine of $20.00 - however, it may be that the witnesses would come vol-
untarily and not have to be subpoenaed; he was informing the Council that this loophole exists in the said Act.
He stated that another avenue open to the Council is that under the Public Inquiries Act if the Lieutenant-
Governor in Council deems it in the public interest, you can have a public inquiry. He noted that the Council is
left with the question - is this in the public interest? - and that the Lieutenant-Governor in Council decides
that question. He stated that the other matter is that the Act lays out that a committee of Council can conduct
an inquiry and the Mayor or chairman of the committee administers oaths, and so on - that is the procedure under
that Act. He advised that at this time he was pointing out some of the problems the Council might run into with
the inquiry that the Council at the meeting of this date authorized. He stated that he should bring in in legal
session a more detailed report, if the Council wishes, on the procedure about the committee and where it is
already under the Act, and that sort of thing. During ensuing discussion, Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels
that the inquiry should be under oath, and in camera. Mr. Rodgers stated he believes that the next step should
be that Mr. George T. Clark, Q. C., Senior Legal Counsel, and he consult with Councillor A. Vincent to get the
detailed subject of what the inquiry is about and then go from there, and then report back to Council.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that, at the same time, he asked for a transcript of the evidence given
by Mr. James Perkins and other people involved in the Omega law suit. He stated he made it clear at that legal
session that he was confronted by a solicitor in the Skyline Hotel in Toronto saying that the City and Councillors
were being sued for over two million dollars. He stated he wants a copy of that transcript, to protect his own
interests as a Councillor, and he wants to take such copy back to his solicitor. Mr. Rodgers advised that the
transcript in question is' not available as it is still being typed; the comments made by Mr. Justice Legere have
been made available to the Council where he implicated the City - that is all that is available on the public
record, as of now. The Council members confirmed to Councillor A. Vincent that copies of the said comments made
by Mr. Justice Legere were given to them by the City Solicitor for the July 14th last Council meeting, with
correspondence supplied to Council for that meeting. Mr. Rodgers advised that he hopes to give the Council a
more detailed report regarding the status of this matter after he returns from holidays. He added that nothing
has transpired since he last discussed the matter with the Council, except correspondence between lawyers. He
stated that the action is the identification of the $75,000.00, approximately, and the action of $2,700,000.00
for loss of profits because the City failed to go ahead with the housing project with Omega.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
/
Common Cler
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the eighteenth day of
August, A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye,
A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, H. Ellis, Assistant to
the City Manager, M. Zides, Acting Commissioner of Community Planning and
Development, E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police, and R. G. Baird, Commissioner
of Economic Development
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council held on August
5th last, be confirmed.
12
~
.;
?
"
\ :Bknche .7Pn
\
~Jkn(-Et!'r :lJ.;}/r;~
/.-c-~ $Ca6oh
~ p/dn-r-
?"pJk~s
:J)~ //q.;;1/~h
tAu/?, /1. (/;n~
#//~h.;j e I ,1(
o '.J)/'/en
~ SO hterj!lY$i
./~~ '
11 e~fol(A.~J?t--
6e(/era~e rflf)
r-/I S!fK~e!/
St-:
.Neff ~e(/il7e
P/:;um. /ldvis.
C?cnwm.
7?srlrin!J
Sj?CJces
var;~J?ce
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council held on
August 11th last, be confirmed.
Miss Blanche Jones of 126 Station Street was present, and advised that because of dumping of
cream and milk from the plant of Baxter Dairies Limited these dairy products run down Hazen Street Ext-
ension past her property and are creating a health hazard in that an obnoxious odour emanates from this
material and it is attracting mice and rats in her home. Miss Jones stated that this problem has been
continuing for well over a month and that she has repeatedly been in touch with officials of this company
to have this problem stopped, without success; she also has approached the Department of Health in the
matter, but that Department has done nothing, although she was told the Department would do something.
Miss Jones appealed to the Common Council for assistance in correcting this problem.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
The Mayor advised that Councillor A. Vincent has stated he will investigate the above noted
roblem for Miss Jones, and that Councillor A. Vincent will report back in the matter to Common Council.
Councillor Kipping asked if there is any wish of Council to hear from representatives of Baxter Dairies
Limited, to which the Mayor replied that when the Council receives a report from Councillor A. Vincent
following his investigation, the Council can then consider Councillor Kipping's point.
Mr. Michael N. O'Brien, Secretary-Treasurer of LSO Enterprises Ltd., at this time presented a
Brief which outlines the endeavours of the company to obtain permission to build a restaurant-beverage
room on the second floor of the company's building at 9-11 Sydney Street, as follows:- in September, 1974
when the company asked the Planning Advisory Committee for such permission, the Committee set the request
aside until businesses in the area could be contacted for comments, and subsequent to this, the company
appeared before the Committee and was granted permission subject to obtaining sufficient off-street
parking - the company contacted the owners of all available parking space in the area and was either
turned down by the owners or by the Planning Advisory Committee for various reasons; sometime in October
or clovember, 1974, Mr. Jack Levine, a businessman who opposed the said proposed restaurant-beverage room,
appeared before the Common Council and as a result the Council passed a motion, which, in effect, re-
commended that the Advisory Committee not grant the company any variance in parking - the company had no
knowledge of Mr. Levine's appearance beforehand and thus had no opportunity to appear and present its side
of the story; on l~ay 21st, 1975, having exhausted all possible sources of parking at that time, the
company appeared before the Advisory Committee and requested that the Committee recommend to Common
Council the acceptance of $35,000.00 in lieu of providing the required parking ($2,500.00 per space) -
this was rejected by the Advisory Committee; on June 1st, 1975, the company entered into an option agree-
ment to purchase three vacant lots at the corner of Peters and Waterloo Streets and ,had plans drawn for a
parking lot at this location which would provide 24 parking spaces (the company's requirement is for 14
parking spaces, plus it had an additional 8 spaces - presently rented to the Saint John Parking Commission) -
the company appeared before the Advisory Committee on June 24th, 1975 and requested that the Committee
approve this parking for the said proposed restaurant-beverage room - this proposal was rejected by the
Advisory Committee, and the company was so informed by letter dated June 27th, 1975 from the Planning
Department; the company appeared at the next meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee for the purposes
of (1) having a second vote on the above proposal, and (2) obtaining permission to put a parking lot on
the lots at the corner of Peters and Waterloo Streets - the vote on the proposal was lost, but the Com-
mittee approved the use of the property as a parking lot with spaces to be rented on a monthly basis
provided that the layout of the parking lot is in conformity with the requirements of the Zoning By-Law
and advised that the original layout does not meet the requirements and so a new plan should be prepared
which does, and the plan can be reviewed by the Advisory Committee whenever it is ready. The Brief ,
advises that the company is asking that the Council accept a nominal payment in lieu of providing parking
for the said proposed restaurant-beverage room and is asking that the payment be nominal on the condition
that the company provide parking spaces on its lots on the said corner of Peters and Waterloo Streets for
the customers of the LSO beverage room -- the nominal sum to be, say, $100.00 per space on the condition
that the company provides parking at the said Peters-Waterloo Streets site. The Brief points out that on
October 15th, 1974 the restaurant-beverage room was approved - subject to parking - and the company has
worked hard for months to obtain parking which it feels is as good or better than that provided by most
businesses located in the uptown area, and it has spent money in preparing to operate this establishment
($5,400.00 for kitchen equipment alone) as it felt it would eventually overcome the parking problem just
as many other businesses have. The Brief states that the company has been left dangling in this matter by
the Advisory Committee for ten months and it appears that it can never get approval unless it has on-site
parking; also, if the company knew ten months ago it could 'never get a beverage room approved (the Brief
states that the company was led to believe it could), the company perhaps could have built offices or
something to generate some sort of revenue. The Brief states that the company feels other business have
had parking approval at distances further away than its proposed parking lot - within the past month,
parking was approved for an office building 450 feet away and the company feels its measures in at a
distance of 400 feet. The Brief advises that in turning the company down, the Committee felt the proposed
parking site was too far away - the company feels that parking within one block is very reasonable. The
Brief further advises that in turning the company down, some members of the Committee apparently felt that
the proper use of the property should be for a building rather than a parking lot on a permanent basis -
yet, two weeks later, the Committee approved the site for a parking lot when it was not related to a
restaurant-beverage room (as has already been referred to in this Brief): The Brief advises that the
Common Council, within the past year, granted a parking variance to the Brunswick Square'project in excess
of 100 parking spaces - the company is asking for a variance on 14 spaces and is not asking for a variance
such as that granted Brunswick Square because the company actually has 32 parking spaces one block from
its premises. The Brief further advises that the company feels the discretionary rule regarding location
of off-site parking is extremely unfair and is being applied unfairly in this instance, and notes that the
company's proposed parking is within 400 feet, as compared to the old Saint John Zoning Appeal Board
ruling of March 29th, 1971 that the parking space for Club Eldiaz be within 800 feet of the site. The
Brief advises that the partners in LSO Enterprises Ltd. and Mr. O'Brien are all Saint Johners, and own
property and their homes here, and run businesses here, that they have in excess of $200,000.00 invested
in the property at 9-11 Sydney Street and are prepared to invest another $75,000.00 in renovations if they
receive Council's approval at this time, and that it is their intention to establish a business in this
building that will be well run and will be a credit to the block, and that they feel there is a need for
this type of business in the uptown area. The Brief states that the company feels it has more than met
the requirements laid down by the City, and requests that the variance as outlined above be granted.
The Mayor asked if the company has contemplated getting together with people in that block who
are also looking for businesses parking spaces and pool their funds to produce such parking in the middle
of the block, by means of establishing a two- or three-storey parking building. Mr. O'Brien replied that
the said vacant land within that block is all owned by the City with the exception of what is owned by Mr.
Levine, and that on talking with Mr. Davis of the Ideal Stores, who is the only businessman who has
parking in the area, Mr. Davis told him he approached businessmen on various occasions of the area, but
nooody wants to spent any money in this regard.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....-
.
f? e~~C1W-Cj
beve/1:11~e
I roP/?1
9-1/ sy~-
h e~ ..5t':-
JbrA-/nff
.sfBee$
(/.,;Jrial7ce
.
P/ann./Jtb;..
Cbfl1h'?-
I
.
I
I
~"A-/nf
s~es '
I'ef~U/t?
.
II....
0Pr- 5
pclrkih!l'
fblYl7le~t-i
IleK of
--rne&ve,
inl'J 5. "S
w~/" P; e/t!l
_C:;_II#~;tDY.
1 ~3
During further discussion, Mr. O'Brien advised that he did not 'get a further parking layout plan drawn
for the Peters-Waterloo Streets site, but he suspects that he can get a proper layout and obtain 22 parking
spaces, at a very minimum, on that lot; in addition to that number of parking spaces there would be the 8 parking
spaces in the lot off Peters Street. He explained that the $75,000.00 expenditure mentioned above is on the
building itself, and the company has already committed itself to purchase the parking lot, regardless of whether
the Council makes a decision at this meeting on the company's request for the approval of Council - if the
Council's approval is not received at this meeting, it will not affect the company's intention to proceed with
the said $75,000.00 expenditure and purchase of the said parking lot. He explained that a restaurant-beverage
room is a tavern that admits men and women and it serves hot meals (this building has all the kitchen facilities
now) which will probably be sold at pretty reasonable prices as compared to prices elsewhere; this establishment
is aiming to attract the uptown noonhour and supper hour crowds, to service the office workers of the uptown
area; people could have a beverage along with the dinner, at their own option - coffee, or draught beer or wine,
would be_ available.
Councillor MacGowan advised of her concern regarding traffic congestion that now exists around King
and that she can see problems arising from this restaurant-beverage room at 9-11 Sydney Street having
by car. Mr. O'Brien, in reply to Councillor Green's question in this regard, advised that he suspects
he noonhour patrons would reach there on foot while probably those at supper hours would travel there by car.
He noted that Club Eldiaz operates on the ground floor of the buildfng during night time hours and that the
building is not in sue during the day which is why the company is aiming at the uptown crowd for the restaurant-
beverage room patronage for noonhours and the supper hours.
During discussion with Councillor Parfitt who expressed concern regarding the problem of high school
students being attracted during noonhours to the uptown beverage rooms, Mr. O'Brien made the point that it is a
reflection on the owners and not on all beverage room operators that such a problem exists with regard to any
particular beverage room.
In reply to Councillor Gould's queries, Mr. Zides advised the following:- in October of 1974 the
Planning Advisory Committee said it would be willing to grant a variance from the City requirements that a
beverage room be not located within 1,000 feet of another tavern or cabaret on the same street or within 600 feet
thereof in any other direction, after LSO Enterprises provides 14 off-street parking spaces at a location and on
terms of time acceptable to the Committee - this means that 400 feet away is not acceptable; very few businesses
up there presently would ever mett any of the requirements for parking presently, under our by-laws - it is only
when they change uses and so on, or put up new buildings, that the'regulations come into play; with regard to
whether the Council is permitted to allow these parking spots in question, Mr. Zides believes this is a situation
that might call for a legal opinion - there is no question that the Council can determine that it would want to
take money in lieu of parking, but on the other hand, the Advisory Committee's resolution says something different,
as above noted - if the Council turns around and allows the parking or takes the money in lieu of the parking the
question is whether the Committee's variance is still there - Mr. Zides does not think it is, and if it is not,
they cannot get a permit - so, this calls for a legal opinion.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that from his study of this matter, he feels that the applicants in
question have met the requirements that the Planning Advisory Committee has, in fact, asked: they have given the
Council examples where permission has been granted in other cases where parking distances were in excess of what
they have presently provided; they have purchased land which has the adequate number of parking spaces; they have
shown that the time factor is erased and that they are the owners of that land; the building that they propose to
locate the resaurant-beverage room in is already licensed and this is merely occupying a second floor - something
which they could probably do in another manner if they so wished, with less confusion, but they have come this
route; he is at a loss as to why there has been so much confusion over this particular case. He asked what
violations now exist that prevent LSO Enterprises from getting their proposal approved by the Planning Advisory
Committee. j~. Zides replied that there are two basic problems: first of all, under the by-law the establish-
ment is supposed to be at least 1,000 feet away from another tavern or beverage room on the same street and 600
feet in any other direction, and that the applicant is called for to provide 14 off-street parking spaces on the
site; the Advisory Committee has the authority to make a discretionary variance subject to such terms and con-
ditions as the Committee imposes, which it has done in the said letter of October 1974 as above noted -- this is
the whole dilemma. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the company has not now provided the parking spaces. Mr.
Zides replied that the company can provide parking spaces but the dilemma, again, is that the Committee is not
accepting those as suitable in order to make a variance. Councillor M. Vincent asked what is unsuitable about the
parking spaces that the company is proposing to provide. Mr. Zides stated that it is largely distance, rather
than number; the distance is 400 from tip of property to tip of property; the actual measured distance could be
400-odd feet from the distances. With regard to the point that there should not be two licensed beverage rooms
within 1,000 feet, Councillor M. Vincent asked how did "The Cove" on Prince Willi8lll Street and the "Harbour
Tavern" come to be established less than 1,000 feet apart. Mr. Zides replied that a variance was made.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that there is a liquor outlet just across the street from "The Cove" in the
old Elks property, back of the old Dominion Bank property, and that the permission for "The Cove" never came to
Council - he added that those properties are just the width of Church Street. Mr. Zides stated he does not
believe that at that time the Council was receiving notices of applications for liquor licenses through the New
Brunswick Liquor Control Commission; the by-law specifically delegated from Council to the administration - that
is, if a tavern proposal came in and it met the by-law it would not come back to Council normally under the by-
law itself - it does, now, because of the notice the Council gets from the New Brunswick Liquor Control Commission
but before then, that was not~o. Councillor A. Vincent stated that what he is talking about is parking, and it
has nothing to do with the New Brunswick Liquor Control Commission; he wants to know if the Advisory Committee
can waive parking without it coming back to Council. Mr. Zides made affirmative reply, and stated that the
reason for that is because of the change of use from a restaurant which it was before (the Normandy Restaurant)
to a restaurant-beverage room which required exactly the same number of parking spaces. Councillor A. Vincent
noted that the said restaurnat went out of business and the owner had bought the building and had tried for a
tavern unsuccessfully, and then got the beverage room - he felt that this means there was a lapse of time in the
use of this building as a restaurant previously until its present use as a restaurant-beverage room. Mr. Zides
replied that it was within the frame time of the requirement.
Councillor A. Vincent asked when is the Planning Advisory Committee going to bring in a recommendation
to the Common Council for abolition of the parking regulation altogether. He stressed that people who drink
should not drive cars - we should encourage patrons of taverns and beverage rooms to use taxicabs in travelling
from and to such establishments. He feels it is time that the Council take another;ook at the parking regulations
and if you have a lot of parking you should not get permission -we should notrcg~ vehicles to be parked with
relation to such establishments - it is time we helped our Police Department and everyone else that we are trying
to help out where you park a car and the motorist is in a free parking lot and knows he is not going to get a
ticket for parking and he drinks excessively at such establishments a~d gets into trouble while driving in that
state. Councillor A. Vincent stated he does not think we should/~~~~ations regarding parking for these establish-
ments - if we do not want to give them a license, he feels we should say we do not want to give them a permit _
we should not use parking as the excuse. He stated he is quite interested in seeing them put some money in the
off-street parking fund - he has no objection to them getting their license; other people and types of business
should do it, also; he does not think that the Advisory Committee has the authority to waive the parking rights
regarding the property on the corner of Church and Prince William Streets, and he would ask for a legal opinion
as to whether the Committee had the right to waive that requirement. The Mayor advised that the City Solicitor
will give an opinion in this regard, as requested.
14
A5() .l;nbtpl'/
,(&,
P~,.kl"i .s.p~
v..:/"', C//?(!e
P/Clnn. /J~",ls.
C!O!n;n,
{j/ICh.5l(!/ tV./J:?i
Pet-/t/OJ? /'Ie
ehUfI(:lt /ll/t'.
fl,;;/(/pVc/Y. t!f'()$S
~
f!/"OIT/ (IJ/A o~
1?anltd/p. "I'-
C'lul/"Ch 171/t?
.a,.ea JI'$.si~t?d:.
C. 7? 1<.
A puis I;: #/t.
fed. {;!ovC"
1?B;/W~!t, oV61'-
F55t?S/e4 n/eI"
p_sse-oS
.7Ohn$7U~~~
;Y1
/J1/(;A~t?1 .(Clh i!r.
/11. 'P
~n. fft,M<!t!!'.$.
$/n/~ lI1ih. gf"
lJ'/un/cfflc1/
/l-FPai/7s
15'tte Chid
Fire JJe,Pr:
/Ion. Cem/d S.
/!/erri-zfhel4/,
mlh. ~d<<~a-l;~
f/on.1?o6e'+ T
fIt'11"hS,
tl'pf/o~H-I(}h .(6
';Prov. f;;o y-C-.
/leE. re
1?;l// RY~ij
rg/ot!..;rE/ f?n t:f!-
I'e- "r?ul-i"f
.(and !?omIT/I"
At the re~uest of Councillor Parfitt, Mr. Zides explained that LSO Enterprises the last time it
was there, made two applications to the Planning Advisory Committee: the first was that the company use
the parking lot as the ancillary parking for the proposedbeve~age room and failing that, that the company
use this as a commercial parking lot on a month-to-month rental basis type of arrangement - the Committee
would not agree to the first proposal but it did agree to the use of that property for a commercial
parking lot.
The Mayor advised Mr. O'Brien that he will be informed of the Council's decision in the for-
egoing matter.
A petition, bearing signatures of 1,659 persons who reside in the Milford, Randolph and Church
Avenue area, and of others, who several times daily must pass over the railway crossing on Church Avenue,
was presented at this time by Mr. Louis E. Murphy of 134 Milford Road. The Brief attached to the petition
notes that Church Avenue is the only entrance to and exit from Milford and Randolph and the volume of
traffic over the railway crossing on this street has greatly increased with the establishment of the J. D.
Irving Ltd. industry in the area, the car pound and the enlargement of the Kierstead Mobile Home Park, and
by traffic generated also by the incinerator in Milford, the building of the Canadian Pacific Railway
station on Dever Road increased the traffic in the area as well as the Bathurst Containers company and the
Lancaster Centennial Arena, and re~uests that the Common Council take whatever action is necessary to keep
this crossing clear of trains parked across the highway. The Brief further states that there is a serious
traffic hazard at this railway crossing and several accidents have occurred there, and that twice daily
two school buses filled with school children who are being transported to and from the area, must cross
the tracks, and the Milford bus makes two trips each forty minutes across these tracks. The Brief points
out that in the event of a fire or emergency at time it would be impossible for the fire engine, ambulance
or police to get through because of trains across these tracks, and that traffic is often backed up past
the Lancaster Baptist Church and out the Dever Road in one direction and well down the Milford Road and
Randolph Road in the other; it recalls that already two young children lost their lives by fire in the
area, and urges that the Common Council take the initiative now to involve the Federal Government, the
Provincial Government and the Canadian Pacific Railway along with the City in the removal of this railway
crossing, or to build an overpass or underpass to rectify the situation.
Mr. Murphy advised that it was pointed out by Mr. John W. Turnbull, Member of the Legislative
Assembly for Saint John Harbour, that special grants may be made from the Federal Government for con-
struction of underpasses or overpasses, that the size of the grant is based on cost involved, that to ease
the burden on the City taxpayers we shall have to try and also obtain Provincial funds, that Mr. Turnbull
feels that the initial contact must come from the City of Saint John.
j~. Murphy advised that Mr. Michael Landers, Member of Parliament for Saint John-Lancaster has
ritten to express his unqualified support for an underpass or an over pass at this location, and to
display his support for the proposal, has brought the matter to the attention of The Honourable Jean
larchand, Minister of Transport, to see if funds are still available for such purposes.
Mr. Murphy stated that The Honourable Horace B. Smith, Minister of Municipal Affairs, has stated
that in order that the Province may intervene in support of the solving of the inconvenience to the
residents of the Milford and Randolph areas of the city caused by the railway crossing, the City of Saint
John must take the initiative as prescribed in the Railway Relocation Act and forward a formal application
to his Department, to the attention of I~. Henry G. Irwin, Administrative Services Co-Ordinator, who is
the liaison officer at the Provincial level acting on behalf of the Department of Municipal Affairs which
has been assigned the co-ordinating role for railway relocation requests for the Ministry of State for
Urban Affairs and the Ministry of Transport. Mr. Murphy advised that Mr. Smith suggests that the City, as
a preliminary measure, might see some merit in discussing this particular problem with the General Manager
of the Canadian Pacific Railway Atlantic Region, Mr. Gerald Benoit, and through negotiation arrive at a
satisfactory solution, and if this approach should prove fruitful it would obviate the cumbersome and
time-consuming procedures re~uired under the Railway Relocation Act.
Mr. Murphy advised that Mr. PergyR. Clark, Chief of the Saint John Fire Department, has written
with regard to the railway crossing in ~uestion, that the Fire Department has been faced with the problem
since the January 1st, 1967 amalgamation and since that date the Department has had several situations
whereby it has been delayed at this crossing, and that due to the fact that there is no fire station on
the other side of the crossing this area is cut off from fire protection when this crossing is occupied.by
a train, and, further, that the construction of an underpass or overpass would be very advantageous to the
Fire Department.
Mr. Murphy further advised that The Honourable Gerald S. Merrithew, Minister of Education, says
that this matter was discussed rather fully when West Saint John Councillors drew it to the attention of
Common Council as early as 1971, or perhaps earlier, and that he is aware of the problems that this
railway crossing poses for the people of the area, and that he is in total sympathy with their plight and
that he heartily endorses the efforts of Mr. Murphy on their behalf, and that he strongly supports the
attempt of the people to take advantage of the Federal programme which would allow relocation of these
tracks, and that he wishes to be informed if there is anything else he can do.
(Councillor Davis entered the meeting)
,Mr. Murphy then read the contents of a telecommunication addressed to the Mayor and Common
Council (a copy of which had been directed to him) from The Honourable Robert J. Higgins (Leader of the
Opposition), Member of the Legislative Assembly for Saint John Park, in which Mr. Higgins expresses the
view that more should be done within the City and the Province respecting railway relocation and that
because of the need for joint Provincial-Municipal initiative, municipalities should be made more aware by
the Province of Federal legislation to facilitate the relocation of railway lines or re-routing of railway
traffic in urban areas to balance the need for efficient rail service and the adverse effects of railways
on the quality of the urban environment and development - and states that he has had full and good dis-
cussions with City officials Mr. Claude MacKinnon and Mr. D. Buck and on their advice he is forwarding all
relevant material on rail relocation and re-routing to the City of Saint John Land Committee for further
consideration, including a copy of Federal Bill C 27, "An Act to Facilitate the Relocation of Railway
Lines or Re-routing of Railway Traffic in Urban Areas and to Provide Financial Assistance for Work Done
for the Protection, Safety and Convenience of the Public at Railway Crossings". The communication notes
that in addition to the Milford and Greenhead Road areas, there are other areas within Saint John which
would benefit from this programme, and advises that he has discussed this matter in considerable detail
with Mr. John Turnbull and they support and endorse corrective action on rail lines and railway crossings
which are causing potential danger and inconvenience to citizens of Saint John, and that Mr. Higgins will
be most pleased to help if he can be of any assistance whatever.
Mr. Murphy stated that considerable groundwork has been done in the foregoing matter by the
residents and by Mr. Turnbull, and the 'residents would therefore respectfully request that the Common
Council take the following action:- (1) set up at once a committee of Council and City staff to make
formal application for an underpass or an overpass at this crossing; (2) prepare the necessary plan for
~
.
I
I
.
I
---- -
.
I
I
.
~
,....-
.
'&JI,IW/!iJq
I"el~;()h
Y'8I"ou-t in,!
.JJd. ".,t! 7:
I ~pt-ahJh7.
,~~;t?
I
.
"
15
submission to the Secretary of the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada; (3) make the necessary application
for a grant from the fund, to file together with the plan with the Secretary of the Board of Transport Commissioner:
(4) utilize to the fullest the services of The Honourable Horace B. Smith, Minister of Municipal Affairs; (5)
draw heavily on the political support volunteered by Mr. Michael Landers, Member of Parliament for Saint John-
Lancaster, The Honourable Robert J. Higgins, Member of the Legislative Assembly from Saint John Park, Mr. John
Turnbull, Member of the Legislative Assembly from Saint John Harbour, The Honourable Gerald S. Merrithew, Minister
of Education, and the additional support the petitioners feel will be forthcoming from our other City leaders and
those throughout the Province.
Mr. Murphy stated that he had with him a copy of the regulations with regard to making a presentation
to the Board of Transport Commissioners, and that Board will, on any item that is approved, pay up to 80% of the
cost, the municipality pays 15%, and the railway pays 5%. He felt that if that percentage to the municipality
was divided between the City and the Province that would reduce the cost burden on the City considerably.
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Murphy advised that while the 1,659 signatures on the petition represent
a good portion of the people who reside in the Milford-Randolph area north of the railway tracks it does not
represent them all. He added that he notices just recently in the newspaper that J. D. Irving Ltd. has been
granted a further sum for building additional houses in the area opposite Dwyer Road, and that this means that
the volume of traffic over this railway crossing will be greatly increased.
Councillor MacGowan felt that the citizens in this area,should be commended for their efforts in
preparing this petition, and stated that she has been fighting for a long while for action regarding this railway
crossing, and that she had officials from the Province look at the road and they were in agreement that something
had to be done, and the northern expressway in this whole area should be tied in from Catherwood Street. She
noted that with the Irving development by the railway tracks we cannot have an underpass and it therefore has to
be an overpass, which will affect some of the properties in that area. She added that she has spoken with Mr.
Sadler of the Canadian Pacific Railway about the railway crossing problem. She stated that the problem is not
going to be solved overnight because there are going to be some people who are going to be unhappy about the
solution. She hoped that before 1917 we will see some action in the matter; it certainly isn't tied in with the
part of the northern expressway. She felt that this petition will help greatly in initiating action in the
matter of the railway crossing solution.
Councillor Hodges enquired what course of action would be taken in the matter. Mr. Barfoot replied
that he feels that Mr. Murphy has laid out the course of action very succinctly and fully, and that he is sure
the City would appreciate receiving a copy of the recommendation submitted by Mr. Murphy for the petitioners.
Mr. Murphy replied that he will comply with this request. Mr. Barfoot advised that what the City has done
recently in connection with the matter of the northern expressway, was to look at the proposed route of such an
overpass and a connection in that area and this was subsequently transmitted to the Department of Highways for
that Department's engineers to make in-put into it; the City will have to follow up on that matter.
'L ,d, IJve The Mayor thanked Mr. Murphy for the presentation,
C?n,,! / . of good value to the Council as a whole, and stated that the
~IIUVcf~ requirement at the said railway crossing.
a,..o:;~iktJ
~Q<<'S ~ Read report of the Committee of the w~ole
IIPfHr'phY (as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
t?o/llm/
W/J(lle
.13,'/e.,e ,. e
. poli~e
'ProV. f:70vt-.
;{a/1/ /lmeJ?~
h1€'n~S
I
noting that it contains a lot of information that is
Council will take it under consideration knowing the
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, August 11th, 1965, when there were present
Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent, and your Committee
begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
1. That the following recommendations submitted by the Council Committee who studied the proposed Pro-
vincial Police Act, known as Bill 89, be adopted, namely:-
(1) that in view of the uncertainty and problems created by this Bill, it be rejected in toto by the City of
Saint John; (2) that a possible alternative, the concept of the Police Commission, by itself provided certain
changes were made, could possibly be helpful; (3) that the provisions of a Board of Police Commissioners be
entirely rejected, because it prescribes the loss of local autonomy and the responsibility of the elected members
to their people; (4) that a Brief be filed with the Law Amendments Committee based on the report submitted by the
said Council Committee and other information that is available.
Saint John, N. B.,
18th August, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recom-
mendation contained therein adopted.
~ " II t- Councillor A. Vincent questioned that the above noted recommendations concerning the Brief are strong
a I~ e enough. He then asked if the City pays a membership in the Chiefs of Police Association of New Brunswick. Mr.
/'I9st?e. c:rF Ferguson replied that the City pays into the Maritime Provinces Chiefs of Police Association. Councillor A.
JOPI','~~ Vincent stated that he understands from the news media that the ChiefsQf Police of New Brunswick have taken a
~ firm stand on Bill 89 which is almost contrary to the stand of The Cities on the Bill - he asked how could the
~I);~$ Chiefs of Police of New Brunswick take a firm stand, which they are alleged to have done, if they have no Assoc-
~~ iation. He asked if the said Chiefs went to a meeting on their own time or on the cities' time, to reach their
decision regarding Bill 89 and added that he thinks that employees should find out what the Bill is all about
before they rush into a decision, particularly non-Union employees which the six Chiefs of Police are. Councillor
. Vincent indicated that he would discuss this further when the Council would be discussing the matter of the
said Brief, and presentation of same to the Law Amendments Committee.
I
(!rJ>&tI1. fl.
Vincent'"
Councillor Green, chairman of the Council Committee above mentioned, advised that the said Brief has
filed today in Fredericton and that he personally strongly supports the Brief that is being presented and
. ~~J?~~ that he supports the Police Association in its endeavour to have Bill 89 rejected. He stated he does not feel
/1 ./;? that the City of Saint John should lose any more autonomy to the Provincial Government, and he knows that The
~t?~/ILd~ Cities Association has a Brief going in to the Law Amendments Committee opposing Bill 89, as well. He urged that
re ~11'~e the City of Saint John make strong representation to the Law Amendments Committee that this City in no way would
I7c~ ant to lose its autonomy to the Provincial Government.
:Brief! -fo
Aaw /lf1'1~n;/-
ments C.ON)
....
16
~
s.:r J)/st-p/et-
h.:iJ,tJttJt (!OUl7ei
'Police !Jet-
ProP'- gOld:
{!tl14l1. 'Pye
led. b?ov~.
hSt/Ce 2Jepc.
/Jfell/KPI sfh!IIrr
/It?l1lfen-hdi,.,y
/VflmiJ1dtl~
/lppf)i;d-meh~ .$
S.:T: 6J';>>1~..y
:z;,d'llst,."" ahJ~'
~~.
s. ;;. 'f/IfJ'JN.'L ~
:J}l?IIe!o/!; t:.~PlP'I.
.K: 7: :Sa~/er
/l~/V'Su/I?Y01I1
..lIr/eF re
'Police /lc~
#:IN /lm~~
Lbmm.
aNh. t!7~.11
crl1lll1C!/ I Comp" L..
re 'Police /lc.~
011<<11. k1ppjh~
S. :J:2Jistr/er
4:Jbd~raf,(,nc;/
{'OKI? /J, t"'/nof'H
~utel1. Il. r/irx!t?1i
'Po/ice ~
'Po11~e l1ar-
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from The Saint John District Labour
Council, expressing the opinion that if the proposed new police act for the Province of New Brunswick is
proclaimed there is great danger that it will isolate the police of this province from the very public
they serve and that this is'the most anti-labour piece of legislation ever introduced by any government,
and that it will wipe out the collective bargaining rights of the police as we presently know them, and
further expressing the view that if this act is proclaimed police will no longer be employees of the city
or the municipality but would become employees of a New Brunswick police commission -- and asking that the
Common Council do everything in its power to stop Bill 89 before it becomes law, and help protect the
rights of the labour movement in this city -- be received and filed.
Councillor Pye stated that in view of the marked increase in major crimes throughout New Brunswick
during the past several years, and the public awareness of same, and the natural apprehension that ac-
companies this awareness, the reluctance of the citizenry of the Martinon area to approve the establish-
ment of a medium security prison at the presently proposed site is highly understandable, and because of
this fact, he would make the following motion.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that a strong letter be submitted by Common Council to the
Justice Department of the Federal Government opposing the location of the proposed medium security prison
within the boundaries of the City of Saint John.
Councillor Hodges noted that there is an item in Committee of the Whole on the same subject, on
the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table.
The Mayor asked that an item be placed on the agenda at this time, being a report from the
Nominating Committee.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report from the Nominating Committee be placed on
the agenda at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the
Nominating Committee, the following appointments be made to the Saint John Commerce and Industry Com-
mission and to the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission:- Mr. E. T. Sadler (nominated by the
Saint John Board of Trade); Mr. Arthur Sullivan (nominated by the Saint John Building and Construction
Trades Council).
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter of the Brief that the City of Saint
John is presenting to the Law Amendments Committee concerning the proposed Provincial Police Act, known as
Bill 89, be placed on the agenda of this meeting at this time.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Brief from the City of Saint John to the Law
Amendments Committee regarding the proposed Province of New Brunswick Police Act (known as Bill 89) be
adopted and that Councillor Green, chairman of the Council Committee on the study of the said proposed
Act, and the legal staff be given permission to present this Brief to the Law Amendments Committee.
Councillor Kipping, referring to the recommendation of the August 11th Committee of the Whole in
this matter, which the Council adopted at this meeting, stated he would not want anyone to think that the
Council has come out so strongly against this Bill without some qualification - that is, the Council has
not condemned it even though the recommendation says "be rejected in toto" - he does not think that the
Council has condemned it entirely - there are some good points about the proposed Police Act, in his
opinion, and he thinks that the Council's suggestion that there is an altern~tive, that there is something
good about the Bill and that it should not just be case aside and not further considered - should not be
lost sight of. He stated he also would not want anyone to think that the Council is asking, prompted only
by the letter from the Saint John District Labour Council which deals with this matter. Councillor A.
Vincent pointed out that it could not be so construed because he went on record of having the matter of
Bill 89 on the Common Council agenda before the said district Labour Council ever thought of submitting a
letter on this subject; he added that after having asked that the matter be on the Council agenda he
learned that the Chiefs of Police were meeting the following day in Fredericton, and so on. With re-
ference to the City's Brief, the Mayor noted that it had to be submitted to the Law Amendments Committee
by August 18th but we can send amendments to the Brief strictly from a Council point of view. Councillor
Kipping advised that he is not suggesting an amendment to the Brief - he is just stating his opinion, that
he does not feel that the said Bill is all?wrdng~and he does support some of the points which the Chiefs
~.
of Police Association has made about it; however, in his opinion, there are enough things about the Bill
that are wrong in its present ~orm that he agreed that the Council members should oppose it as a Council,
and he has voted that way. He stated he was simply making the point that the Bill was not thrown out,
rejected, in toto and that there is something good about the Bill and he is in hopes that the Provincial
Government will take our comments into account and perhaps come up with a Bill that meets the approval of
all segments of society, even the Saint John District Labour Council, which has taken the view that it
impinges on their rights to a very great degree - and that, of course, is a matter for debate.
Councillor A. Vincent made the point that the City of Saint John has an excellent Police De-
partment, under the guidance of an excellent Chief of Police, and therefore does not need a Police Act; he
feels that the City could say in presenting the Brief that we in Saint John, because historically and
traditionally we run our own a~fairs and pay the costs, do not need a Police Act. He added that he knows
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...-
.
I
'"
I
.
I
Polt'ee' /ld-
:4-;ff
kw /lm
h1~ds a.
'ld:J"fi/1ff S.
. Y..,r/dI/1ee
;(.>0 EITkI"-
,Pr':sf?s ~ ~
Il1,CAcael J:
() ':Brien
C/~!1
.5;,1/ 'L"/t-Ol"
I
I
.
....
17
that other parts of the Province need a Police Act - he thinks that a presentation along that line should be
made.
Councillor Hodges advised that the Council Committee who studied the said Bill 89, of which Committee
he was a member, did contemplate the idea that we should ask the Province to exempt the City of Saint John from
the provisions of the proposed Act - and he pointed out that it rests with the people who write this Act where
the City will be standing. He stated that as the Bill stands at the present time it would be possible, in his
estimation, to turn it into a police state. He added that from what he has read, in those places where there
have been police commissions such commissions have not been favour ably active and all the citizens have not been
treated the same. He recalled that the people of Saint John, in their wisdom voted out the police commission
that Saint John had, a few years ago, and he would have a hard time understanding why they would not vote one out
again, a second time.
With reference to the presentation of the Brief on the City's behalf before the Law Amendments Committee,
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is opposing the Bill but he would still like to go to that hearing, even
though the Council knows he opposes the Bill. Councillor Pye, a member of the Committee, stated he would also
like to go to the hearing, as he, too, is interested in opposing the Bill. Councillor Green noted that when the
matter is heard before the Law Amendments Committee any elected member can appear and speak either for or against
the Bill, as an elected representative. Councillor Davis noted that the Brief that the City has presented will
be presented before the Law Amendments Committee, and nobody has any authority from this Council to present
anything but what is said in the Brief - the Council members have agreed to this; if a Councillor wants to appear
before that Committee and present something else, he thinks he should be able to go and probably should go at the
City's expense. He stated that his opinion of the Brief is that it does not state strongly enough that those who
are most affected by the Bill are the Chiefs of Police, who lose nearly all authority; this Act has the same
effect upon the Chiefs as the School Act had upon the Superintendents who have no authority whatever, or their
authority today is nowhere near what it once was - and the same thing is going to happen with the Chiefs. He
added that the men of the Police Departments, and the cities, will take care of themselves, but the Chiefs do not
have a chance, and if he goes before the Law Amendments Committee he will present that point, and he feels that
every other Councillor who has a point to present that is not mentioned in the Brief should be in a position to
do so.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understood that before the Brief was forwarded to the Law Amend-
ments Committee the Council members would have in-put into the Council Committee that was set up to study the
said Bill 89; he added that he would have liked to have looked at the Brief before it was mailed out to the Law
Amendments Committee. The Mayor advised that it was agreed by Council that in order to meet the deadline (August
18th) that the Brief would be submitted to Fredericton in the form outlined in the report from August 11th
Committee of the Whole meeting, and that the Brief could be amended according to the wishes of Council. During
further discussion, Councillor A. Vincent stated that he has a couple of suggestions he wants to make to add to
the above named Brief but he wishes to talk the matter over with the Chief of Police and with the City Solicitor _
he would not want to discuss the matter publicly in Council unless the Council knows what the Chief of Police's
and the City Solicitor's feelings are. Councillor Green stated he would appreciate any in-put from the Council
members regarding the said Brief, and that he feels that Council members should be in attendance when the Brief
is presented on behalf of the City before the Law Amendments Committee. The Mayor felt that any Councillor who
has a suggestion to make regarding additions to the Brief should prepare same and present same to the chairman of
the said Council Committee, Councillor Green, and a meeting can be called and the additions discussed, and the
amendments to the Brief can be forwarded. Councillor MacGowan suggested that there is merit in having Council
members present in strength of numbers when the Brief is presented before the Law Amendments Committee, in the
interests of having a better presentation.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that any Councillors who would see fit to attend the session of
the Law Amendments Committee at which the Brief from the City of Saint John is to be presented regarding the
proposed Province of New Brunswick Police Act (known as Bill 89), so attend.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Common Council grant the necessary variances to LSO
Enterprises Ltd. and permission be granted to establish a restaurant-beverage room on the second floor at 9-11
Sydney Street.
Councillor Gould asked if there are any by-laws or regulations that say the Council cannot do what the
above motion provides for. Mr. Rodgers replied that he will have to examine the correspondence that is in
existence, the Zoning By-Law and the Community Planning Act. Councillor Gould stated he would like to know
whether the above motion is overstepping the bounds of authority of Council with the Planning Advisory Committee,
and if the Council is doing this, does it have the right to do so. Mr. Rodgers replied that if the above resol-
ution is adopted, he will examine it in the light of other correspondence and the laws as they exist, and advise
the Council at its next meeting.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she will vote against the motion for the following reasons:- with
reference to the problem of high school students being attracted to beverage rooms, she feels it is quite a
responsibility to put another liquor outlet in that area during the day hours when the young people are going to
school; she noted that the Province is having problems allover New Brunswick with the drinking drivers and she
feels that if this establishment were permitted it would be much better for it not to have parking facilities,
but that patrons travel to and from it as pointed out earlier in the meeting by Councillor A. Vincent, but she
does not think that solves the problem; she does not think that in the uptown area of this city we need any more
li~uor outlets - during the busy hours, in any case - she thinks it is only a traffic hazard, so she will vote
against it.
Councillor Pye stated that the thing th~t concerns him is whether or not many an individual, after
imbibing in a club mostly in the evening and having attained a degree of intoxication, then will have to travel
on foot one block before reaching his motor vehicle, and it is known that an inebriated man on the street after
dark is atarget for a "mugger"; that is why he is wholly in favour of on-site parking.
Councillor Hodges stated that his concern is to see that everybody who comes before Council gets fair
play, and if this man has fulfilled the obligation as others have, and that includes M.R.A., then we should treat
him in the same manner.
Councillor M. Vincent explained that he feels that the above motion must be adopted by Council because
a precedent has been set by three other cases that have been dealt with in the same manner as the above motion,
and it is his feeling that the applicant now before Council must be treated the same as the other cases.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that up until this meeting when he heard Mr. O'Brien's presentation he was
completely opposed to the application but when he found out that the Planning Advisory Committee saw fit to make
18
~,,e'$.I~~~
?et-//-/PJ7 re
{]/; <<'I"c-h /J v~ .
ral/weul
t:r()~$rn1
(7v~rpSS ur
/otn~er~s$
'Jbl/er/r!a H/effs
Cil.f/.ed /I ~
JGlhlcsJ) 'Eht.
tJd,'I/t>h -/PI"
w.--ler ex&e/1$/.
~b CD#d~e7?e{.
'J'-t/U ~/J7cK
:~;ver fi7L.
C,l'1A1i#ee
Whb/e
LEG A L
C%& ..)q//~'~6
F/ppL'-hf
..tee AkJsk,..,t-
Shirley $e~
ys. '?rt>y. b?e7~
<l-C/..fff .,!;J S
-rA;rL ,?~n'y
~
the variances and issue other licenses, he is supporting this application on the grounds that he wants
equal treatment for everybody. Councillor Green stated that he has the same thoughts, and he feels that he
would rather see no parking spots whatsoever for patrons of taverns or clubs such as that rather than see
such patrons driving when they might be in a state that driving would be dangerous - he feels very strongly
that these establishments should have no parking spaces whatsoever which would mean that such patrons
would therefore have to use taxicabs or make arrangements to be driven to and from these establishments.
.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she cannot see where two wrongs make a right: if we have made a
variance in other areas where perhaps we should not have, then we certainly should not proceed and make
another mistake if we feel that making those'variances was wrong. She felt that the Council has a respon-
sibility to Our young people and to all our citizens, not just to one person who wants to open a club.
Councillor Davis commented that he should not really be voting on the question because he was
not present earlier in the meeting when Mr. O'Brien made his presentation. He asked if the Council
approves this present application, is it then possible to open a restaurant-beverage room in Saint John
without any parking space anywhere - is the Council setting a precedent- is the Council allowing payment
in lieu of parking. The Mayor replied that the Council is not saying that the applicant does not need any
parking, but we will accept the parking the applicant has - the applicant is asking for a variance.
I
Councillor Parfitt felt that this property is different because there is a nightclub in oper-
ation downstairs which she believes is open until 1.00 a.m. approximately, but this opens at 11.00 a.m.
and goes all day long - she has heard of problems of parking now because they will not go a block away and
they cause problems to the people who are taxpayers in that area and have to have the cars towed away, and
so on.
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors MacGowan, Parfitt, Davis and Pye
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that appropriate City staff be assigned to look into the
matters as raised by Mr. Louis E. Murphy and petitioners with regard to the railway crossing on Church
Avenue and that the various persons who have indicated their support regarding the relocation of this
railway crossing or the construction of an overpass or underpass to rectify the present situation affecting
traffic, be contacted and that the City of Saint John make a feasibility study of the proposal.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
-,
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the item from Mr. Gilfred H. Brown regarding the
problem of contaminated wells, be placed on the agenda of this meeting at this time.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Gilfred H. Brown of the Cottage
Road, Saint John East, advising that Mr. James D'Entremont and he have been confronted with the problem of
ontaminated wells believed due to septic solution in the immediate area and that the Department of Health
believes that the problem is the result of poor bedrock conditions and that the situation is incurable and
suggests the only solution is their acquisition of City water services; listing eight families on Old
Black River Road and the Cottage Road in this area who wish to take advantage of City water services and
also listing eight businesses and names of persons who would be en route if City water were to be brought
to the area as suggested, all of Old Black River Road; advising that the City water services at present
are located at the industrial park on Old Black River Road, approximately one-quarter of a mile from the
corner of Old Black River Road and Cottage Road where the problem exists, and that these residents con-
sider this an acute problem and request the Council's assistance in resolving the problem; and requesting,
on behalf of those listed in the first mentioned list of eight names of families, that they be granted
City water and given an estimate as to the possible time it would be provided -- be referred to the City
staff with the request that they ascertain the time, costs, et cetera, in this matter.
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Council be provided with the above requested information
within thirty days.
.
At 8.45 p.m., the meeting adjourned to Committee of the Whole, and at 10.45 p.m the Committee
arose and the Mayor resumed the Chair, in legal session of Common Council, when there were present Coun-
cillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt and Pye, and Messrs. N. Barfoot, City
Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, and F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor.
Mr. Rodgers stated that this morning, on returning from his vacation, he found on his desk a
Third Party notice served on the City of Saint John by Clark, Drummie & Company, Barristers, representing
Lee Webster and Shirley Webster who sued the Province of New Brunswick with respect to a flooding situation
in West Saint John; the Province, in turn, has joined the City as Third Party. He stated that he is
therefore looking for authority to file the necessary Appearance at this time against this action and that
he be authorized to engage legal counsel to defend the action, and look into it and come back to Council
with a recommendation.
I
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be authorized to file an Appearance
against the action in the case of Lee Webster,an~Shirley Webster vs. the Province of New Brunswick in
~
which the City of Saint John has been_given-Third Party notice, and that he be authorized to engage legal
counsel to defend the action and make a recommendation to Council following study of the matter.
I
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
.
~
JI""""
.
I
I
.
I
ttksfer/'J
IV- :B. jjJ /111;
7);d;o/~~
~d~Ht-
SUhJ>>{er
K~r
::Jel i YI --r-!f
t!/ea)?-u.?
lIoh f?1lf"
t!epfiliCde
C/vk'T/72P'
l)&;ltcl.Cd~
C't7~J1.
fI'l;;JC boWO/
19
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-fifth day
of August, A. D. 1975, at 4.00. o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye and A. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. R. Park, Acting City Manager, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer
of Operations of the Engineering and Works Department, H. Ellis, Assistant to
the City Manager, M. Zides, Acting Commissioner of Community Planning and
Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of
Housing and Renewal Services, C. Nicolle, Director of the Recreation and
Parks Department, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, R. H. Stone,
Deputy Chief of Police, and A. W. C. Robertson, Acting Deputy Fire Chief
A prayer, which was read by Miss Anne Chisholm, opened the meeting.
Major Leo Mulholland was present, accompanied by Militia students who participated in The Western New
Brunswick Militia District, Student Summer Employment Activity in Saint John this summer.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council held on August 18th
last, be confirmed.
Councillor MacGowan advised that the above named group of young people worked this summer under the
Western New Brunswick Militia District, Student Summer Employment Activity at clean-up of the area along Chesley
Street and at the rear of the Lord Beaverbrook Rink, and of the site at Fort Howe, and that the City must continue
this worthwhile clean-up project, hopefully, by having this group finish their excellent work, and also by the
City itself continuing on this project. She paid tribute to the historical military pageant that is presented by
this group at Fort Howe twice a day five days a week, which is a tourist attraction and draws a number of spect-
ators. She felt that this student summer employment activity has awakened an interest in the young people in the
community, in community pride and in the history of their city, and stated that she would commend them, most
strongly. She stated that as a result of these activities, the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee
felt it would like to honour this group by the presentation of an Honour Certificate, the citation of which reads
as follows, "For their invaluable assistance in the project of municipal beautification. The thoroughness with
which this activity was carried out has elicited favourable comments from both citizens and visitors. The Mayor
and Common Council wish to thank the sponsoring body, The Western N. B. Militia District, for their co-operation
and to commend the students who participated.".
In presenting the said Honour Certificate, the Mayor explained that he received a call from the Militia
in the spring stating that they had a group of young students who would be employed during the summer in militia
training and that part of their training was to do something for their COmmunity, and having agreed that this
would be a, good thing for the City as well as for the students, we turned the matter over to the Civic Improve-
ment and Beautification Committee and Councillor MacGowan detailed the things that she felt could best be done
for the City, and which this group executed, and for which he congratulates the group. He expressed the apprec-
iation of the City and its citizens to Major Mulholland for allowing the City to have the work done by this
group, and he further expressed the pride the citizens must feel in knowing that these young people take an
interest in their city in this fashion.
On motion of Councillor Green
. 7'itnJl'llf'r .1-0;/ Seconded by Councillor Pye
GlCt!t?j?.,;-r::<<, RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that only one reply,
~ j/ that of Canadian Salt Co. Ltd. of Halifax, N. S., was received in response to the City's call for tenders for
/1~~,~ supplying 10,000 tons of highway salt, and recommending that the said tender bid be accepted, at a price of
~/?~~"~n $20.00 per ton, plus eight per cent Provincial sales tax, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
5.;J~a.~
I, ~'/~ /IJ~r-
Ce.Prle JI.
K/m J,.;J / /
~eClCdn 51:
tJur~~
Sir/e pgI~j/r
A.imtllGd:i1/in.
I~~~
~I').;l/LV:
/I~6ul"S
&1"~/J?q
5&:, /res
Spee/ /ih7/-
7>o//Ct! .2)e..
. /Il;;/.pf'ic +
.5'aFe-c-~
(;'Iv/YJP7.
....
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Engineering and Works with regard to the letter from Mr. George H. Kimball of 145 Beacon Street which advises
that the residents of this street do not have curbing or a sidewalk and which requests that this situation be
rectified, advising that it has been estimated that the work would involve about 1,000 feet of asphalt curbing,
several driveway ramps, 900 square yards of landscaping and possibly an asphalt sidewalk and that there is an
approximate estimate of $6,000.00 required for this project, and recommending that this improvement be referred
to the 1976 Capital Budget Committee, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Engineering and Works in reply to the points and suggestions contained in the letter from Mr. Donald V.
Arthurs of 598 Harding Street, Saint John West, to 'overcome the problems created by use of this short street as a
throughway for all trucks, vans, oil tank trucks, pulp trucks and cars heading in or out of the city, advising
that the Traffic and Safety Committee has recommended that 30 m.p.h. signs be prominently displayed on Harding
Street and that the Police Department has indicated that enforcement of maximum speed limits below 30 m.p.h. is
virtually impossible - in any case, speed limits are applicable only under ideal conditions - and that given a
osted limit of 30 m.p.h. and the physical conditions on this street, it seems that present regulations are
within reasonable limit - and suggesting that the speed limit signs be more prominently displayed and that
continued checking by the Police Department be prompted, and advising that these suggestions, as contained in
this letter of reply, are being followed up -- be received and filed and a copy of same be sent to Mr. Arthurs.
In reply to Councillor MacGowan's query as to whether a better access route to the throughway and
Fairville Boulevard than Harding Street is going to become available soon (the above noted letter points out that
should a better access route become available, Harding Street West will return to its former status as a quiet
residential street), Mr. Armstrong stated that such better access route will not be available immediately. In
20
Falrvi/le
:Blvd. exte/lSiA
hnMr <fIeee
Fence
,..f;;,$tern ;:€l7ce
~-&,(.
J?ecredt/PI?
s/tfe s
H 1?...J)~ey.
t(/.;;ufel"~ sewel"
Nlfe .!#dy
u4teN$ewet:,
~ ~dr!~
reJ//ew
2hz/In f1teAt
W.=1t~rcj~(/d
tIt.;Jl'sh [7reek
Ai/re t, Pl'lio/~
rv?h70V.;j/
Sighs r:e
aUh7f.JIY/j
:p~ 'P,J.tpt;hf..
(' 4/.)
Ao/.;J.td ~!/S
1(/'17.1 $'1'
d.;J/'11.a~e
/)j'()~k5
L
reply to Councillor Kipping's request for information regarding the proposed plans to extend Fairville
Boulevard from Catherwood Drive to Main Street, West (and Harding Street could become a 'dead end, in each
case) which would get people off Harding Street and thereby an~wer Mr.Arth~'~ de~ipeg, MP, ,Ap~~tpong
stated that he is not familiar with this matter which is an Engineering Department matter - however, any
connections there would probably be some time in the future - it would not be immediate within the next
few years.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, the bid of Eastern Fence Ltd. in the total amount of $14,990.00 for supplying and installing
chain link fencing at the following recreation sites throughout the City:- Swanton Street and Robar
Court, Troop Street, Simonds Centennial Arena, Lorneville Centennial Arena and Adelaide Street, with
delivery in two weeks' time, be accepted, funds having been provided for this purpose in the 1975 Capital
Budget.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Com-
missioner of Finance submitting, for the information of the Common Council, a copy of the report from
H. R. Doane and Company dated July 29th, 1975 which sets forth the scope of the work, methods of con-
ducting the water and sewer rate study for the City, and the estimated fee for conducting the review of
the Water and Sewerage Department operations and bringing in recommendations for revised user rates, be
received and filed.
Councillor Hodges, referring to the above named report of the said consultants, asked if the
rate schedules mentioned therein will cover companies and households. Mr. Park, in reply, advised that
the review will cover all consumers but where there are fixed water rates under the terms of signed
agreements, those cannot be changed during the duration of those agreements; the information regarding
the parties who are receiving the benefits of fixed water rates will appear in the consultants' report as
part of it.
The Mayor stated he understands that there are accounts for sewerage that have been owing the
City for from three to six years, and he asked if the City advertises this information with the names of
those who owe these accounts. Mr. Park stated that the City does not normally advertise - the City tries
to enforce payments, usually, by shutting off water service - it is successful in a number of cases, and
the charge remains on the property as long as the payment has not been made - in the long run, the City
should recover all the unpaid accounts; there is quite a list of unpaid accounts. In reply to Councillor
Gould's suggestion that the City shut the water service off for a while and thus force the delinquent
account to be paid, Mr. Park stated that the City does this on occasion - the City tries to encourage the
consumer to pay before going to those extreme lengths, but sometimes it is necessary for the City to take
the ultimate step of closing off the water. Councillor Gould felt that action should be taken to collect
these accounts. The Mayor suggested that possibly results could be obtained in collecting these accounts
by publishing the names of the delinquent accounts if they will not make payment through the water being
shut off.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that in
reply to the questions raised by Councillors at the Common Council meeting of August 5th last concerning
Likely bridge and signs prohibiting dumping in the Marsh Creek, the Department of Public Works of Canada
has informed the City that tenders for the removal of the said bridge at the new Post Office site are
closing on August 14th and that the work of removing the bridge should take place shortly thereafter, and
further advising that ten signs "Dumping Prohibited By Order" are being made by the City and will be
installed at various locations along the banks of Marsh Creek, be received and filed.
l~. Armstrong pointed out that as the above named bridge is being torn down by the Federal
Department of Public Works the City is not involved in any of that cost. In reply to Councillor Hodges'
question as to where the above named ten signs are going to be placed, Mr. Armstrong stated he does not
believe it has been determined as yet where they will be placed. In reply to Councillor Hodges' question
as to whether the City has the authority to place such signs, the Mayor noted that this is something that
will have to be looked into. Councillor Higgins noted that there is to be a meeting shortly to discuss
the jurisdiction of the Marsh Creek, and the Mayor confirmed that the Minister of Municipal Affairs is
coming to the city for a meeting this week with the Council and City officials.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting a report
from the Director of Recreation and Parks which advises that during Loyalist Days 1975 the placing of
kiosks in King Square resulted in destruction of flower beds and approximately $2,000.00 total cost to
the Department for supervision and damages and that many of the plants destroyed are lost for the season
which is very disheartening, especially to the staff who take great pride in their work of beautifying
the up-town area, and advising that he supports the said Director's recommendation that the kiosks, if
placed in the Square another year, be only allowed on the walks, and that other conditions required by
the said Department of Recreation and Parks be strictly adhered to, be received and filed and the Loyal-
ist Days kiosks no longer be permitted in the said Square.
Councillor Pye stated he would recommend that in future, King Square north be closed to traffic
for Loyalist Days week and the kiosks~be~p~ced there - he noted that traffic, particularly bus traffic,
could be routed up Union Street and along Charlotte Street. Councillor MacGowan stated that as far as the
kiosks are concerned, she believes that the most successful year for Loyalist Days was when there was
activity on King Street, when the first block of that street was closed off to create a mall; she noted
that the merchants on King Street suffer in loss of business when the crowds are attracted to King Square
as the focal up-town point for Loyalist Days. She stated she would hope that a mall on King Street for
Loyalist Days would be considered again. She stated she was appalled regarding the damage to the said
Square in question. Councillor Kipping felt that before making a decision regarding kiosks in King
Square, the Council should probably-consult with the Loyalist Days Committee and see what the alter-
natives are. He added that his own thought in the matter is that perhaps the Council could allow the
kiosks in King Square for one more year during Loyalist Days on the walks only and with no exceptions,
and with better supervision - he noticed during the past Loyalist Days there that what was lacking was
supervision and there was a group of large boys there whom no-one would really want to try to monitor _
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
'I tI~)7 Seconded by Councillor Green
l1'el.7eJ(1e11 RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be given for
~/~el! payment of the account from Palmer, O'Connell, Leger, Turnbull & Turnbull, in the amount of $454.11, for legal
CI'c.: . e/~ services rendered in connection with the expropriation of the property at 426 Main Street (F-11-22-21) owned by
~J?J1___ I Hannah I. MacLellan, for the period December 28th, 1972 to June 23rd, 1975, this property being required for the
~e~~!-l'~/, North End Urban Renewal Project, and the Partnership's approval having been acknowledged for payment of the said
~K;.1,(/'~t1A(// account - and that these accounts be charged against the project and shared in the usual way.
Expnp/,/.;'fl
~a6Jf/d/11 ~
1-1.;111 naJ,;z:.
eJ1lac.(ellah
Sktvin/~h
,6,:1'1' /ll31
-t 1m e .(N-I.
I? fJ/ll~/5.;J
/1//2, );. 'P- C.
:lJ(7c/r Sf:
jJr()~ert-y
1?~j9~/~/ Seconded by Councillor Higgins
/77orJ?l!', RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be given for
~/'~~el'/~c; payment of the following accounts received from Thorne, Riddell & Company in the total amount of $2,600.00 for
l~f~~J'~~ professional services rendered in connection with properties required for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme,
/:_ ~ ~/. approval of the Partnership for payment of these accounts having been acknowledged, and that these accounts be
. . rYliIhK tei'/e:s..t- charged against the proj ect and shared in the usual way:-
~phS Period of December 15, 1974 to March 31, 1975:
.S,I17#. F-6-19 10 61 63 Dock Street
j)/e/,;i"'~ ~t: Se tember 17 to March 15 19 5:
~ "B~Se F-6-19-14, 16, 17 & 18 South Market Wharf and Nelson
~I1Si?~ Street-Warehouse & Transport -
IU/.,F 19/d'd': W. F. Allan Ltd.
,(t; . Mr. Buck advised that the same information given regarding authority to engage the above named services
of Shawinigan Engineering Maritime Ltd. applies regarding the above named services of Thorne, Riddell & Company.
,....-
.
'I
I
Sarf/e~
t1!1tf'L e?(:h -
.,,<lhf/ey;k,
:g,.e!lrTJaJ7"1f-
Ham.,.nn
fY'/aPke-t 51
. :JJock 5i:
{;!(JI'1'f p / e )(
....
'-.
2t
however, it is his feeling that probably just the presence of one or two policemen in uniform there, and by them
speaking to such group, could accomplish this.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table, until the meeting of
Council of September 8th, with the understanding that the Council in the meantime will notify the Loyalist Days
Committee of the matter.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with Councillors Kipping, Green, Parfitt, Cave and
the Mayor voting "yea" and Councillors MacGowan, Davis, Pye, Hodges, Gould and Higgins voting "nay".
Councillor Parfitt felt that the Council should take into consideration that not only were the kiosks
in the Square during Loyalist Days but that there was entertainment there as well, and that this raises the
question that it was not the kiosks that caused all the damage in the Square.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Kipping voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gonld
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the estimated
cost of professional services rendered by Shawinigan Engineering Maritime Ltd. in the appraising of the Dock
Street Power Plant in connection with the North End Urban Renewal Scheme is $15,000.00 and that the current
account from this company of $3,463.43 covers work carried out during the months of February and March, 1975 and
that the approval of the Partnership for payment of these progress accounts in the said amount of $3,463.43 has
been acknowledged and that these accounts will be charged against the project and shared in the usual way - and
recommending that the Council approve payment of the said invoice of $3,463.43, be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
In reply to the Mayor's question as to who gave the authority to engage Shawinigan Engineering Maritime
Ltd. for the above named work, Mr. Buck advised that this is an appraisal that is being made of the New Brunswick
Electric Power Commission plant on Dock Street; that there are really in Canada two companies that do this
appraising work - the other is Montreal Engineering, who are acting for the said Power Commission, and so the Co-
Ordinating Committee for the Partnership engaged Shawinigan Engineering. He stated that this same procedure has
been followed regarding consultants previously in other work in the City; this work is being done on the Co-
Ordinating Committee's authority. Mr. Park and Mr. Buck advised that this procedure is quite normal, in the
circumstances. Mr. Buck added that the Common Council gave the Co-Ordinating Committee authority to approve all
budgeted expenditures under the Urban Renewal Scheme except properties which are brought to Council; it has been
the practice of the Co-Ordinating Committee to bring to Council anything that is unusual or of a very large
amount. He noted that the City pays 37 1/2% of the above noted invoice amount.
Councillor MacGowan withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the accounts from Murdoch-Lingley Ltd. in the total amount of $9,700.60 for survey work carried out in
connection with the North End Urban Renewal Scheme, specifically Sites A, B, C and D and H on Chesley Street,
Sites I, J and K on Main Street and Site L on Lansdowne Avenue, the Partnership's approval for payment of the
said accounts having been acknowledged, and that these accounts be charged against the project and shared in the
usual way.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Frank Fales & Sons
$ 1,300.00
$ 1,300.00
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
approval be given for the payment of the invoices from Bregman & Hamann, in the total amount of $23,443.11 for
professional services rendered during the period December 1974 to June, 1975 regarding the evaluation of schematic
designs, preparation of revised schematic design drawings and related services for the Market Square civic and
commercial centre, the approval of the Partnership for payment of the said total amount having been acknowledged,
and that these accounts be charged against the project and shared in the usual way.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, stating that
Project Management Limited, the principals of which are A. J. Callaghan and family, are developing Kil-
"7> . -f- Ail 9 t? kenny Court Sub'-division as the first phase of what was originally called Project Sandy, and that this
/',.~~C ~/~17 ~ sub-division will take place on the north side of Ocean Westway at a point approximately 200 feet west of
11.7t'J1~~~~' the King William Road intersection; that the developers' plans meet the re~uirements of the Engineering
and Works Department for the construction of street and services for approximately 800 feet of Katie
Drive, and the sanitary sewer connections to the collector line at the throughway; that according to the
City's sub-division policy of only cost sharing development in Stage 1 areas (under the Comprehensive or
unicipal Development Plan), the City will only be responsible for the share of the pipe materials which
would be usable for future development, and, therefore, the City would be responsible for sanitary sewer
material costs of $8,800.00 - and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water and
sewerage materials to be charged to the 1975 Capital Budget, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in due course -- be received and filed and the recom-
mendation adopted.
oJ')
......
.7.ilfrl e S F
IlCiI,.pls ii-d.
/Ilar/rel- Sr.-
:Pock Sf. C'Oh/p
/I ppr~/..s.:;JIs
I1ppN/~/s A~
fj'3-~'7~ 57--5'
PocA' -J-t:
fI,/11./I~rr
eo, './~a.
kKf'r't7l'r,".;/t/on
&,.;,yel
J)e;t'ier ahsC/",
,(-6~
/1Sj/k/f
$~~eJ7 Ghd.
C'o, kC,{
5",t-~'r- 4!r(!i!'-
me47f
Kt'/7hebe~/s
.znyed-"'Jt!'d'~
..{~/IC..
:Bf?h /Jc~{)~
Sa/l-d/V:
/l.TCaI/.a4kn
er3/
~lkehn:lau
$u.6-rX/Y-
?e-h'tion ';;'oP/
'/bu/ IFtJJ7ItJn,
5'V.3"fig!lP/i/stU1.
/;/mer tIU'/5on,
?der Pt!''':~1/.
IIowJrd vv-;"/son
""''/.sOh $u.6-<<',,'
f'oq~p/ay.
'<01-'11 t'tll/Ie
~
payment of the invoice from James F. Harris Ltd. in the total amount of $4,437.55 for professional ser-
vices rendered in connection with the Market S~uare civic and commercial centre for the period January
20th to June 30th, 1975 - this company having been retained as consultants to work with the developer to
produce a revised proposal of the civic centre, a phased programme of development and a separation of
responsibilities between the developer and government - the Partnership's approval for payment of the said
account having been acknowledged - and that this account be charged against the project and shared in the
usual way.
.
Councillor MacGowan re-entered the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the recommendation of the City Manager be adopted,
namely, that the Council approve payment of the invoice from Appraisals Ltd. in the amount of $245.00 for
appraising 53-55 and 57-59 Dock Street (F-6-19-8 & 9) of H. M. Hopper Co., Ltd. in connection with the
North End Urban Renewal Scheme, the approval of the Partnership for payment of this account having been
acknowledged, and that this account be charged against the project and shared in the usual way.
I:
In reply to the Mayor's ~uestion as to whether the City has informed the H. M. Hopper Co., Ltd.
that it is going to expropriate, Mr. Buck advised that this is one of a number of companies that are left
on Market Square and we have asked the City Solicitor to begin expropriation procedures because of the
anticipated length of time that expropriation will take - it is expected that a number of these property
ac~uisitions will be settled by agreement, and this would include the Hopper company in this agreement
rather than to go expropriation, but we have to start the expropriation procedures, anyway.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, approval be
given for payment of the invoice from Dexter Construction Ltd. in the amount of $7,905.18, for crushing
and supplying gravel to the Works Department during the period June 1st to July 31st, 1975.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the Acting City Manager,
authority be granted for payment of the invoice from Stephen Construction Company Limited for supplying
asphalt to the Works Department during the period August 1st to 15th, 1975, in the total amount of $36,518.38.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that
Kennebecasis Investments Limited are developing approximately 900 feet of street in Phase 2 of the Bon
Accord Sub-division and are also extending the existing watermain at Lakewood 2,100 feet to connect to the
sub-division, so that proper pressures will be available for the Phase 2 portion of the development and
that the developer's servicing plans met with the approval of the Engineering and Works Department, and
that according to the sub-division policy, the City will be responsible for the following costs:- (1)
water materials (watermains, gate valves, fire hydrants, et cetera) $38,000.00; (2) sanitary sewer material
(pipe, manholes, et cetera) $6,700.00; (3) storm sewer materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $7,000.00 __
totalling $51,700.00 -- and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water and sewerage
materials to be charged to the 1975 Capital Budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to
execute the sub-division agreement in due course -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the Acting City Manager and the
Commissioner of Engineering and Works, relative to the petition submitted by Messrs. Paul Gordon, Stanley
Wilson, Elmer Wilson, Peter Perry and Howard Wilson for consideration to the upgrading and maintenance of
the roadway leading to their homes in Wilson's Sub-division at Lorneville, and to the feeling of these
petitioners that it should be the responsibility of the City to at least gravel the roadway and maintain
it in a good condition, advising that the roadway leading into this small sub-division is a common right-
of-way and not a City street and that portion of the right-of-way leading from Lorneville Road is 30 feet
in width and the roadway itself is 10 to 12 feet in width, and the right-of-way alters to 50 feet further
in the sub-division - and further advising that at the present time it is not the responsibility of the
City to service or maintain this private right-of-way but that, however, should the homeowners provide
sufficient\roadway width to the City and, in addition, that they develop the roadway according to the
City's requirements, the City would be prepared to accept the maintenance on the roadway -- be received
and filed and the said petitioners be so advised, and that they be supplied with a copy of the said
letter.
I
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the Acting City Manager and the
Commissioner of Engineering and Works in reply to the request made by Mr. Yvon St. Coeur of POkemouche,
~
,....-
"-.,
'J '-3
_l
Yvt7J?.5t.'~..~ N. B. that the road at 138-142 Morris Street Extension, Saint John West, be paved by the City, advising that Mr.
.t.r.1t7~;'/'S ~~, St. Coeur agreed to provide the paving and curbing to the western property line and to construct the extension of
~-L- . Morris Street, as set forth in the submitted correspondence, and further advising that a certified cheque, in the
/f..C:I1S/()h amount of $2,000.00, was deposited by Mr. St. Coeur - however, it was Mr. St. Coeur's responsibility to complete
the work on this street - be received and filed and a copy of same be sent to Mr. St. Coeur.
I
Councillor MacGowan asked if the above information means that Mr. St. Coeur can be forced to do the
above named work on the street in question. She added that the people who live there are not very happy with the
condition of this street. She asked if this responsibility of Mr. St. Coeur to complete the street was tied in
with any other responsibility than this; within a certain length of time, for instance. She asked if Mr. St.
Coeur purchased Lots 25, 26 and 27, and if the City supplied scrape fill, as mentioned in the above named cor-
respondence - she noted that Mr. St. Coeur must have agreed to purchase these lots if he was able to have the
development. She asked when Mr. St. Coeur is going to complete this street. Mr. MacKinnon expressed the opinion
that he does not think that Mr. St. Coeur is ever going to do it. He explained that the certified cheque for
$2,000.00 deposited by this man was for performance of the work and this man has not done the work; the work was
going on without a building permit, regarding construction of the building on Morris Street by this man - this
construction was on land adjacent to a City street and this man was extending the street and doing the work
without a building permit and without negotiating with the City - the City in turn negotiated the work and this
man in turn indicated on City plans work that he was going to do - this, in turn, is the culmination of the
matter; the City Solicitor is familiar with the December 27th, 1973 letter of the Works Department which is at
present under discussion, and with Mr. St. Coeur's request at that time - however, this man has completed the
building, but has not completed the work, and,has now come to the Council asking the City to do the work. He
stated that he has replied Mr. St. Coeur's request that it is not the City's responsibility, but that of Mr. St.
Coeur to do it. Councillor Gould asked if the $2,000.00 would cover completion of the work if the City did it.
l~. MacKinnon made negative reply. He added that if Mr. St. Coeur had done all the work, it would have been on
such basis that the City would then take it over as a City street - at the moment it is a cul-de-sac adjacent to
his buildings and is almost a private road. In reply to Councillor Gould's question as to whether the City has
cashed the said $2,000.00 cheque of Mr. St. Coeur, Mr. Park stated he has not verified this particular cheque,
but the City's normal procedure would be to cash this cheque and the City would be holding it as a deposit
awaiting a report from the Works Department as to completion of the work. In reply to Councillor Gould's question
as to what action the City can take to see that Mr. St. Coeur completes the work, Mr. MacKinnon pointed out that
the first thing to do is to reply to the request of Mr. St. Coeur that the City complete the work - he should be
told it is his responsibility and that he should complete the work post-haste, and that it is not the City's
responsibility. With regard to Councillor Green's suggestion that the City Works Department give Mr. St. Coeur
notification of the estimated cost to complete this work, along with the above motion of Council in reply to his
letter, Mr. MacKinnon stated that the estimate of cost of completing the work can be prepared, and he feels that
the Council should use strong wording in telling Mr. St. Coeur it is his responsibility to do the work. Councillor
MacGowan asked if any landscaping has taken place near that building of Mr. St. Coeur. Mr. MacKinnon stated he
does not believe any of that type of work has been completed. In answer to Councillor MacGowan's question as to
whether Mr. St. Coeur finally obtained a building permit for the building, he stated he believes this man obtained
a building permit sometime after he began work on it. Mr. A. Ellis confirmed that Mr. St. Coeur obtained a
building permit.
I
.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
1_- ~111'1-<#-fl/iJ~
:J)e/J-I:.
Won .5~t!of?tC
II!tlIW's S-i:
"t;xkl1sion
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the Engineering and Works Department keep a check with
regard to the work that Mr. Yvon St. Coeur is required to do to complete the extension of Morris Street, and
follow the proper procedure to ensure that such work is done, at no cost to the City.
On motion of Councillor Gould
/J1(7l7t-h/y
f'e(/6r#s
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the reports for July of the Fire Department and of the
Technical and Inspection Services (including the Plumbing Division), be received and filed.
.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Acting City Manager and the Deputy Commissioner of
Housing and Renewal Services, which advises that recent meetings with the Saint John Regional Library Board, the
developer of the Market Square civic centre complex, and City staff and their consultant, have resulted in
agreement on certain changes to be made to the layout plan for Market Square, and that in order to adjust the
plan to accommodate these changes, it will be necessary for the City's design consultant, Mr. David Scott of
Bregman & Hamann, to work on the plan and make the changes - and further advising that, to date, all work by this
consultant has been cost-shared because the Federal and Provincial partners in the scheme have considered the
work as being related to the general North End Urban Redevelopment Scheme; and that this work relates to a
specific part of the civic content of the project and is considered to be the responsibility of the City. The
letter requests the Council's authority for the said consultant of the City to make the necessary changes to the
Market Square plan as agreed between the Library Board, the developer and the City.
Councillor Davis stated he is not completely in favour of this, because even though we did arrive at a
design that was very satisfactory to the Library Board it seems to him that we should not begin redesigning this
until the problem of the hotel is completed. He noted that it would probably cost the City $15,000.00 to have
this redesigned and then the hotel people might want to come up another 50 feet towards Dock Street and we would
have to go through the same procedure again. He stated he does not quite see why we should have a new plan made
and new models made every time there is a change - he noted that the Council has approved the concept and we were
told at the very start that the plans would be changed - where the library and hotel are shown may be changed _
~ ~~t>~,~~ be does not see why the City should go to the expense of having this redesigned, every time. He noted that as
'~L' / ~~ soon as the hotel location is determined, the project can proceed.
.../t?I"';?~ .l-'~,
1.:8f'''1mah?-
~~~1111 Seconded by Councillor Higgins
1I!.;1"~~ ~- RESOLVED that the permission requested for the City's consultant, Bregman
~~ ~~. & Hamann, to make the necessary changes to the Market Square plan as agreed between the Library Board, the
~ n~:{?X developer and the City, as referred to in the letter dated August 21st, 1975 from the Acting City Manager and the
.LvO~~~~ Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, be not granted until such time as the developer has some
1'1.;111 ~,~ "7 indication that the location of the hotel is satisfactory to a tenant. ' . ,
I
"
On motion of Councillor Davis
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the Acting City Manager, the
following construction progress certificates be paid on the following named project contract that is included in
the Capital Budget:-
lrl....
24
~
t'a,P/t-..lI'lJ.ojer:: l. Community Arenas
/l,.enas (a) Rocca Construction Ltd. .
'/?odc.;1 ~l1st-r. Construction of three arenas
Total value of contract $ 2,913,949.00
..( -6-d. Total work done, Estimate Number 7 2,663,127.00
Retention 399,469.05
Payments previously approved 1,945,712.05
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 7,
dated August 8, 1975 $ 330,570.30
(b) A. D. 1. Limited
/J. :I).I: .( t-L. Engineering Services I
Payments previously approved $ 133,730.82
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 11,
dated July 31, 1975 $ 5,610.81
JJe'p,.1?~.;f'(!,!n .
~ph5/(m
/If,1-1Orr/. e~~.
&Ik~f'dr $erne
~-mls /lS$<<!";
..(~tZ,
~.seH!~ . /_
~I'~$
(;pod.1car ~ri
,( -cd.
//. T ~/Jq~/,an
/15S0t:!,
CAdl'ff/,6;11 +-
~~/VDM{ ilis.
Co//. SeIPe'l"
(l.erdlltLJ~11
eo, 2-6~
ark a//. /lre-
Ji.u.l1k Sewer
areel1ter f'/ace
,,<i.f'-c .5'-ta-c-/f?11
SUl1l'1Se 'fJ~
..J)anl-e ;:b,.,e
.5'UI1NSe '1!;,,../r
S,J-p{./f/.
SJ-d'/y. ..-A-
~reRmenb
,fr'
In reply to Councillor Gould's question as to when the three community arenas can be expected to
be completed, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the estimated completion schedule would indicate that the Simonds
arena would be completed the third week of September and that the other two arenas would be completed in
the first week of September - they would be probably substantially completed by the times mentioned; other
items such as clean-up around the buildings and small items of this nature would remain to be done, but I
there is no reason why the ice surfaces cannot be in well ahead of schedule.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, the fol-
lowing construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services, regarding
projects that have been undertaken in connection with the Department of Regional Economic Expansion
programme, be paid, namely:-
l.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer
(a) Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 44,
dated July 13, 1975
127, 77l. 33
11 ,077.74
$
$
(b) Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 45,
dated July 17, 1975
$
138,849.07
9,106.94
$
2.
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
(a) Goodyear Paving Limited
Construction of eastern approaches
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 14
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 14,
dated July 31, 1975
5,163.22
$
671,856.00
748,965.74
112,344.85
631,525.67
$
(b) A. J. Callaghan & Associates
Engineering Services for eastern approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 40,
dated August 1, 1975
$
$
137,312.48
4 ,27l. 00
3.
Champlain and Lakewood Heights Collector Sewer
Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
Contract "D" Champlain Heights System
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated July 31, 1975
13,447.04
$
178,810.23
16 ,20l. 25
2,754.21
Nil
$
4.
Western Collector Area Trunk Sewer 16 c.f.s.
Carpenter Place Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended, for payment, Progress Estimate Number 12,
dated July 24, 1975
85,090.15
3,424.17
$
$
On motion of Councillor Higgins
,
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that
Sunrise Park Limited, the principal of which is Mr. Dante Foriere, is developing Sunrise Park Sub-division
and the development will take place on the north side of the Loch Lomond Road approximately 2,500 feet
past Graham Brook; that the developer's plan have met the requirements of the Engineering and Works
Department for the construction of streets and services for approximately 1,000 feet of street and service
connections to water and sewer; that according to the City's sub-division policy of only cost sharing
development in Stage 1 areas (under the Comprehensive or Municipal Plan), the City will only be respon-
sible for the share of the pipe materials which would be usable for future development and, therefore, the
City would be responsible for water material costs of $9,400.00; and recommending that the above expendi-
ture be approved for water materials to be charged to the 1975 Capital Budget, and that the Mayor and
Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in due course -- be received and filed
and the recommendation adopted.
.
I
.
I
I
.
.....
,....-
)-
;,.:)
'-
On motion of Councillor Cave
.~" /jJmF. Seconded by Councillor Green
~7 e t. / RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Acting City
,v~ ~~~_~ Manager, approval be given for payment of the invoice from Chitticks (1962) Ltd., dated August 20th, 1975, for
~J7/ /~ArS equipment rental to the Works Department for the period August 1st to'15th, 1975, in the amount of $10,868.20.
(r.,6~) ~TL
7eq,!~~n
dCeer" e
1- ~/,..va e //
e"l7 r. ATl
G"eentfCl/e
~~ g-6bl"
sewer
1.K9#U;o""M
,.el7~c<l1
:0. /4-H;e 4-
.,(-t-d.
.
;r(eady
lPent'''';h
.,(-t-tL.
I
.LJpnL
ISsue
.
I
I
.
....
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager recommending that the
tender of Fairvale Construction Ltd., Saint John, N. B. in the amount of $89,170.00, which is the low bid, be
accepted for the 1975 Capital project of construction of a 36-inch storm sewer in the Greendale area, Phase 2,
be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Kipping felt that the Council should not just accept the above recommendation as it stands,
but subject to compliance by the contractor with the performance bond or equivalent requirement and the in-
surance requirement, satisfactory to the City Manager, in order to protect the City's own interests. Mr. Park
replied that such requirement is understood.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Acting City
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following invoices for equipment rental, namely:-
D. Hatfield Ltd. - to the Water and Sewerage Dept.
July 16-31, 1975
(dated August 5, 1975)
July 16-31, 1975
(dated August 5, 1975)
July 1-15, 1975
(dated July 21, 1975)
$ 11,319.68
$ 21,360.40
$ 11,147.20
- to the Works Dept.
- to the Water Dept.
Ready Rentals Ltd. (this equipment was used for rock
Bay causeway)
removal on the Courtenay
July 16-30, 1975
(dated July 31, 1975)
$ 2,332.80
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS the City of Saint John hereinafter called the 'Corporation' is authorized by Chapter 27 of
the Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year 1889, and amendments thereto, and the Munici-
pal Debentures Act, and amendments thereto, as occasion may in the public interest arise for the carrying on of
any public civic works or needed civic improvements, to borrow any sum or sums of money for any such purpose and
to issue debentures to secure the repayment of such monies;
AND WHEREAS the Corporation by virtue of Section 4 of an agreement dated the 13th day of April, 1972,
between Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the Corporation of The City of Saint John, pertaining to
the construction of approximately 2,400 lineal feet of 36" and 48" diameter sewer, Grandview Avenue Sewer has
agreed on November 1st., in each year to issue and deliver to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation a debenture
of The City of Saint John equal in amount to the principal amount advanced in the preceding twelve months period
by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to The City of Saint John:
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS
That the Corporation do create and issue a debenture of a principal amount of $56,614.58 bearing
interest at the rate of 7% per annum calculated half-yearly, not in advance commencing on the first day of
November 1972.
That payment of interest and instalments of principal be made on November 1 annually over a term of
twenty years in accordance with schedule hereto annexed.
That such payment of interest and principal be made at par as they fall due at the main office of The
Bank of rlova Scotia in Ottawa, Ontario.
Provided that the Corporation shall have the privilege of paying the whole amount owing hereunder or
any part thereof at any time prior to the 1st day of November in the year 1992.
That the Mayor and Common Clerk of the Corporatiion be hereby authorized to sign the said debenture on
behalf of the Corporation and the Common Clerk be hereby authorized to affix thereto the Seal of the Corporation."
SCHEDULE OF REPAYMENT ATTACHED TO AND FORMING PART OF:
7% DEBENTURE $ 56,614.58
ISSUED BY THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
NOVEMBER 1, 1972
TO MATURE NOVEMBER 1, 1992
Payment Date Interest Principal Tot al
November 1, 1973 $ 2,429.90 $ 1,362.63 $ 3,792.53
" " 1974 2,332.84 1,459.68 3,792.52
" " 1975 2,974.68 1,563.65 4,538.33
" " 1976 3,719.98 1,675.02 5,395.00
" " 1977 3,600.68 1,794.32 5,395.00
" " 1978 3,472.88 1,922.12 5,395.00
" " 1979 3,335.98 2,059.02 5,395.00
" " 1980 3,189.32 2,205.68 5,395.00
" " 1981 3,032.22 2,362.78 5,395.00
" " 1982 2,863.93 2,53l.07 5,395.00
" " 1983 2,683.66 2,711. 34 5,395.00
'."'/ ','
'e>t) ;
.......:/",.,...
..... ? .--~
..----
'j
~
JJpJ1L
----
:LssKe
:JJpnd
~
..Lssge
;;??~/ntt6',t ~ t!e
!4y..25; /'1'7t '
(7: ~G 1, t;;/5 .7Jt7t7~)
" " 1984 2,490.54 2,904.46 5,395.00
" " 1985 2,283.67 3 ,Ill. 33 5,395.00
" " 1986 2,062.07 3,332.93 5,395.00
" " 1987 1,824.68 3,570.32 5,395.00
" " 1988 1,570.39 3,824.61 5,395.00
" " 1989 1,297.98 4,097.02 5,395.00
" " 1990 1,006.17 4,388.83 5,395.00
" " 1991 693.57 4,70l.43 5,395.00
" " 1992 358.71 5,036.34 5 , 395.00
$47,223.85 $56,614.58 $103,838.43
(Form of Bond)
CANADA
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
7% DEBENTURE
.
I
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN in the County of Saint John, Province of New Brunswick, a
body corporate under a Royal Charter dated 18th day of May 1785 under authority of Chapter
27 of the Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year 1889, and amend-
ments thereto, and the Municipal Debentures Act, and amendments thereto, and pursuant to
a resolution of the Common Council passed on 25th day of August': 1975 promises to pay to
the registered holder hereof at the main office of The Bank of Nova Scotia in Ottawa,
Ontario, the sum of FIFTY SIX THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED FOURTEEN DOLLARS AND FIFTY EIGHT CENTS
($56,614.58) in lawful money of Canada together with interest thereon at the rate of
SEVEN PER CENTUM (7%) per annum, calculated half-yearly, not in advance, commencing on
the 1ST day of NOVEMBER, 1972 in TWENTY equal annual instalments, payment of the first
instalment to be made on the 1ST day of NOVEMBER 1973. Provided that the City of Saint
John shall have the privilege of paying the whole amount owing hereunder or any part thereof
at any time prior to the 1ST day of NOVEMBER in the year 1992.
I
.
This debenture or any interest therein shall not, after a certificate of ownership
has been endorsed thereon by the Chamberlain of the City of Saint John, be transferable
except by entry of the Chamberlain or his Deputy in the debenture registry book of the
said City of Saint John.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the said City of Saint
John has caused this debenture to be signed
by its Mayor and countersigned by its Common
Clerk and its corporate seal to be hereto
affixed on this 25th day of 'August 1975 at
the City of Saint John in the County of Saint
John and Province of New Brunswick.
I
Mayor.
Common Clerk.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
/ RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS the City of Saint John hereinafter called the 'Corporation' is authorized by Chapter
27 of the Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year 1889, and amendments thereto,
and the Municipal Debentures Act, and amendments thereto, as occasion may in the public interest arise
for the carrying on of any public civic works or needed civic improvements, to borrow any sum or sums of
money for any such purpose and to issue debentures to secure the repayment of such monies.
.
AND WHEREAS the Corporation by virtue of Section 4 of an agreement dated the 13th day of
August, 1970, between Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the Corporation of The City of Saint
John, pertaining to the construction of a sewage treatment project consisting of approximately 16,300
lineal feet of 8" to 30" interceptor sewers, 6,100 lineal feet of twin 12" forcemain, two pumping stations
and 1.0 mgd sewage treatment plant, has~agreed on July 1 in each year to issue and deliver to Central
Mortgage and Housing Corporation a debenture of The City of Saint John equal in amount to the principal
amount advanced in the preceding twelve months period by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to The
City of Saint John:
1-
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS
That the Corporation do create and issue a debenture of a principal amount of $628,014.02
bearing interest at the rate of 8 1/2% per annum calculated half-yearly, not in advance, commencing on
the FIRST day of MAY, 1973.
I
, That payment of interest and instalments of principal be made on MAY 1ST annually over a term
of TWENTY years in accordance with the schedule hereto annexed.
That such payment of interest and principal be made at par as they fall due at the main office
of The Bank of Nova Scotia in Ottawa, Ontario.
Provided that the Corporation shall have the privilege of paying the whole amount, owing here-
under or any part thereof at any time prior to the FIRST day of MAY in the year 1992.
That the Mayor and Common Clerk of the Corporation be hereby authorized to sign the said
debenture on behalf of the Corporation and the Common Clerk be hereby authorized to affix thereto the
Seal of the Corporation."
.
~
,....-
.)r:. '
.....0
.
I
I
Jj(/ nttl
L$t(e
.
I
.
I
I
.
:Bonlll
-'- S5<<.e
....
SCHEDULE OF REPAYMENT ATTACHED TO AND FORMING PART OF:
8 1/4% DEBENTURE $ 628,014.02
ISSUED BY THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
MAY 1, 1972
TO MATURE MAY 1, 1992
Payment Date
May 1, 1973
" " 1974
" " 1975
" " 1976
" " 1977
" " 1978
" " 1979
" " 1980
" " 1981
" " 1982
" " 1983
" " 1984
" " 1985
" " 1986
" " 1987
" " 1988
" " 1989
" " 1990
" " 1991
" " 1992
Interest
$ 24,244.32
33,153.57
50, 58l. 20
49,284.81
47,879.27
46,355.37
44,703.16
42,911.83
40,969.67
38,863.97
36,580.97
34,105.74
31,422.09
28,512.47
25,357'.86
21,937.63
18,229.40
14,208.94
9,849.95
5,124.38
$644,276.60
Principal
$ 13,097.71
14,200.56
15,396.27
16,692.66
18,098.20
19,622.10
21,274.31
23,065.64
25,007.80
27,113.50
29,396.50
31 ,87l. 73
34,555.38
37,465.00
40,619.61
44,039.84
47,748.07
51,768.53
56,127.52
60,853.09.
$628,014.02
Total
$ 37,342.03
47,354.13
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
65,977.47
'7 65,977.47
$ 1,272,290.62
(Form of Bond)
CANADA
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
8 1/4% DEBENTURE
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN in the County of Saint John, Province of New Brunswick, a
body corporate under a Royal Charter dated 18th day of May 1785 under authority of Chapter
27 of the Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year 1889, and amend-
ments thereto, and the Municipal Debentures Act, and amendments thereto, and pursuant to a
resolution of the Common Council passed on the 25th day of August" 1975 promises to pay
to the registered hold.er hereof at the main office of The Bank of Nova Scotia in Ottawa,
Ontario, the sum of SIX HUNDRED TWENTY EIGHT THOUSAND, FOURTEEN DOLLARS, AND TWO CENTS
($628,014.02) in lawful money of Canada together with interest thereon at the rate of
EIGHT AND ONE QUARTER PER CENTUM (8 1/4%) per annum calculated half-yearly, not in advance,
commencing on the 1ST day of MAY, 1972 in TWENTY equal annual instalments, payment of the
first instalment to be made on the 1st day of May 1973. Provided~ that the City of Saint
John shall have the privilege of paying the whole amount owing hereunder or any part thereof
at any time prior to the 1ST day of MAY in the year 1992.
This debenture or any interest therein shall not, after a certificate of ownership
has been endorsed by the Chamberlain of the City of Saint John, be transferable
except by entry of the Chamberlain or his Deputy in the debenture registry book of the
said City of Saint John.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the said City of Saint
John has caused this debenture to be signed
by its Mayor and countersigned by its Common
Clerk and its corporate seal to be hereto
affixed on this 25th day of 'August,> 1975 at
the City of Saint John in the County of Saint
John and Province of New Brunswick.
..............................................
Mayor.
..............................................
Common Clerk.
j~. Park referred to his report to Council regarding the debenture issue, which report advises that
there is an offer to buy the whole of this issue. He advised that the City's normal practice has been to call
tenders, but under today's conditions the Municipal Bond Co-Ordinator recommends that there are likely to be much
better results in the attempts to place an issue of this size by negotiating through a single syndicate com-
prising all interested local investment dealers, and that is the procedure that the City is following at this
time. He pointed out that the offer now before the Council contains no price - the price is contained in a
letter that was filed with the Common Clerk today, and that remains unopened at this time.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that occasion having arisen in the public interest for the fol-
lowing public civic works and needed Civic Improvements, that is to say:
FOR GBNERAL PURPOSES:
ublic Works - Road Construction and Street Paving _
Cedar Point Trailer Park ~1,586.00; Sandy Point Road $65,734.00; Kiwanis Centre $6,613.00; Bridge Street $17,442.00
Fifth Street $17,323.00; Grandview Avenue $7,680.00; Norris Road $7,341.00; Morrison Road $5,558.00; Golden Grove
Road $53,997.00; Westmorland Road $64,754.00; Loch Lomond Road $31,473.00; Lakeview Drive $18,385.00; Charles
Street $8,064.00; Summit Avenue $11,779.00; Hickey Road $34,774.00; Lorneville Road $17,206.00; Raynes Beach Road
28
~
.2f t? m:i
2ssae
:Eond
~
-L S$/ote
$3,303.00; South Bay Road $56,505.00; Greenhead Road $3,881.00; Saint James Street West $63,773.00; Church
Avenue $7,829.00
-- $505,000.00 .
Land Acquired for Roads -
Dock Street $28,000.00; Sandy Point Road $20,000.00
-- $48,000.00
Garage - Heating and Ventilating -- $47,000.00
Recreation and Parks -
I
Development of Community and School facilities for joint use $74,958.00; Swimming Pool $190,309.00;
Rockwood Park, including golf course $159,111.00; Beaches, Docking facilities and Watershed parks $65,469.00;
Community Arenas $2,755,153.00; Land required for recreation purposes $155,000.00
-- $3,400,000.00
Total General Purposes - $4,000,000.00
FOR SELF-SUPPORTING UTILITIES:
Power Commission: Substations and extensions to the distribution system -- $1,000,000.00
~otal Self-Supporting Utilities - $5,000,000.00
I
THEREFORE RESOLVED that Debentures issue under provlslons of the Acts of Assembly 52, Victoria, Chapter
27, Section 29, and Amendments thereto, to the amount of $5,000,000.00
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS by resolution passed by the required vote of the Mayor and each of the eleven Coun-
cillors present, being members of the Common Council of The City of Saint John, at a meeting of the said
Common Council duly called and held on the 25th day of August, 1975, The City of Saint John authorised the
issue of debentures in the aggregate principal amount of $5,000.00.
.
NOW THEREFORE be it resolved and ordered as follows:
1. That the said debentures in the principal amount of $5,000.000 shall be in serial form to mature
according to the following schedule:
1976 $400,000 1986 $200,000
1977 400,000 1987 200,000
1978 400,000 1988 200,000
1979 400,000 1989 200,000
1980 400,000 1990 200,000
1981 400,000
1982 400,000
1983 400,000
1984 400,000
1985 400,000
I
2.
rate of:
That the said debentures shall be dated October 1, 1975 and bear interest from that date at the
10 1/4% per annum for those maturing 1976 - 1980
10 1/2% per annum for those maturing 1981 - 1990
such interest to be payable half-yearly on the respective first day of April and October in each year of
the currency of the said debentures.
3. That the said debentures and related interest coupons shall be payable at any branch in Canada .
of The Bank of Nova Scotia, far northern branches excepted.
4. That the said debentures shall be substantially in the form hereto annexed and marked with the
letter "A".
5. That the said debentures shall be numbered consecutively, shall be signed by the Mayor and
countersigned by the Common Clerk and the Corporate Seal of The City of Saint John shall be affixed
thereto and the coupons for interest attached thereon shall bear the lithographed facsimile signature of
the Common Clerk of the said City.
I
(Specimen Bond)
CANADA
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
NUMBER
DOLLARS
$1,000
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
10 1/2% Serial Debenture
The Municipal Corporation of The City of Saint John under the authority of Chapter
27 of the Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year A. D. 1889,
entitled "An Act to Unite The City of Portland with The City of Saint John, in The
City and County of Saint John, and to Amend the Charter of The City of Saint John and
The Law Relating to Civic Government", as 8lIlended, and the Municipal Debentures Act,
and amendments thereto, and pursuant to Resolutions of the said Corporation passed on
the 25th day of August A. D. 1975 for value received, promises to pay to the bearer
(or if registered to the registered holder hereof) at any branch in Canada of The Bank
of Nova Scotia, far northern branches excepted, at the holder's option, on the first
day of October A. D.
I
the sum of
.
ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS
in lawful money of Canada and further promises to pay interest thereon from the first
day of October A. D. 1975 at the rate of ten and one-half per centum (10 1/2%) per annum
~
,...-
')9
.... ,
Coat
of
Arms
I Coupon
Number
.
I
I
J30J?ti
2ssue
.
:iJt?nd
I5s<<.e
(~!:fnd',~
.
I
:Bond
/ SSKe
s~ntft.
I/UJlw~l1,
I S-ic;tfqel/.".
Ge;J/~l?e"
,t.t-tL
lVesbi#;
77!DP1S0)?"If-
eo, .(EtL
t?-E .;;l /
.
jfe-::z.on'';,
/I jpl,;j
Tnves6
cr 1ge1lt!/e$
~-6d.
...
payable half-yearly on the respective first day of April and October in each year of
the currency of this debenture in accordance with and upon presentation and surrender
of the proper interest coupons hereto annexed as they severally mature.
This debenture forms part of an issue of a total principal amount of $5,000,000
payable as to both principal and interest in lawful money of Canada, issued under
the statutory authority above mentioned.
This debenture is transferable by delivery except when it is registered as to principal
in the register kept by the Chamberlain of The City of Saint John and such registration
is inscribed on the debenture. Notwithstanding any such registration, interest coupons
shall continue to be payable to bearer and shall pass by delivery.
DATED AT SAINT JOHN THIS FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER A. D. 1975.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the said Municipal Corporation
has caused this debenture to be signed by its
Mayor and countersigned by its Common Clerk and
its Corporate Seal to be hereto affixed on this
first day of October A. D. 1975 at The City of
Saint John, Province of New Brunswick.
Common Clerk
Mayor
(Specimen Coupons)
Coat
The Municipal Corporation of the City of Saint John, N. B. will
pay the bearer on the date shown in the margin at any branch
in Canada of The Bank of Nova Scotia, far northern branches
excepted, at the holder's option, the sum of Fifty Two Dollars and
Fifty Cents being six months' interest then due on the debenture
numbered as in margin
$52.50
April
of
1
Arms
Coupon
Number
Debenture
Number
Common Clerk
The Municipal Corporation of the City of Saint John, N. B. will
pay the bearer on the date shown in the margin at any branch
in Canada of The Bank of Nova Scotia, far northern branches
,
excepted, at the holder's option, the sum of Fifty Two Dollars and
Fifty Cents being six months' interest then due on the debenture
numbered as in margin.
October
1
1976
$52.50
Debenture Number
Common Clerk
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the Common Council approve in principle the sale of
the current debenture issue through a single syndicate comprising all interested local investment dealers.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the tender submitted by Walwyn, Stodgell & Gairdner Ltd.
regarding the above named debenture issue, be opened at this time.
The Common Clerk thereupon opened the said tender and read the tender offer, which was a firm offer for
today's date, August 25th, 1975, submitted by Walwyn, Stodgell and Gairdner Ltd., Syndicate Managers. Mr. Park
advised that the price quoted in this tender would give rise to a cost of approximately 10.79%. He stated that,
under today's conditions, he would recommend that this offer be accepted. He noted that the rate is slightly
higher than the rate last year, but, unfortunately, it is in keeping with the times. He added that the rate last
year was 10.64%.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the offer dated August 25th, 1975 received from a syndicate
of investment dealers and banks and jointly managed by the firms of Walwyn, Stodgell and Gairdner Ltd., and
Nesbitt, Thomson & Co., Ltd., to buy the serial bonds amounting to $5,000,000 to be dated October 1,1975 at the
price of $98.30 per $100.00 debenture and subject to the conditions contained in the said offer be accepted, and
that for the purpose of record the participating members of the syndicate are:- (1) Walwyn, Stodgell and Gairdner
Ltd., Burns Bros. and Denton Ltd., Toronto-Dominion Bank, Bank of Nova Scotia, Crang and Ostiguy Inc., and Scotia
Bond Co. Ltd.; (2) Nesbitt Thomson Securities Ltd., Dominion Securities Corporation Harris and Partners Ltd.,
Pitfield Mackay Ross and Co. Ltd., Bank of Montreal, Winslow and Winslow Ltd., and Tasse and Associes Ltee.; in
addition, the following dealers will be invited to participate in the financing: Wood Gundy Ltd., Merrill Lynch
Royal Securities Ltd., Richardson Securities of Canada, McLeod Young Weir and Co. Ltd., Greenshields Inc., and
LeveSQue Beaubien Inc.; and the conditions of the offer are:- $98.30 per $100.00 debenture for $5,000,000 City of
Saint John, New Brunswick Serial Debentures maturing $2,000,000 one to five years, bearing 10 1/4% coupon, and
~3,000,000 six to fifteen year Debentures bearing 10 1/2% coupon; the debentures are to be dated October 1, 1975,
and are to mature $400,000.00 each year one to ten years, and $200,000.00 each year eleven to fifteen years; this
offer is firm for the date of August 25th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land lying west of
lots fronting on Glenview Avenue containing approximately 20 acres, from "RS-2" One- and Two-F8lIlily Suburban
Residential district to "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
30
~
/I~b~ ..in vr~i-
meq-t.:; +-19~~
X-t{t'.
'PNII/. t7.t?//t.
-I'e~ .$
~l1r'1. 111I""5. ~
1?e- 2ol?/~
.7Ji7Cet mt'd
/:;, t-~r flrise'.5
,(-t-iL
;zr e-7, 0 I? / Yl
.J)t7C<<.menC
/hff/pri5eS
~t-d.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety at this time.
.
Councillor Kipping enquired as to whether it is known as yet whether the company for whom the
re-zOning is being done, namely, Alpha Investments and Agencies Limited, is as yet in good standing with
the Province of New Brunswick. Councillor Cave stated that in conversation today with Mr. Ralph Stephen,
solicitor for this company, Mr. Stephen assured him, for the information and assurance of the Common
Council members, that the company's fees are paid and that everything is in order. Councillor Kipping
stated he wonders if that information has been officially communicated to the City, and if the City
Manager is in possession of this information in an official way. Mr. Park replied that he has had no
communication on the subject, at all. Councillor Kipping stated that he has other reasons for voting
against this matter. He felt that, as he has stated before, it indicates it is poor business to do
business with a company that is not in good standing - he now notes that this company has done away with
that objection and has brought itself into good standing.
I
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Pye, MacGowan and Kipping voting
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
August 18th, 1975 in reply to Council's question of August 5th last as to whether, if the land proposed to
be re-zoned on the northerly side of Thornbrough Street for Document Enterprises Limited is not developed
within a reasonable time with two 12-unit apartment buildings, it should revert to its present zoning,
stating that the Committee feels that the proposed rezoning is not unreasonable in this area and that the
proposal as such is not important enough to warrant making a recommendation when similar recommendations
have not been made or used for much more important developments, and pointing out that the Common Council
has the right to provide for the reversion zoning under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, with or
without a recommendation of the said Committee and that the Council should do so when it feels such a move
to be desirable - be received and filed.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land
commencing 70 feet west of the intersection of Sandy Point Road and Thornbrough Street and running west-
erly on Thornbrough Street approximately 300 feet with a depth of approximately 102 :feet from "R-2" One-
and 'l'wo-Family Residential to "RM-l" up to three-storey multiple residential district, and an adjacent
area to its west approximately 400 feet from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to nRM_l" up to three-
storey multiple residential district, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entilted, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By.,.Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land
commencing 70 feet west of the intersection of Sandy Point Road and Thornbrough Street and running west-
erly on Thornbrough Street approximately 300 feet with a depth of approximately 102 feet from "R-2" One-
and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" up to three-storey multiple residential district, and an adjacent
area to its west approximately 400 feet from "R-IB" One-F8lIlily Residential district to "RM-l" up to three-
storey multiple residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor with reference to
Common Council resolution of August 18th last, namely, "That the Common Council grant the necessary
~~bf ~~lic-/~ variance to L.S.O. Enterprises Limited and permission be granted to establish a restaurant-beverage room
~ on the second floor at 9-11 Sydney Street", and the question as to the legality of the said resolution,
~ s.t).. Kh ier- advising that the authority to grant reasonable variances from the requirements of the Zoning By-Law is an
.~ ~ ~~~ authority outside the jurisdiction of Council and resting with the Planning Advisory Committee by virtue I
~"/-7~ of the Provincial statute; that from an examination of the correspondence relating to the request for the
111/t:Jdlel () ~' wariance, it is his opinion that the said Committee have not granted any variances, and if the matter
appears before the said Committee again, the question of two variances ought to be kept in mind by the
Committee rather than the parking issue becoming a condition of the location variance; that the first
variance for the Committee's consideration is the variance with respect to the location of the restaurant-
beverage room in relation to the location of another similar use - if such variance is granted, the
Cormnittee should stipulate the aspects of the reasonable variance - with such variance being granted, the
question of parking requirements then becomes a relevant issue; that if the applicant cannot provide the
required number of parking spaces within the area in compliance with the Zoning By-Law, the applicant may I
wish to provide parking at another location for which the Planning Advisory Committee must grant a second
variance - or the applicant may apply directly to Council for the purpose of obtaining Council permission
to pay an amount of money to the City in lieu~ofparking; that the question of accepting money in lieu of
parking is the only issue within Council's J~isdiction under the present laws governing this matter _
however, the question of Council accepting money in lieu of parking is not a proper issue to be before
Council, until the Advisory Committee grants a variance allowing the applicant to locate its business
closer than a 1,000 feet of another similar type of business on the same street, or within 600 feet
thereof in any other direction -- be received and filed and the said Council resolution of August 18th,
975 be rescinded, and that this matter be referred back to the Planning Advisory Committee.
Councillor Hodges commented that it is his view that all citizens of Saint John should be .
reated alike, and that he considers that the above noted applicant is not being treated fairly in this
atter.
~
JII"'"
. C~JPtc#P
Ihfu/PY
I. , sx 1h.1'~
I/f?~/ n1 R!
/o~e'J!?~
31.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor with regard to holding an
enquiry to be conducted under oath under an 1895 statute relating to a civic matter wherein information has been
revealed to the public out of the Committee of the Whole meetings and Legal Session, and in particular a meeting
of July 28th, 1975, be laid on the table until Councillor A. Vincent is present.
On motion of Councillor Gould
\
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission submitting'
a report for adoption by Common Council, which report is the result of the Commission's study of the recommendation'
of the Housing Task Force Committee Report, 1971 - be laid on the table until later in the meeting, in view of
the absence from the meeting of Councillor A. Vincent.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
. . _ RESOLVED that the letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification
I~v/c~~~.~ Committee advising of its concern with the lack of landscaping for some homes that have been built in the past
~~ ~O~ several years and noting that there are numerous minor sub-divisions laying out lots along existing services for
~~~-~/;v. which there is no sub-division agreement and apparently no City requirement for landscaping, and stating that the
Committee would like landscaping to be mandatory and would suggest either appropriate regulations or the City
authorizing "in blanket" sub-division agreements where there is no cost sharing involved in order to cover such
items as landscaping and perhaps other features of the normal sub-division agreement, be referred to the Planning
Advisory Committee to bring in the proper wording of a resolution to make landscaping mandatory in all sub-
divisions.
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, with reference to the
application made to Council on May 26th last by Mr. R. D. Murphy of 197 Prince Street, Saint John West, to
urchase 2 additional feet, or all, of the 12-foot right-of-way retained by the City when the portion of the
former Lancaster Street, lying between Prince Street and Riverview Drive throughway property, was closed, ad-
ising that on recommendation of the Land Committee to Common Council on November 19th, 1973 the Council auth-
rized the sale to Mr. Murphy of a portion of the said former Lancaster Street, being approximately 48 feet by
" ~. 00 feet for the sum of $700.00, and that the Committee is not prepared to recommend the sale of any part of the
r-t?~~O)1 emaining right-of-way which gives access to the rear entrance of the adjoining property and provides the pos-
o~ ~Ol'/n~"sibility of this adjoining 29-foot property being at some time in the future a usable lot, and further advising
,~~~~~;. hat j~. Murphy has refused to sign the surveyor's plan deeding him the said 48-foot parcel of land unless it
~-L includes the part of the right-of-way he needs to build the 45-foot house and, therefore, the sale to him of the
~~, irst-named parcel has never been consummated - and recommending that the said Council resolution of November
9th, 1973 authorizing the sale of part of Lancaster Street (now closed) to Mr. Murphy be rescinded -- be received
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
d,j"ee I1J eds
1Y/aI1;1~o"f
Jt--/ands tJ.;;11'1
tJlahVJ.Ii-"tI"lS.
(?PJd/n.
~mf'7PJ/ ~
. ~ra~~)
I
~I7L ~~h1
c:,,.. t/h;M~
a/.;r6el' {Db
. ,61 L:J.
e.,:pll"mQI/:t/DI7
7(oUnll/h4
Or eOJ"I71f,.
/(j'W.ii1n/s C.
Ji'usse/I
fI'1yins
I
Nesci nd't.
117 PI ////7
7{. 7).111/&
I
. ~xprDfJri~-
-r Ion
1f3-ff~
6!//6errf .$t;
l'''or; G!od;
TA/"()u.~aJa
~
Councillor Kipping commented that it will be difficult to' define the word "landscaping': in the sub-
division agreements and to limit and confine it; he does not know how you can force people to landscape property
beyond having them agree to grading topsoil and growing grass because beyond that it would be invading their own
rights; he felt that after grading topsoil and growing grass the Unsightly Premises By-Law could be brought into
operation rather than forcing people. In agreeing with Councillor Kipping's suggestion, Councillor Cave pointed
out that making landscaping mandatory would work an undue hardship in a case of an individual developing a lot as
large as an acre and placing his residence back on the lot, as it would mean he would have a large front area
which he would have to landscape. He stated that he therefore would have to vote against such mandatory regul-
ation. Councillor Hodges asked for information regarding what regulations apply for landscaping of commercial
building sites. With reference to the subject of landscaping, Mr. Park stated that Mr. Zides told him today that
the Planning Department has done study along these lines since the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee
first brought up the matter about a month ago, and the Planning advisory Committee is continuing to study the "
matter and will be considering it this week. ~rr. Park felt that it is far from a straightforward matter, and
that he believes it would be quite appropriate to have the matter referred to the Planning Advisory Committee to
await the outcome of the Committee's further study on the matter. The Mayor asked that the said Committee
include in the said study and report the matter of requirements for landscaping of large commercial buildings
that are,being constructed.
Councillor MacGowan explained that the Civic Improvement
above noted suggestion for landscaping regulations or arrangements
cost sharing involved, is not referring to landscaping with trees,
grass.
and Beautification Committee, in making the
in sub-division agreements where there is no
flowers, et cetera, but just topsoil and
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
the City-owned building (the former E. Clinton Brown property) located at the corner of Union and Waterloo
Streets be demolished, the tenants be notified to vacate, and the corner be rounded to improve the access to the
Waterloo Street hospital area.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
Lot 4 on Kiwanis Court be sold to Mr. Russell Higgins for the sum of $8,000.00 with the stipulation that the lot
ill be developed for private residence and that construction begin not later than one year from the date of the
Council Order to sell this lot, and if construction does not commence within the time specified, the property
automatically reverts to the City.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the City-
wned six-unit apartment building situate at 113-115 Gilbert Street was expropriated by the Province of New
runswick for the throughway on March 20th, 1974 and the Province had the property appraised and offered the sum
f ~45,500.00 as compensation for the City, and that the Land Committee has reviewed the compensation offer and
ecommends acceptance of the said $45,500.00 for this property, plus interest from the date of taking of 113-115
ilbert Street - be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
32
~
~~)ut ~hm.
5'~ 'f/ri/1t!e55
red Inc,.ease.
JJe-I-/-c;',n
&in-&s 7?~r-
~rs/' ~reDl
~/J Rrp~ll71er,
ti,e.
UtuarL ~p-
re/f fsZcde
'?ens/tlh ::lJ,,{.
"Ref;I"en;eI7"C-
~/Y)/'" II/r&J-t-
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that
the City~owned property situate at 50 Princess Street (the Ritchie building, so-called) was acquired by
the City on October 25th, 1972 on the recommendation of the Land Committee as its acquisition was most
desirable to complete the concept of the former City Hall property; that because of the very low rents
received the building is being run at a deficit, which in 1974 amounted to $2,994.24, without consider-
ation for any return on the City's investment of $72,410.00, which was paid for the building; that the
building is presently managed by Central & Nova Scotia Trust and seven of the twenty-two offices are
vacant; that the Land Committee has carefully considered the representation which was made to Council by
the tenants of the building and has also investigated the condition of the building and the possibility
of it having any historical or architectural significance, and that taking all these into account, the
Committee's recommendation is that the building be demolished and that the site be used for off-street
parking and further advising that Central & Nova Scotia Trust will be required to give the tenants notice
of termination of their occupation in the building and the demolition contract will be advertised as soon
as Council approval is received -- be laid on the table.
.
I
Prior to moving the above motion, Councillor Davis, Chairman of the Land Committee, advised
that in speaking with Councillor Green who was not present at the meeting of the Committee when this
matter was taken up, Councillor Green has convinced him that perhaps the Council should ascertain from I
the tenants of the building to see whether or not they will pay the increased rental. He felt that it is
rather cruel to the tenants to be as brusque in the matter, as recommended in the above Land Committee
letter, but it was the intention at the Land Committee meeting that if the City cannot make this building
and other such buildings like it, pay, they are a burden on the community, and therefore this building
should be demolished.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that its
meeting held on July 31st last the Committee considered the letter from l{r. John Palmer, Q. C. on behalf
of the Edward Carvell Estate, which referred to an area of land in the Saint's Rest Marsh area, which
land is bounded by the throughway and on the south by the Manawagonish Creek and so has no access other
than by boat on the creek boundary, and which land is made up entirely of marsh land and any value which
may attribute to the land other than for the existing use would require a great deal of expensive road
and servicing work and any estimation of when some future use could be realized would be highly specul-
ative, and further advising that the City owns no land in this area and would have to acquire other lands
in order to gain any access to the site - and recommending that for the preceding reasons the City not
accept the offer to purchase this land made by Mr. Palmer on behalf of the said Estate -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
Councillor Higgins stated he feels that many Council members are confusing the policy the
Council is taking with the Saint's Rest area as a preservation area and the Carvell property, and what
have you. He suggested .that perspective could be gained if Mr. Zides could comment on the long-range
planning with reference to the preservation of the Saint's Rest Marsh area that the Council has been I
discussing for the past few months, and how the Carvell property in question fits in, or does not fit in,
with the over-all plan. With regard to this question, the Common Clerk pointed out that the Marsh area
has not been rezoned as yet, and another public hearing will be coming up, probably on September 2nd
next.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Board of
Trustees of the Civic Employees' Pension Plan, Mr. Harold Wright of the Works Department be retired
effective September 1st, 1975, in accordance with Section 9, Sub-section 1 of the Pension Act, he having
complied with the provisions of the said sub-section, by providing medical reports as to his permanent
disabili ty.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
.
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee,
PIa"h, /Jr;ltllS a whose letter of August 14th, 1975 advises that Mrs. Valerie McCavour has applied for the temporary
J2f. ~ placement of a mobile home on Provincially owned land to the rear of the William and Harold McCavour
~/.'~r/~ "It'~tI~ properties on the southerly side of the Lorneville Road and that permission for the use of the property
has been given by the Development Manager of Saint John Deep - permission be given for the temporary
placement of this mobile by Mrs. McCavour for a period not exceeding one year, at the end of which time
the mobile home must be removed, and that this permission be subject to the approval of the Department of
Health in respect of the sewage disposal system which is required for the mobile home.
/11,J;!e ht?l7Je
.JJepllledl/t-h
On motion of Councillor Higgins
I
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
~r'~J? ~I""/~ Advisory Committee the City accept the sum of $360.00 in lieu of land for public purposes in the Brian
~ ~--~/'&r. Harris Sub-division on the Mispec Road (a 3.5 acre parcel of land on the northerly side of Mispec Road
'2) U. nt./1 /tel( owned by Mr. Harris is being divided into three lots - one lot contains Mr. Harris' home :.. the other two
r.:1!1me,/.' lots are vacant; the appraisal from the Real Estate Department gives $2,000.00 and $2,500.00, respectively,
O;:f7~~IIC f'tel'- as the values of these two lots; at the Subdivision By-law rate of 8% of market value at.the time of
/01h~S submission of the plan for approval to be paid to the City in lieu of land for public purposes, the sum
fJ"se required is the above noted $360.00).
Ilsssd ~O
S~i(/. ,o/dJ7
k'i/kehh.# e,.-t;
5u.rO- ~/v.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee,
hose letter of August 22nd, 1975 advises that the submitted print shows the first phase of what had been
previously referred to as the Starlight Construction or project "Sandy" sub-division on Ocean Westway
near the junction of the Lorneville Road and that it is now proposed to layout one street called Katie
Drive and six lots, on each of which would be erected a l2-unit three-storey apartment building (the
zoning for this area was carried out some time ago as part of the zoning for the over-all proposed
development) - the Council assent to the Kilkenny Court sub-division plan which provides for the laying
out of Katie Drive which is to be publicly-owned and for the setting aside of the land for public purposes
.
~
,...
.
/ f'I;:}-rf/c+
S~{ef-y~~
'P.;;J~h1ed
l/br mI.fs
.:Bee /t:iet-
IS.:r 'P()~
kve/ C'0hlA1
,.e~bl"C' '
1111 J1 <<.;;11
'1? efJo/Vt-
'Powel"
C!oml?1.
.
CU/llmi#c
u~Pt/A()le
I7pfJblht-liTe
;;!ul'/'d/ff ,,2/'
f{h1/T7'1
C0I11h110'H.
~J;;"'!fl1~qI-
J}e(/e/~ PIe
lJI/e~/p.P1 -
SeeeeJl/-t-1{
~J1/'eh~i~
C/t-If. /fl",..
FeU. ~yt;,
ptM/J/ /c
,oreseda-
-t-/() J?
~ 1Jelrk
. /ld/n!fCt.
/I1ahdfer
I
I
.
....
33
shown north of or above the water pipeline (this land for public purposes may be required to revert to the
developers when a larger more suitably located area is set aside in further sub-divlsion for vesting in the
City) .
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee advising
that a resolution was adopted at the Committee's meeting held on August 19th last for payment to each member of
the Committee for each meeting attended, with a maximum of twelve meetings annually, and that the sum of payment
be $10.00 per meeting, be referred to the Committee on Budget for consideration together with similar requests
that have been made by other committees, commissions and advisory boards.
Councillor Cave, who had withdrawn from the meeting during discussion of the Land Committee's letter
pertaining to proposed demolition of the City-owned building at 50 Princess Street, re-entered the meeting at
this time.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that
submitting a report on the Commission's activities
received and filed.
the letter from the Saint John Port Development Commission
for the period March 27th, 1975 to June 30th, 1975, be
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the annual report for the year 1974 of the Power Commission
of the City of Saint John, be received and filed.
Read report of the Committee of the,Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, August 18th, 1975, when there were present
Mayor Flewwelling,and Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and A. Vincent,
and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendations, namely:-
1. That in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager, Mr. Murray Zides be appointed to the
position of Commissioner, Community Planning and Development.
I
2.
That the Common Council approves in principle the concept of a medium-security penitentiary in the
area:
AND FURTHER that the City Manager be instructed to invite the appropriate Federal Government staff to
make a presentation to the Common Council regarding the proposed medium-security penitentiary, in public session.
3. That Mr, R. Park, be Acting City Manager during the absence ,on holiday of Mr. N. Barfoot, City Manager,
for a periOd of two weeks commencing August 19th, 1975.
4.
That Fundy Cablevision Ltd. be allowed to televise public sessions of Common Council meetings.
Saint John, N. B.,
25th August, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that section 1 of the above report be adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that section 2 of the above report be adopted.
Councillor Parfitt stated she feels that the Common Council has been placed in an intolerable position
over the above named medium-security penitentiary site issue, and that it was her understanding when the Council
met on May 12th last with the Federal Government officials that those officials would have a public information
programme shortly after that, on the subject. She noted that the Council could not speak on the subject pub-
licly because there was no communication with the Federal Government until only the last few days when the City
Manager reached Mr. Humphrey Sheehan, a Federal Government penitentiary official.
Councillor Higgins received confirmation from the Mayor and other Council members present that the
above motion refers to no specific site in the area, and no decision will be made until the Federal Government
staff makes a presentation to the Common Council in public regarding a medium-security penitentiary site.
Councillor Kipping noted that if the above motion is adopted the Council is approving only the concept, in
principle. Councillor Cave stated his intention of withdrawing from the Council table during the vote on the
said motion, because there may be a conflict of interest on his part due to the fact that he owns a piece of
land that he is trying to sell to the Federal Government.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors MacGowan and Pye voting "nay".
Councillor Cave resumed his seat at the Council table at this time.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that section 3 of the above repo~t be adopted.
34
~
C"/II/11/-t-ke or
Whole
~t-er $t.tf?/A
C(lI1~/~/Oh
S. J: #/e~..~~1
Spc/e-l-y
:P,.. JJ./I. CO/I"6
<</e1ier eX'tel7s/
Co-#.:Jffe 1<.d.
Old !Bla~k
1(;yer ~d.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that section 4 of the above report be adopted:
AND FURTHER that the said report be received and filed.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillor MacGowan voting
The Council members recalled that when the matter of quality of the drinking water in the
Millidgeville area was discussed in Committee of the Whole on August 11th last, the decision was that the
City Manager make a report at this meeting of Common Council; also, on August 11th last, in open session
of Council, the letter from the Executive of the Saint John Medical Society regarding a detailed study of
the problem of ensuring that the drinking water in this city is clean and safe from contamination, was
referred to the appropriate City staff for a report. It was further noted that because the City Manager
has been on vacation, the report requested of him has not been provided for this meeting.
Mr. MacKinnon was asked to speak in explanation of what action is being taken with regard to
the above mentioned problem, and he advised, as follows:- starting back several months ago, we have been
dealing with consultants, particularly local consultants dealing with water quality - some of them have
been fairly knowledgeable in pollution measurements and we have been talking about the taste of the
water, the p.h., et cetera - also, there has been the coliform count which is something that occurs
regularly in the summertimes, not always as high as other times, and not necessarily in any particular
co-ordinated fashion; in 1975, as in 1974, there was a request by the Health Department to boil the water
in a specific area in the city - about a month prior to the said request being made the City had been
looking into the installation of a sub-station in the Millidgeville area to accommodate the injection of
chlorine into the system - the problem was th~t there was not a residual amount of chlorine showing up in
the said area - there is no specific reason as to why this is happening outside of the fact that we are
putting chlorine into the system at Latimer Lake and the Spruce Lake area - however, there could be any
number of reasons as to why the residual amount is not showing up in the Millidgeville area - we have
increased the amounts of chlorine as we get to the warm weather and for reasons either of volume or time
the water is resting in a number of the dead-ends and coliform colonies are appearing and the Health
Department in its turn has requested that the water be boiled; we hoped that the installation of the sub-
station was going to be put in long before the Health Department actually had the counts that high _
because of the method of ordering the equipment and getting it in, the Health Department subsequently
asked that the water be boiled, and following that we had the equipment installed and it is in operation
- the counts are down to very acceptable levels, he understands - the water, not necessarily, is what
people may like because there is a taste of chlorine in it - however, the water is safe although not
quite tasteful; following the installation of the said sub-station, we have been talking with the con-
sultants about doing further testing and at this point, he thinks it would be relative to the above
mentioned letter from the Executive of the Saint John Medical Society asking for a complete testing
programme; Mr. Barfoot had been talking with one engineering firm that was going to give us a proposal
and Mr. MacKinnon had discussed with them the scope of the proposal dealing with the quality of the
water, and he had talked with another consultant who was talking with him again today about doing a study
at the source (at the Loch Lomond lakes) - he thinks, from speaking with one of the doctors in the said
Medical Society, that this is the area of concern about the problem; it is the City's intention to look
at the total area of the lake, the problems of septic systems and/or any other bodies that may be getting
into the water supply; at this point in time, without knowing what the study is going to show, he cannot
really comment, but we are taking all steps necessary to supply safe water to the city, and it is hoped
that the examination by the consultants will possibly indicate some of the problem areas that we should
probably pay more attention to. He further advised:- the incidence of high counts of coliform organisms
are not necessarily indicative of the problem of testing - for example, in some of the areas the counts
during the summer seasons would go high in one day and go down to zero in the next day - this does not
indicate a pattern at all and it may possibly even indicate that the testing itself is suspect - so, he
thinks we are looking at theltrsting procedures as well as the quality of the water and the problem at
the source. Noting that /=~~t~9~~ganisms develop from human and animal fesces, Councillor Gould asked
how are such fesces getting into the water system; he also asked how much land around the Loch Lomond
lakes does the City own now and does the City have a long-range plan to own it all. Mr. MacKinnon stated
he cannot comment as to the medical reasons as to how the coliform colonies may occur - however, there
have been a number of reasons in the water lines: the chlorine has a time period to react and the amount
of chlorine in the system normally is up - however, in cold weather when the chlorine is down some of the
matter that goes through the system may be in the line and it may be in some oflhe dead-ends - there
is tuberculation in the lines and there is a closing of the pipes so that you have an amount of mat-
erial - when we flush the lines the chlorine at times may kill some of the areas but at the same time
releasing some of this tuberculated area so that it is in the line again and allowing it to form - this
is one of the reasons the lines are flushed, to allow the water to move along; in the Millidgeville area
this summer, we had another problem - that of the water pressure itself being down - there was some major
work on the water lines in the area of Paradise Row (a 15-inch water line) - there was volume of water
but the pressure was down and subsequently the water was slower, allowing it to stay in the lines even
longer.
In reply'to Councillor Gould's other question, Councillor Davis stated that the Land Committee
and the City have a long~range plan for acquiring all the lands in our watershed, but the City acquires
them only when they become available - the City has no plan to expropriate properties or to dispossess
people.
Noting that Dr. D. H. Garey, President of the Executive of the said Saint John Medical Society,
as present at the meeting at this time, Mr. MacKinnon advised that while Dr. Garey was absent from the
city he was talking with Dr. Dysart on the subject under discussion, and when he receives information
from one of the local consultants the City staff would like to have a meeting with the Medical Society,
probably within the next few days, because he believes the Society would like to expand upon the letter
sent to Council as to the Society's concerns and fears.
Councillor Cave recalled that at the last Council meeting, he asked for a report on the ex-
of water due to a circumstance which-o~curred in the Black River area. He stated that since that
date he has discovered that the Black River Road school is receiving water of Grade "E" - this water has
een inspected by the Department of Health, and this Grade is not good. He asked for a report in this
egard, noting that the people of the area are concerned and are willing to pay for the extension of
ater, and that the City should proceed with such water extension if it is at all possible. Mr. Mac-
innon advised that, as an interim report, the area of concern is in what is called Zone 2 of the ex-
ansion programme, and the present water service is installed as far as the entrance to McAllister
Industrial Park - because it is in Zone 2 it is going to require a pumping station in order to give the
rea the required water pressure to get it just as far as the school itself - he believes that the water
res sure around the entrance to the said industrial park is approximately 25 pounds per square inch and
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
".-
35
I/.;Jnda//Sh7
:l?Nt4.,
-/~Ck/h
13J;wC'/e
.Pf;f-/';/lq
JPdrol/i ,,~
t;:;fp
l:.Ba"i.:r {;tt1.
CI/eI' 01' Chief
'PI? Ilee
5tr/ke
Cana~ <</i:
<:f-C;Jble j,-t.
I :JJr()kel1 received
windows
1>,I/ce :J)eji/.
C};uJ?'
~',P?/n:J
Water
. e rl;en :J/tJJ?
e~';;;>1'e~
01,( :Ekf
1?/l/el" ~d.
'I
I
.
.
I
.
ll....
it should really be much higher in order to give it adequate pressure at the school; the distance is approximately
1,500 lineal feet as far as the school and the cost to extend the water line itself is approximately $45,000.00,
the pumping station would cost approximately $30,000.00, and engineering and contingencies, et cetera would cost
approximately $16,000.00, making a total cost of approximately $96,000.00 to get the water just as far as the
school; outside of the school itself there are not many of the homes that were on the petition that would be
included in this service. He stated that according to the petition there appeared to be a commitment to take the
water beyond the industrial park - however, there is nothing that the City could find that would indicate there
was any commitment to take the water any further at this particular point in time. He stated that the City has
not been able to check on the well conditions with the Department of Health. He stated that from this year's
point of view, the matter of an expenditure of $96,000 should be of concern to get the water along that area; he
feels that maybe the problem of wells would be coincident with the time of the year and the dry weather rather
than just the fact that the wells are not good. He advised that the Department needs more time to prepare a
report on the matter for Council.
Councillor Pye stated that at a Common Council meeting of three months ago, he requested that the
Council enforce the 1908 by-law which prohibits the use of the grass in King Square and in the Old Burial Ground
by any persons other than a civic employee in the performance of duty; his reason at that time, among other
things, was to minimize the damage to the grass and flower beds in the said areas. He pointed out that the
damage perpetrated in these two areas during 1974 totalled $1,199.00 for King Square and $749.00 for the Old
Burial Ground, not including the Loyalist Days damage to King Square; that in addition to the damage factor
stressed by him at that time, when he brought the matter before Council three months ago, he advised periodic
policing of these said areas as a deterrent to future vandalism; that although the Council did not support his
views it was suggested that he request the Chief of Police to assist in curbing further destruction in these two
areas; that on four occasions during the past two months he discussed the matter with the Chief who assured him
that action would be taken i~ this regard - however, up to date, Councillor Pye has seen no evidence of it except
during Loyalist Days week; that other than the damage to the areas in question which occurs frequently, bicycles
can be seen being ridden daily through the Square, unopposed, defying the prohibiting by-law and existing traffic
signs and imperilling the well-being of persons who wish to enjoy the beauty of the Burial Ground and Square;
that further to this, he has been informed by reliable authority that in addition to the presence of pestiferous
inebriates it is not an uncommon sight to observe wayward youths reclining on the grass smoking "patTI while drug
"pushers" peddle their wares unhindered by patrolling police for the timid passerby. He stated that in view of
the serious situation that exists within the boundaries of these sectors he would propose the following motion.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Chief of Police be instructed by Common Council to issue
a permanent order to all constables patrolling the Charlotte Street beat to provide periodic daily coverage for
King Square and the Old Burial Ground for the purpose of enforcement of the Bicycle By-Law and the elimination of
vandalism and drug trafficking - the hours of patrolling the said areas to extend from 8.00 a.m. to 12.00 mid-
night, from June 1st to October 31st, inclusive.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table and referred to the
of Police for a report.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
A report from the Acting City Manager was considered at this time, which submits a report from the
Chief of Police, as follows:- a constable of the Police Department was detailed by the radio operator to proceed
to Canada Wire & Cable Limited on the morning of August 7th, 1975 for the purpose of carrying out investigation
of the complaint received from the company that six windows had been broken out of these premises during the
night; on arrival the constable noticed that pickets were out in front of this company and decided not to cross
the picket line but radioed back to the Western police station and asked a member to call the company to have
someone come out to see him about the incident - at no time did any of the pickets interfere with the policeman,
and there is no evidence to suggest that he was advised not to cross the picket line - the constable waited
outside for approximately twenty minutes, but no-one from the company came out, and he departed; later in the
same morning, a sergeant of the Police Department visited the company when the circumstances dealing with the
previous member not going to the company were learned - there was no interference by any pickets, and staff of
the company were interviewed relative tO,the damage; there is no evidence that in any way did the pickets attempt
to stop the Police Department member from visiting the company - the decision not to enter at the time of the
original complaint was made by a three year constable who thought he was acting properly; there is no evidence
that any member of the said Department on this particular date advised this constable not to cross the picket
line - he made the decision on his own initiative; the member concerned has been counselled dealing with the
authority and responsibilities of a police officer - the Chief of Police is satisfied that the constable was of
the opinion he was acting in a proper manner - any gross error made by the constable was the fact that he had not
contacted his sergeant for a decision; in future, every effort will be made to preclude this type of problem.
Councillor Kipping at this time proposed the following motion, which was not seconded:- That the Chief
of Police issue a general directive clarifying the policy of the Department as to the appropriate action to be
taken by members of the Force when confronted by picket lines.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letter from the Acting City Manager be
and filed.
Councillor Kipping explained that his above motion arose from the fact that the above noted report from
he Chief of Police states that the Police Department member concerned has been counselled dealing with the
authority and responsibilities of a Police Officer, and that he thinks that it is not sufficient to counsel a
ember every time an incident occurs; it is his feeling that if this is not understood by a three year constable,
hen a general directive is called for. He suggested that if the level of training in that Department is so low
hat a three year constable does not realize he should check back for orders from his superior when confronted by
a situation which confuses him, then Council had better vote even more money than it already has voted, for some
"crash" training programmes, or else raise the standards for the City's recruiting. Councillor Kipping expressed
concern that what is involved in this matter is not the ordinary problem associated with picket lines but the
uch more serious problem of police officers, for whatever reasons, allowing themselves to be intimidated - by
icket lines or any other cause - to the extent that they fail to carry out their official duties. He stated
hat to his way of thinking - and this is shared by many who have contacted him about this incident - when any
olice officer in the course of his duty allows personal considerations or affiliations to prevent him from
arrying out his duty, then Councillor Kipping submits that the maintenance of law and order is placed in jeopardy
nd a disservice is rendered to the public, and the field for the practice of discrimination is wide open.
3H
~
Str/ke
~l1d"a fi(/I
t?able .t-i,t.
:J3,..oKen wiJ1t!tJ,
Pol/ee 2J~
/frCf7r"ec-t-~P/ 7? ;7'2,
#;15 .:ftC'p/r
~ha~;dJ17 ,1f.m/ol
fdd-a"el"S'Il$$()
aiel' 0(3 'Po/fce
E l"I-foN:oe menr
0-1" ~ ..>trikes,
plc/rets, er(!.
Councillor Davis stated that he got a completely different meaning from the above mentioned
letter written by the Chief of Police, and that it seems to him that an officer should not barge into a
Union or a labour dispute, or into a domestic dispute, and that if he cannot decide what action to take
he calls his superiors and they decide what action to take. He stated that he gets from the said letter
the impression that we have an excellent Police Force and a very well trained group of superior policemen;
if at a time of the Union dispute there is very taut feelings and there are other factors involved, an
officer should not expose himself to problems and he should not create greater problems. He advised that
he thinks that this particular officer in his confusion acted wisely to determine what action he should
take, and he thinks that the Council should inform The Canadian Manufacturers' Association, whose letter
is next on the Council agenda, that Saint John has probably a police force that every other community in
the Maritimes would like to have. He stated he does not think there were any great problems caused - it
was inconvenience for the moment - but he would not like a group of policemen made into a situation and
aggravate a situation that is otherwise quite simple to handle. He added that he thinks this particular
situation was handled very well and his interpretation from the Chief's letter and his interpretation
from the letter from Deputy Police Chief R. H. Stone is that it could have been handled a little sp-
eedier, but he thinks, on the whole, the Force is trained properly and they did the right thing; it all
came out very well, he pointed out. He felt that the said letter from The Canadian Manufacturers'
Association is a continuation of this matter, and that it simply calls for a letter telling the Assoc-
iation that this has been an excellent climate for manufacturing, and for Labour, and we have Labour
people on all our big commissions, and have done so for years - everybody is involved in this city - and
we do things carefully and do not cause violent situations.
~ Councillor Hodges commented that on reading the correspondence from the Chief of Police in this
matter he feels that the constable performed his duties in the manner that he knew, and there was lack of
supervision and therefore he does not see any reason why this officer should be chastised in the manner
as has been done by City staff. He stated that from his experience in the matter of "strikes" there has
never been anything done to date to prevent the Police from performing their duties. He stressed that
the affiliation of the Police with the Labour movement has never interfered with them carrying out their
duties, as the Police have an obligation and principles to live up to.
Councillor Green advised that when Councillor Kipping's letter came to Council originally in
the above matter, he went to see the Unions to determine what the problem was. He stated that he, just as
the Mayor and some of the Council members have done, has done all in his power to try to have the said
"strike" finalized rather than see an industry lost to the City. He stated that his particular feeling
was .that in no way did the picketers of this Union have anything to do with the damage that was caused to
the company's premises (breaking of the windows). He noted that on that same evening, windows were
broken in premises further up Fairville Boulevard. He stated that what he is trying to say, on the
assurance of the said Union to him, is that in no way did that Union have anything to do with the bre-
aking of any of the windows.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he thinks that the constable acted properly - he asked for
more advice. He felt that in this case of the windows alleged to have been broken the night before, it
should have been an off-duty man investigating the incident, rather than a man in uniform.
Consideration was thereon given to the said letter from The Canadian Manufacturers' Association
which advises that the Association has established a reputation as an authoratative source of information
on the numerous development affecting the Canadian manufacturer and that among the many questions that
daily confront its various offices, there is one especially which could have a potential effect on Saint
John - it refers to the advisability of locating a new plant in the Saint John community versus another
community; that a recent news item in the Saint John papers on the refusal of city policemen to cross a
picket line to investigate an incident that did not appear to be related to the "strike", prompts this
letter because a company, when deciding where to locate, wants to know what the general attitude is
towards industry in the community and, more specifically, what is the attitude of local government and
local enfor~ement agencies regarding enforcement of the law as it applies to "strikes", pickets, et
cetera, and the right of the employer to continue operations during a "strike", if he so wishes, and the
right of individuals to cross picket lines if they so wish. The letter asks if the Common Council can
provide the Association with a copy of any statement of policy, resolution, or by-law which reflects
the attitude of the Common Council towards the enforcement of the law during a labour dispute.
Considerable discussion ensued. The following points regarding policy were made by the Common
Council members: when the Police officer encounters a situation that he feels he cannot handle he calls
headquarters to his superior, for further orders, and that at no ti~e has the City had any problems in
this regard; the members of the Saint John Police Department know the boundaries of the City of Saint
John and operate within those boundaries; the Province's Labour Relations Act protects both sides in the
case of a legal strike; the City of Saint John has no policy regarding the enforcement of the law during
a labour dispute - the City's policy is that our Police Department maintain law and order, without
complication; it is the Criminal Code of Canada that tells the Police what to do, and the Common Council
does not tell them what to do and does not control the Police.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letter from The Canadian Manu-
facturers' Association be referred to the City staff to consult with the Chief of Police in the pre-
paration by the said staff and Chief of a letter of reply to the Association, based on the attitude
expressed at this meeting by the Council members, and that such draft letter of reply be submitted at the
next meeting of Council for ratification.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. R. H. Woodroffe, Chairman,
Elected Representative of the Senior Citizens of High Rise Building One, Loch Lomond Villa Inc., El-
,/ h,/,.j ~ lerdale Street, advising that since August 1973 the rents of senior citizens residing in the said building
!r.'f, rv~~ror'< have increased from $100.00 for a bachelor apartment and $115.00 for a one-bedroom apartment to $145.00
;(Od~,(()~O)?AC and $165.00, respectively, as per~no;ification given August 1975; that some of the residents have only
~,/~ their old age pension plus the gove:rnment supplement which makes their income about $200.00 monthly from
r' ~ e<f' ens hich to pay rent and food, clothing, furnish and maintain their apartments and provide transportation
.7el?/O~ / I;? for medical care and other incidentals as none of these necessities are provided by the Loch Lomond Villa
of III!!;' If /s 'it Inc.; that some of the residents feel they could still meet this raise in rent and cost of living by
~/~t7 l?l1e using their small savings but they do not feel that this is the solution to the problem as these buildings
~' ere started as a senior citizens' home away from home and they did not foresee that this would ever
1Y61I1~iJ7C~se. arise; that they are confident that once these conditions are brought to the attention of the government
nd elected members the senior citizens in question may rely on them to come to their assistance, and at
S. 7: fI.s!1'eom. the same time .they suggest perhaps it may be an opportune time to implement a form of rental control, and
, that for the present they appeal to the government for its assistance to help them cover this enormous
.
I
I
.
I
.
,I
I.
.
.!".
-,
~
,....-
.
I
I
If/edol'/ J..
F U ,[.1,e
lY/~b;1e
home
.
37
increase in their rents -- be referred to the Saint John Housing Commission and to the City staff for a report
and recommendation.
Councillor Parfitt pointed out that the residents of the above named senior citizens housing complex
are in the position that they can move to another part of the complex where they can receive Level 3 nursing care
which is completely paid for by the Provincial Government, and that many are under that arrangement. She stated
that if their rent is to be increased $30.00 next month she believes that some of these people will get $120.00
from the Provincial Government in cognizance of what it is doing for people on fixed incomes; also, Medicare will
start October 1st which will mean that some may have $30.00 or $40.00 more per months towards rent. She pointed
out that this could be multiplied many times throughout the city and she is sure that some more are paying more
than $145.00 heated throughout the city for a bachelor apartment - so, she does not know what we can do to help
senior citizens, but she was told today that they could appeal to the Social Assistance for any help, if needed.
Councillor Pye recommended that the Common Council instruct the Common Clerk to submit a letter to the Provincial
Government instructing immediate monetary assistance for the senior citizens at the said Loch Lomond Villa.
Councillor Cave stated that he has been in discussion with Mr. R. H. Woodroffe and these senior citizens are
saying, in effect, that no way do they wish the Lions Club to operate at a deficit but, by the same token, their
rent has gone up in the last two months by $42.00 and they just cannot afford it, and any help that the Common
Council can give them they would appreciate.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Merton L. Fudge of 26 Peters Street,
requesting permission to place a mobile home on the lower end of the Latimer Lake Road on a lot on which he plans
to build two new homes, and, therefore, the placement of the mobile home will be for temporary accommodation for
his daughter and her husband for the purpose of guarding against vandalism and theft, and advising that, health
permitting, he hopes to commence construction of these new homes in the fall and complete construction in the
spring of 1976, and that if this request is denied he will be forced to abandon his construction plans as he
would not feel safe in leaving the new buildings unprotected, be received and filed and the requested permission
be granted for one year.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the
~~.~Ol1le~ N. B. for a change in zoning to permit the establishment
JrJ.rol'J?1JI/1' and to make available rental accommodations, be referred
and authority be given to proceed to advertise regarding
ZOI'J~~ ~
:P0c6. r 0;'
de /sf-
O#I(;e
P/;;Jim, t9,/v"s
eol7U'>1
.J) :l1ou.lit<i1~
l1(e-z..oni
:lJeb;r/s A
:Oell'l~/i.f/oJ1
:Bank /f!-t I
l6ylYJ.SJ#
.yr.
{,kr~~ -t-o
Ple/rlDh j
tJDntralZ'
. er'i.
50 i%i-ior
I
:z;,~u/.ty
I
.
$.:T /!s!1'
~o.m,".
~
application from Dr. George M. Thornhill of Westfield,
of a perment medical office at 1283 Manawagonish Road
to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation,
this application.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application from Mr.D. Bountalas of 136 Donaldson
Street for a change in zoning to permit the erection at 19 St. Anne Street, Saint John East of one 6-family
apartment building, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that the necessary
advertising be proceeded with.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that the Bank of Montreal has been demolished for three or four days and
yet the contractor still has the barricades up at Haymarket Square in this connection, which is reducing the
traffic flow by one lane. He requested that the Commissioner of Engineering and Works have that contractor clean
the demolition area up and remove the barricades. Mr. MacKinnon replied that as of today, the barricades are
back to the sidewalk area; however, the site should be cleared up a lot better. Councillor A. Vincent stated
that several of the City staff were working at this site cleaning it up today, and he wants to see the City make
a charge-back on the demolition permit of this particular contractor.
At this time, the Council considered the City Solicitor's letter which outlines the resolution the City
Solicitor believes is necessary as the next step in the matter of the holding of an Enquiry by the Council to be
conducted under oath under an 1895 statute relating to a civic matter wherein information has been revealed to
the public out of the Committee of the Whole meetings and legal session, and in particular a meeting of July
28th, 1975 -- if the Council wishes to proceed.
Councillor Gould asked what, by law, says that Councillors would have to appear before the Councillors'
committee since it would not be a legal court or a legal hearing, he does not believe. He asked what legal right
the Councillors' committee would have to call a Council member to appear before it. Mr. Rodgers replied that it
would be under the statute; if a Council member did not appear he would be fined, under the statute. Councillor
Gould noted that it would have to be taken to court to fine him, and he asked how they would collect it from that
committee. He stated he was making the point that the whole thing is ridiculous.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the matter be dropped.
Councillor Cave felt that if there is going to be an Enquiry, it should not be by a Council committee,
but by the best. Councillor Pye indicated that he does not object to having an Enquiry. Councillor MacGowan
asked if any other committee, other than a committee of Councillors, can be set up in this regard. Councillor A.
/
incent stated he thought that the statute was stronger than it is, and that he is still in favour of holding the
Enquiry. Councillor Parfitt felt that the subject has cast a reflection on each member of the Common Council.
She noted that some Enquiries take up a lot of time and money, usually. She felt that it is urgent that the
usiness of the City be proceeded with rather than hold an Enquiry. She stated that if it were a case of each
Councillor were charged, she would be prepared to take a lie detector test, that she has never been guilty of
giving out information. Councillor Kipping stated that a reflection has been cast on every Councillor around the
Council table and, therefore, he thinks that an Enquiry is required in order to clear the air, if nothing else;
it is a reflection that there is a "leak" and he feels that in order to define the "leak" and plug it, the matter
should be investigated officially in order to define, find and plug the "leak", if it exists. He added that we
ave seen plenty of evidence that there are "leaks" and the Council wants to know how they are happening.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Cave, Parfitt,
odges, Higgins and Gould voting "yea" and Councillors MacGowan, A. Vincent, Green, Pye and Kipping voting
11 \I
nay.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission submitting
report for adoption by Common Council, which report is the result of the Commission's study of the recommendation
~38
~
S:J:/I~amp',
//s~. /.21sK
Foree amp>.
Re'port-
Cf)//~1b1i1it4.t/Dh
f(, C. ...L J'lviJ7,j
~n. Ii'1l:tlit S tr/~
.J)evc/' 11 ward
TI"d~ev{ 7m:l<<s
CO(,C.h~; / of
Ca,?.;;IdOi
'Pens/l1p! ',P.4n
C?al7dU:~01 ,(,.re
/lssure1nce Co
( .(e(. on c",J/e)
of the Housing Task Force Committee Report, 1971 and which was laid on the table on July 28th and August
11th last, be referred to the City staff to report back to Council what items in the said Housing Task
Force Committee Report have, and have not, been implemented, so that the Council can take the necessary
action.
.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Ji! ~~fflm '
Comm Clerk.
I
I
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Tuesday, the second
day of September" A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
.
Councillors Cave, ~~__' Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, and A. Vincent, and 11. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, D. French,
Director of Personnel and Training, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, Engineering and Works Department
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
The Mayor, on behalf of the Common Council, extended the Council's congratulations to Mr. K. C.
Irving on having been named to receive the Canadian Industrial Development Award which is presented by the
Trade and Industrial Council of Canada. The Mayor noted that Mr. Irving was a former citizen of Saint
John and has done a lot for this city, and stated that the City is very pleased to see him receive this
Award. Councillor Parfitt added that Mr. Irving in this regard is being recognized for his fifty years'
contribution to the economy of Atlantic Canada.
I
Consideration was given to the letter from The Canada Life Assurance Company, Saint John office,
recalling that in 1974, companies were invited to tender on managing the investment portfolio of the
pension plan for the employees of the City of Saint John, and that Canada Life was unable to tender
because the tender specifications exceeded some of the limitations in its Charter of Incorporation, and
advising that should the City proceed with its proposal of establishing an outside investment manager,
there would be three separate groups as against the present two involved in the affairs of the said
pension plan (the two being: The City providing the administration as well as managing the portfolio; the
actuarial work being provided by an outside organization) and that this fragmentation is neither necessary
nor efficient, and that Canada Life would therefore like to propose that it submit to the City a Plan for
the consolidation of these three functions by that company as it feels that such a change may relieve the
City of considerable work as well as possibly improved benefits for retiring employees.
.
l~. Park advised that the City of Saint John pension plan is set up by a Provincial statute and
it is administered under the terms provided in that statute, and it has been done in this way since 1947
and even though there are, from time to time, suggestions made for changes in the pension plan in general
there has been complete satisfaction with the type of arrangement that we have; this is not to say that
from time to time the benefits and perhaps contributions might be changed, but there is general satis-
faction with the manner in which it is administered; he has not heard of any particular reason for changing
it. Wi th regard to the sentence in the Canada Life letter, "We feel that such a change may relieve the
City of considerable work as well as possibly improved benefits for retiring employees", Mr. Park stated
that he does not see that it is possible to make that kind of comment without a study of the whole pension
plan - along with benefits there must always be attendant costs; the Pension Board from time to time has
this kind of study done with the benefit of actuaries that it has employed for this purpose, and is always
looking for opportunities to improve benefits consistent with costs when it is feasible to do so; as far
as making improved benefits available, there is obviously an attendant cost related to this.
I
Councillor Gould suggested that it would not hurt to at least hear the Plan that Canada Life
proposes, before the Council gives a negative or affirmative reply. Mr. Park noted that the company in
its letter does not seem to be suggesting any particular Plan, but he presumed there is no harm in asking
to hear Canada Life's proposal. Councillor M. Vincent felt that there would be no harm in at least
looking at the proposal of Canada Life, to inform the Council of the details of the proposal.
I
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the proposed Plan be requested from The Canada Life
Assurance Company and submitted to Council.
.
Councillor Kipping noted that the Council does not know whether or not there is a cost associated
with the submission of the said proposed Plan, and he felt that the Council might determine that before it
asks for the proposed Plan - but subject to that being determined, the proposed Plan be requested.
~
,...-
.
I
I ~h5'On~n
C:7I7~ /,{t
/!S5Ql:;1nee ~
t:4b7mIiiral1
Jkns/on 1iW
.
tfhl'Kfh1
Ill/reeme"r
~T ~rie
,6"pl,!l.eed
t/n;on /Yo, /,
eoncllidJC-/o
.:B.,t. /"err
I
Ce>u:n. /I. iii.
:JJ/CiJl1Ch e
Tcmes
.:B.;J/der
.:iJ;J1 r/es h
S~~/()n
t7pen;rfi (:)11
. P"",m.I9,w,s.
ef?~n?
/lllcJ;iilel IV-
o '.1Jrien
I
I
20111 n5
:B~-A.;1/oV
dlhJend -
men-c-s
--cf7 ~e)d-
.
....
39
Councillor A. Vincent asked when the Pension Board or the Common Council would be reconsidering the
actuaries, adding that he does not think that we are getting the best use of the twelve million dollars that is
tied up in the pension fund. He asked if the Council is going to open the whole thing up why does it not open up
the question of calling in some other actuaries, who do not sell pension plans. He advised that The, Canada
Life Assurance Company sells pension plans. He stated he thinks that the City should be doing business with
consultants who do not sell pension plans but tell us what we should have and how we should invest the twelve
million dollars to get the best return.
Councillor Cave asked if there is any advantage in having Canad Life give us this proposal. Mr. Park
replied that in 1974 a general invitation was extended to any firms that were interested in submitting a proposal
for the managing of the pension fund's portfolio of investments; approximately 28 responded - Canada Life along
with one other life insurance company considered the questionnaire that they had been invited to reply to and
found that they were unable to comply; he believes it was 28 applications in all received by the Pension Board,
from applicants who were able to complete the questionnnaire quite satisfactorily - since that time, the Pension
Board has been analyzing the submissions that were received and has not yet concluded its study which is a fairly
long and extensive procedure;, the Pension Board is continuing to study this and will be making its next step in
the procedure some time next month; the Pension Board has reported to Council in its annual report that when it
has come to a conclusion on the subject of management of its investment portfolio it will be reporting to Council;
that is where the matter stands, at the moment.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that this matter be laid on the table until the Council has
further information from the Commissioner of Finance and the Pension Board and until Councillors Davis and Green,
who are members of the Pension Board, are present.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, dated August
29th, 1975, submitting the final draft Working Agreement 1975-1976 in respect to the Saint John Civic Employees'
Local No. 18, C.U.P.E. which reflects the negotiated changes together with the recommendations contained in the
report of the Conciliation Board and amendments thereto, and recommending that the said final draft Agreement be
adopted by Common Council and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of
the City of Saint John, which Agreement has been examined and approved by the City Solicitor as to legality and
form, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Mayor and Common Clerk, in executing the above named document on
behalf of the City, affix their initials to each page of the document and to each clause as well, and that the
Union signing officers do likewise, in view of the fact that from his experience in Labour matters the document
has to be so initialled to stand up in any court procedures.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report dated September 2nd, 1975 from Councillor A. Vincent,
to whom had been referred the problem described by Miss Blanche Jones of 126 Station Street at the Council
meeting of August 18th last, which report is signed by Councillor A. Vincent, Mr. Malcolm Baxter of Baxter
Dairies Limited, and Miss Blanche G. Jones, advising that as the result of complaints received from Miss Jones
regarding the operation of Baxter Dairies Limited on Station Street, (1) Baxter Dairies Limited has ceased the
bottling of milk on Station Street as of now, (2) the distribution operation will cease at the end if six months
or when the expansion is completed at the Millidge Avenue headquarters, and (3) the washing of vehicles at
Station Street will be kept to a minimum and will be only washed for sanitary reasons -- be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that the above solutions to the problem were only arrived at through the
able help of the Common Clerk, the City Solicitor and the City Manager.
The
Zoning By-Law
jection, that
Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed for the proposed amendments to the text of the
that have been recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee. He advised that one written ob-
of !~. Michael N. O'Brien, has been received, to the amendment of Section 131.
Mr. O'Brien was present and stated that his only objection is that in the proposed amendment, the
Council would be granting to the Planning Advisory Committee more discretionary powers. He pointed out that he
has found himself within the past two weeks in the position that the Council cannot overrule the Advisory Committee
on many items and particularly where the authority is discretionary there is basically no grounds for appealing
the Advisory Committee's decisions - the Advisory Committee, in his opinion, answer to no-one in many items and
his case is just an example of it, and that is his only objection to amending the said Section 131. He stated
that what he would suggest in this particular instance is that what they are saying is somebody should be able to
take a look at proposed private clubs and light industrial zones, and that he agrees, but he thinks the authority
should rest with the Common Council, who are answerable to the people - he stated that the Advisory Committee
appear to be answerable to no-one. The Mayor pointed out that the Community Planning Act, which is a Provincial
Act, gives the authority.
No other person was present to speak to the proposed changes in the Zoning By-Law.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns
l. amending Section 2 by: (a) inserting a new clause (na) after clause (n) to read as follows: Ulna)
'Dwelling Group' means two or more buildings containing dwelling units located on a lot or a number of adjoining
lots where all buildings, recreation areas, driveways, parking areas, landscaping and all other features have
been planned as a single or unified development."; (b) substituting the following for clause (at): "( at) 'Place'
means an open unoccupied space other than a public street, permanently reserved as the principal means of access
to a dwelling group and approved as such by the Committee.";
2. inserting the. words "or recreationll between the words llcoITIInnnityll and IIcentretl in Sections 13(2) (c);
20(2) (c); 68(2) (b); 79(2) (b); and 90(2) (b);
40
~
3. substituting the word "zone" for the word "district" and the word "zones" for the word "districts"
throughout the By-Law;
.
4. substituting the figures "39" for the figures and letter "19A" where they appear in Sections
58 (2) and 174 (4) of the Zoning By-Law;
5. amending Section 68 by: (a) inserting the following as clause (c) after clause (b) of sub-
section (2): "(c) a dwelling group";
(b) redesignating clauses (ba) to (r) inclusive of subsection (2) as clauses (c) to (s)
inclusive:
(c) substituting the term "clause (p) of subsection (2)" in subsection (3) for the term
"clause (0) of subsection (2)";
(d) substituting the term "clause (1)" in subsection (3) for the term "clause (k)";
I
6. amending subsection (2) of Section 79 by: (a) redesignating clauses (c) to (1) inclusive as
clauses (d) to (m) inclusive; (b) inserting a clause (c) to read: "(c) a dwelling group";
7. amending subsection (2) of Section 172 by: (a) redesignating clauses (viii) to (xxiv) inclusive
as clauses (ix) to (xxv) inclusive; (b) inserting a new clause (viii) to read "(viii) a dwelling group";
;;?I?n/hff
2j.9'-~dl1/
~d-
dmenl!lmeds
8. substituting the following for
"72. (2) The maximwn height of
following conditions being satisfied (a)
foot for each three feet of the building
subsection (2) of Section 72:
a main building or structure may exceed 35 feet subject to the
the side yard shall be not less than four feet plus one additional
height
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding 35
its height from an abutting "R" zone other than an "RM" clas-
I
feet in height shall be located at least
sification
exceed 45 feet.";
(c) In no case shall the height of any building or structure
9.
substituting the following for Section 83:
"83. (1) with respect to height
(a) no main building may be less than two storeys; and
(b) subject to subsection (2) no main building or 'structure may exceed six
storeys or 75 feet.
.
(2) The maximwn height of a main building or structure may exceed six storeys or
75 feet subject to the following conditions being satisfied
(a) The side yard shall be not less than one foot for every two feet of height
and an additional 0.75 feet for each foot the building or structure exceeds
75 feet.
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding 75 feet in
height shall be located at least its height from an abutting zone other
than 'RM-2', 'RM-3' or 'P' zone.
(c) In no case shall the height of any building or structure exceed 15 storeys
or 150 feet."
I
10. substituting the following for Section 94:
"94. (1) with respect to height
(a) no main building may be less than two storeys; and
(b) subject to subsection (2), no main building or structure may exceed ten
storeys or 10 feet.
(2) The maximwn height of a main building or structure may exceed ten storeys or
100 feet subject to the following conditions being satisfied
.
(a) The side yard shall be not less than 0.3 times the height of the building
or structure up to a height of 100 feet and an additional 0.2 feet for each
foot the building or structure exceeds 100 feet.
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding 100 feet in height
shall be located at least one-third of its height from any other abutting 'R'
zone.
(c) In no case, shall the height of the building or structure exceed 20 storeys
or 20 feet.";
I
ll. (a) substituting the word "or" for the word "and" at the end of Section 93 (l)(b)(i);
(b) repealing Section 93 (l)(b)(ii).
12. substituting the following for the words "of at least 15 feet in width" in subsection (2) of
Section 114: "of at least 20 feet in width clear of any projections or encroachments therein;
13.
amending Section 131 by:
(a) repealing clause (2) of subsection (1);
(b) redesignating the remaining clauses of subsection (1) appropriately;
(c) inserting a new clause after clause (1) of subsection (2) to read, "a club or lodge,
fraternal or private"; ,
(d) redesignating the foregoing new clause and all succeeding clauses of subsection (2)
appropriately;
I
14. 8lIlending Section 217 (l)(k) by inserting the words "that this requirement shall not apply"
after the word "except";
15. amending Section 217 by: (a) redesignating clauses (12) to (16) inclusive as clauses (13) to
(17) inclusive; (b) inserting the following as a new clause (12):
"(12) A driveway to a parking area which is not the sole means
of access to a building shall be at least 20 feet in width";
.
16. amending Section 211 by:
(a) changing the title to read, "Places on Which Dwelling Groups Front";
~
"... ,
41
.
1..< S~.E ntP;{
~rISeSA~
7{esrCKLlWlt
.6ever..i>1ffe
/"()pm
Jl;1,.k/H,/
I.sF~es'
1/.;;J"iaHce
.
I ZUl7inff
21Y-~dw
~ed
ClIneJ1tL-
mehts
.
I
I
.
......
(b) substituting the following for the first line:
upon a placell;
(c) inserting the following as the last
provision for a turnabout as considered
(d) striking out the words "one to four
in clause (b) --- be read a first time.
"Where a dwelling group fronts
line of clause (a): "and shall contain such
satisfactory by the Committee";
family housesll for the words "group houses"
Councillor M. Vincent asked if there are any sections, amendments or changes in this article that are
in contradiction to the 1970-1975 National Building Code. Mr. Zides replied that there are not, to his know-
ledge, but that at this time he would scrutenize the said Code and proposed amendments in order to answer that
question.
Councillor Higgins recalled that the letter from the City Solicitor to the Common Council meeting of
August 25th last regarding variances to permit a restaurant-beverage room at 9-11 Sydney Street owned by LSO
Enterprises Ltd., said it was not within the jurisdiction of Council to avoid that variance but that it is the
Planning Advisory Committee's jurisdiction. He asked Mr. O'Brien if he was planning to go back to that Committee
in the matter. Mr. O'Brien replied that Mr. Zides told him that the Advisory Committee discussed it last week,
and decided to do nothing. He added that the only thing he can do now is to appeal to the Provincial Planning
Board, but his problem is appealing a discretionary decision - it is something you cannot do, he felt. He stated
that the by-law amendment under discussion at this time does not really relate to his case at all except that it
is just showing there is so much discretionary authority in the Planning Advisory Committee and the Council,
which is a ruling body, cannot overrule the Advisory Committee in many areas. He stated he does not like to see
this expanded. Mr. O'Brien advised that he did not formally apply to the Planning Advisory Committee in the
matter of LSO Enterprises Ltd. following the August 25th Council meeting - he telephoned Mr. Zides Wednesday
morning and asked what the procedure would be (does the Council refer it back automatically, or does he request
to appear) and Mr. Zides told him that the Advisory Committee discussed it the previous evening and was not going
to do anything. He stated that Mr. Zides was aware that he had an appeal pending before the Planning Appeal
Board of the Province. Councillor Higgins asked Mr. Zides if Mr. O'Brien through formal means has the right to
appeal to the Planning Advisory Committee. Mr. Zides replied that under the rules of procedure of the Planning
Advisory Committee anybody can come back - the Committee will welcome re-applications provided the applicant sets
out his case in writing and the Committee has never turned anybody down yet, from appearing again before the
Committee. He stated that if Mr. O'Brien and his principals would set their case in writing it would be taken to
,
the Planning Advisory Committee for disposition - in other words, the Committee would probably ask them to come
back again. \
advised t~t there is nothing
National Building Code.
Mr. Zides
much to do with the
in the proposed amendments to the Zoning By-Law that has very
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and M. Vincent voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns
1. amending Section 2 by: (a) inserting a new clause (na) after clause (n) to read as follows: "(na)
'Dwelling Group' means two or more buildings containing dwelling units located on a lot or a number of adjoining
lots where all buildings, recreation areas, driveways, parking areas, landscaping and all other features have
been planned as a single or unified development."; (b) substituting the following for clause (at): "(at) 'Place'
means an open unoccupied space other than a public street, permanently reserved as the principal means of access
to a dwelling group and approved as such by the Committee.";
2. inserting the words "or recreation" between the words "community" and "centre" in Sections 13(2) (c);
20(2) (c); 68(2) (b); 79(2) (b); and 90(2) (b);
3. substituting the word "zone"for the word "districtll and the word IIzones" for the word "districts"
throughout the By-Law;
. _ 'J1). "'__~ t}.c:._ _: ~
4. substituting"theifigures-"39" ,for the figures and letter "19A" where they appear in Sections 58 (2) and
174 (4) of the Zoning By-Law;
5. amending Section 68 by: (a) inserting the following as clause (c) after clause (b) of subsection (2):
"(c) a dwelling group";
(b) redesignating clauses (ba) to (r) inclusive of subsection (2) as clauses (c) to (s) inclusive;
(c) substituting the term "clause (p) of subsection (2)' in subsection (3) for the term "clause (0) of
subsection (2)";
(d) substituting the term "clause (1)" in subsection (3) for the term "clause (k)";
6. amending subsection (2) of Section 79 by: (a) redesignating clauses (c) to (1) inclusive as clauses (d)
to (m) inclusive; (b) inserting a clause (c) to read: "(c) a dwelling group";
7.
clauses
amending subsection (2) of Section 172 by: (a) redesignating clauses (viii) to (xxiv) inclusive as
(ix) to (xxv) inclusive; (b) inserting a new clause (viii) to read "(viii) a dwelling group";
8. substituting the following for subsection (2) of Section 72:
"92. (2) The maximum height of a main building or structure may exceed 35 feet subject to the following
conditions being satisfied (a) The side yard shall be not less than four feet plus one additional foot for each
three feet of the building height
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding 35 feet in
height shall be located at least its height from an abutting "R" zone other than an "RM" classification
(c) In no case shall the height of any building or structure exceed 45
feet.lI;
9.
substituting the following for Section 83:
"83. (1) with respect to height
(a) no main building may be less than two storeys; and
(b) subject to subsection (2) no main building or structure may exceed six
storeys or 75 feet.
(2) The maximum height of a main building or structure may exceed six storeys or
75 feet subject to the following conditions being satisfied
A .j
":I....
~
,Zi?hinj' ~-.4
~e1<t-
OImenllmt?n-&- .$
Th e Ce7ye
1?;Jrkin~ SfMlee.
f/dridilJ7t!e
II/lchOlel IY'..
o ':f)r/en
~oCCiiL (;?,.e-Ie,P
A-t--~.
ttel.si?J7 t/oJ Ie
SarJ-t:iClv.
'Re-::zonh1~
(a) The side yard shall be not less than one foot for every two feet of height
and an additional 0.75 feet for each foot the building or structure exceeds
75 feet.
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding 75 feet
height shall be located at least its height from an abutting zone other
than 'RM-21, 'RM-3' or 'pt zone.
(c) In no case shall the height of any building or structure exceed 15 storeys
or 150 feet."
10.
substituting the following for Section 94:
"94. (1) with respect to height
(a) no main building may be less than two storeys; and
(b) subject to subsection (2), no main building or'structure,may exceed ten
storeys or 100 feet.
(2) The maximum height of a main building or structure may exceed ten storeys or
100 feet subject to the following conditions being satisfied
(a) The side yard shall be not less than 0.3 times the height of the building
or structure up to a height of 100 feet and an additional 0.2 feet for each
foot the building or structure exceeds 100 feet.
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding 100 feet in height
shall be located at least one-third of its height from any other abutting 'R'
zone.
(c) In no case, shall the height of the building or structure exceed 20 storeys
or 20 feet.lI;
ll. (a) substituting the word "or" for the word "and at the end of Section 93 (l)(b)(i);
(b) repealing Section 93 (l)(b)(ii).
12. substituting the following the words "of at least 15 feet in width" in subsection (2) of Section
114: "of at least 20 feet in width clear of any proj ections or encroachments therein";
13.
amending Section 131 by:
(a) repealing clause (a) of subsection (1);
(b) redesignating the remaining clauses of subsection (1) appropriately;
(c) inserting a new clause after clause (1) of subsection (2) to read, "a club or lodge,
fraternal or private";
(d) redesignating the foregoing new clause and all succeeding clauses or subsection (2)
appropriately;
14.
the word
amending Section 217 (l)(k) by inserting the word "that this requirement shall not apply" after
"except";
15. amending Section 217 by: (a) redesignating clauses (12) to (16) inclusive as clauses (13) to
(17) inclusive; (b) inserting the following as a new clause (12):
"(12) A driveway to a parking area which is not the sole means
of access to a building shall be at least 20 feet in width";
16.
amending Section 211 by:
(a) changing the title to read, "Places on Which Dwelling Groups Front";
(b) substituting the following for the first line: "Where a dwelling group fronts
upon a place";
(c) inserting the following as the ~ast line of clause (a): "and shall contain such
provision for a turnabout as considered satisfactory by the Committee";
(d) striking out the words "one to four family houses" for the words "group houses"
in clause (b) --- be read a second time.
I1nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and M. Vincent voting
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like some kind of an understanding how the club on the
corner of Prince William and Church Streets was permitted to be located there with no appeals, et cetera,
when there is a liquor outlet across the street. The Mayor advised that we will obtain the answer for
Councillor A. Vincent.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letter of objection submitted by
Mr. Michael N. O'Brien, be received and filed.
The Common Clerk stated that the necessary advertising was completed for The Rocca Group Limited
regarding the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law to re-zone land in the Nelson Vale Sub-division off
the Manawagonish Road for the development of housing and minor commercial facilities for serving immediate
local needs, and that no written obj~ctions were received in this matter.
No person was present to offer comment on the proposed Zoning By-Law amendment.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of 1he City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning approximately 86
acres of land north and south of the Pipeline Road immediately to the west of the Clark property off
JIlanawagonish Road from "RF" Rural and "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to "R-2" One- and
'l'wo-Family, "RM_l" Multiple Family (low rise), "RM_2" Multiple Family (high rise), "B_2" General Business,
"R 2" 0 d r.'L.-T
- ne- an lwo-F8lIlily and "R-IB" f'
One-Family districts, be read a lrst time.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
..:'
.
.....
,...-
4~)
. Pf.;u,,,, /l4/s,
~mm.
I
IIYt'rlhel"l1
ex- pl'eS Slf,6li
al'9nmenc
.
I
71e-A,,"lnj'
W~~,P
~-M.
1I/'e/st>PlI41/e
Su-b-~/v.
Plal1",/l-IIIn'
(?el'mJ7? .
.
Consideration was given to the Planning Advisory Committee letter of August 27th, 1975 concerning the
said re-zoning, which recommends that the area so indicated on the submitted print be re-zoned as shown. The
letter states that the print indicates the proposed sub-division pattern and princip&l l&nd use &re&s; th&t St~ge
I of the development will consist of approximately 40 acres running from the southerly limit of the property to
about the City's water pipeline; that a mixture of housing types is proposed including single family houses,
semi-detached houses and three-storey apartments; that in subsequent stages it is intended that there be higher
density apartments adjacent to the park area, town-housing and possibly also other single family houses and semi-
detached houses; that Stage I will consist of approximately 372 housing units in one-family, two-family and
three-storey multiple family buildings; that it is likely to take from a year upwards for development to mater-
ialize at this location and questions of access and servicing are now being resolved by the Rocca Group; that it
is premature to estimate the number of units in later stages - for example, the north end of the site is subject
to a number of factors which are undetermined at this time - among these questions of access at the north end,
the reservation or exclusion from zoning of a right-of-way for the Northern Expressway, the most suitable levels
for development after gravel removal and relationship of the 520-foot wide property to the west of adjacent
property in terms of over-all development design - at the present time, the Dexter property to the east is having
gravel removed from it and is under study by its owners for development capability - the gravel deposits extend
on the Rocca Group land and satisfactory grading plans for both properties will have to be worked out by the
affected owners. The letter advises that the Planning Advisory Committee recommends the re-zoning requested by
the Rocca Group.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she is totally in favour of the above development, but she is still
concerned that we do not know the alignment of the Northern Expressway and if we zone this land in question and
the portion where we think now is the Northern Expressway we may find the alignment is 50 feet or 100 feet out.
She stated she thinks that the Council should find out exactly where the Northern Expressway is going before it
approves any further developments. Mr. Barfoot advised that since the last meeting on the Northern Expressway
this matter has been with the Province, and he will check with the Province as to what further progress has been
made in determining the alignment. He stated that this matter will be pursued at further meetings to be held
with the Province on the closing of the Reversing Falls bridge in future and the construction which might have to~
be done in conjunction with that - and a report will be made back to Council. Councillor MacGowan stated she
would hope that the Council would have an answer in this regard before the third reading of this re-zoning.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning approximately 86 acres of land
north and south of the Pipeline Road immediately to the west of the Clark property off Manawagonish Road from
"HF" Rural and "RS-2" One- and Two-F8lIlily Residential to "R-2" One- and Two-F8lIlily, "RM-l" Multiple F8lIlily (low
rise), "RM-2" Multiple F8lIlily (high rise), "B-2" General Business, "R-2" One- and Two-F8lIlily and "R-IB" One-
Family districts, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee, recommending the re-zoning requested by the Rocca Group Limited, as shown on the submitted print, be
received and filed.
The Common Clerk stated that advertising was completed regarding the proposed re-zoning for Petrofina
Canada Ltd. of the northwest corner of Loch Lomond Road and McAllister Drive with a frontage of 200 feet on Loch
Lomond Road and 215 feet on McAllister Drive from "RS_2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential district to "1-
R" Restricted Industrial district, and that no written objections were received.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
~,,~.~a(n' August 27th, 1975, stating that Petrofina Canada Ltd. wishes to build on this 200 by 215-foot lot a full line car
~dP~~' wash service station as quickly as possible at this corner and the company is losing the service station at
. Haymarket Square to the Gilbert Street ramp, off the new Saint John throughway, and that this new facility will
7s'e-:J{Ohll1:/ be attendant-operated, not self-service; that in reviewing the application, it was noted that McAllister Drive
~~_, J7Dl would need widening along this property and discrepancies were found between the City and Provincial widening
I I'~~' plans for this area and the Planning Advisory Committee has been unable to resolve these so far but is attempting
~~"'C1~~ . to do so - this involves consultations with or advice from the City's Land Committee, the Engineering and Works
Department and the Provincial Department of Transportation (Highways) - the widening will have major effects on
the design of the site for the proposed car wash, possibly to the point that the proposal might even become
impractical - and Petrofina Canada Ltd. has been made aware of the situation -- and requesting that the Common
Council defer its decision on this re-zoning application until the Committee can resolve the situation and report
to Council which it will do at the earliest opportunity -- be laid on the table pending receipt of further
information from the Planning Advisory Committee.
17?.Tr;;.,~:s
/J'1.;J",'I,'n?e
'Re-!..;// / (;!c:lSD
line 7)ecJ/er.
/7S5el't::.
/fie/! fits -/er
J)r. -d1;~hPle.
.
....
Mr. R. J. Gillis, Barrister, was present on behalf of the Maritime Retail Gasoline Dealers Association
and stated that if the above matter is being referred to the Planning Advisory Committee he will make his recom-
mendations and submit his findings, and would prefer to do so, to the Committee rather than speak in the matter
at this time to Council.
Councillor A. Vincent at this time left his seat at the Council table and spoke from the podium as a
private citizen, advising that he opposes the proposed re-zoning because he thinks that before any permit for
further expansion is given that the new alignment of the new McAllister Drive should be confirmed, before we
allow anyone to build or any more permits to be issued in the new alignment of that new road.
Councillor Cave pointed out that the Council would only be giving first and second readings to the
proposed re-zoning and that before the company would have a permit to build it must meet the requirements of the
Planning Advisory Committee. He stated he understands that the company went to a great deal of cost in pur-
chasing that site, and he noted that a service station at Haymarket Square has been taken away from this company,
and he felt that the company deserves the right to build if and when it meets the requirements. He stated that
~cAllister Drive was a right-of-way of 100-foot width.
44
lI~-~~n/hff
'?e-lrtrl'ihiil
(!Dln.;;ut';j ,4'''bl
Service 17 ssoei.
~~~
/fe- ~ol7/n.1
rre-~on/n~
SeN"ce' /ls.J'oc;'
~~tL
A (?IoU S T/l/t-t:ou,
Plallh.l'lav/,s.
~/>>'".
(See t; t? tJ. :Pee. /.3,
/77~. '7? ///, 300k
7~)
Mr. Joseph Kennedy, Market Development Manager for Petrofina Canada Ltd., was present and
advised that the company does not own the property that is under discussion for re-zoning but just has it
under control. He stated that the company has spent a lot of money on this proposed site and just last
week lost the service station at Haymarket Square which was demolished in connection with the above noted
Gilbert Street ramp. He stated that while the company would like to see something happening as quickly
as possible, it has been informed by Mr. Zides of the problem with the width of McAllister Drive, and the
company will wait until that problem gets settled. He stated that the company is not opposing the
deferring of the re-zoning matter at this time.
~
.
ctoting that there is a store and a gasoline pump presently at this corner, Councillor MacGowan
asked why the re-zoning is necessary. Mr. Zides explained that this present use is non-conforming and
although it is illegal it may be permitted to continue because that use was there prior to the establish- I
ment of zoning regulations, but to rebuild or redevelopment you get into a different question.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Cave voting IInay".
The Common Clerk advised that with regard to the proposed re-zoning for Service Associates
Limited of property located at the northwest corner of Adelaide and Metcalfe Streets (Flash Muffler Ltd.)
from "RM-l" Multiple Family district to either "B-2" General Business or "I-I" Light Industrial district,
dvertising took place, and a letter of objection was received this date from Mr. Louis J. McCourt of 142
Adelaide Street, which states he would be opposed to re-zoning from residence to business classification
because no plans have been submitted for the proposal and because of the fact that the present dwelling
on this site could be repaired for tenants thereby saving one more house from being demolished where
scarcity of much needed housing now exists.
cto person was present to offer comments regarding the proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter be deferred for one week until the
Council receives a report from the Building Inspector on the condition of the building adjacent to 41
Adelaide Street.
Councillor Higgins explained that his reason for making the above motion is that a letter has
come in to the effect that the building next door could be rehabilitated and used in the North End where
housing is very limited; if the Building Inspector says that the property is on the verge of being
dangerous and dilapidated and should be demolished, that is a different matter.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with a majority of Council members casting "nay"
votes.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning property at the
northwest corner of Adelaide and Metcalfe Streets (Flash Muffler Ltd.) from "RM-l" Multiple F8lIlily
district to "I-I" Light Industrial district, be read a first time.
Councillor Kipping stated that he has inspected the property.
I
.
I
Councillor MacGowan asked for information regarding the statement in Mr. McCourt's letter that
no plans have been submitted for the proposal of Service Associates Limited for this site. Mr. Zides
replied that there are plans: simply to knock down the building to extend - there is a drawing of what
the addition would look like, and there is also a sketch to indicate the final product in relation to the
property ownership. Councillor MacGowan stated she could not go along with a solid fence because she
thinks it would be just as much an eyesore as what is there. She stated she sees the lot as an ideal lot
for high-rise or medium-rise residential use and she thinks it would be a shame to take that good site,
and she still does not feel that anything of that type of a business should be in a residential area. She
felt that if the present building is non-conforming then when it is demolished, a similar use should not .
be permitted. She stated that she will therefore vote against the motion.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors MacGowan, Higgins and Cave voting
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning property at the
northwest corner of Adelaide and Metcalfe Streets (Flash Muffler Ltd.) from "RM-l" Multiple F8lIlily
district to "I-I" Light Industrial district, be read a second time.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors MacGowan, Higgins and Cave voting
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Louis J. McCourt be received and
filed:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated August 27th, 1975,
advising that the Committee recommends that the property known as 41 Adelaide Street at the northwesterly
corner of Adelaide and Metcalfe Streets and the contiguous lot extending through to Durham Street be re-
zoned to "I-I" Light Industrial classification, pursuant to a resolution under Section 39 of the Com-
munity Planning Act tying the proposed redevelopment of this property to its proposed use as a muffler
shop and requiring that the Durham Street frontage be blocked and screened by a solid fence or wall of
four to five feet in height - and advising that the company also owns a lot fronting on Durham Street
which is contiguous to the back portion of the subject site and it is the intention to provide a driveway
off Metcalfe Street into this present vacant lot -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
~
I
I"
.
....
,...-
45
. h(,nn.;Jh ~
SIYJ/#h
:T.8rMur
Flp?~
l1?e- ;ZO~1/hf
Ilfe-fitJ/1ll1j'
.
P/.:JIII7./Uvls
{!OPlP7.
I
1(t7ee.il
~u?.t~d.
1?e-:zonh1ff
?rd-/t-Ion
In d~ee-f/o.
.
PIanI1./ldv,:
aP1l7'1.
I
I
.
lil...
The Common Clerk stated that with regard to the proposed re-zoning of an area of approximately 7.5
acres behind the Simonds Medical Centre at 243 Loch Lomond Road from "PD" Planned Development to "RM-l" Multiple
Family Residential classification, for Mr. Norman E. Smith and Mr. J. Arthur Flood, advertising took place and no
written objections to the proposed re-zoning were received. It was noted that no person was present offer
comment regarding the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of approximately 7.5 acres
behind the Simonds Medical Centre at 243 Loch Lomond Road from "PD" Planned Development district to "RM-l"
Multiple Family Residential district, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of approximately 7.5 acres
behind the Simonds Medical Centre at 243 Loch Lomond Road from "PD" Planned Development district to "RM-l"
Multiple Family Residential district, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments 'rhereto".
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee recommending
that the area of approximately 7.5 acres .behind the Simonds Medical Centre at 243 Loch Lomond Road, as shown on
the submitted print, be re-zoned from "PD" Planned Development to "RM-l" up to Three-Storey Multiple F8lIlily
Residential classification, and advising that Messrs. Norman Smith and J. Arthur Flood have made application for
this re-zoning and that the project for which the "PD" zone was created for Mr. Flood some time ago has been
abandoned, and that the property is currently held by Bay View Developments, of which Mr. Flood is one of the
principals, and that Mr. Smith is negotiating the purchase of this parcel and the remainder of the surrounding
land giving a total of 20 acres (the surrounding land is already zoned "RM-l") with the intent of sub-dividing
the 20 acres into 24 or more lots and erecting a 12-unit apartment building on each lot (each building will
contain a combination of three, two and one bedroom units; they will be prefabricated by Kent Homes and Modular
Structures, brought to the site and completed on site; timing of development is for completion by the summer of
1976) - and further advising that the Planning Advisory Committee still has a few reservations on Mr. Smith's
sub-division proposal and apartment sitings, and these can be expected to be resolved shortly so that the required
sub-division and subsequent development can proceed. -- be received and filed.
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising took place for The Rocca Group Limited re-
garding the proposed re-zoning of (a) the area between the G & R apartments on Ellerdale Street (next to the
Lebanese Club on Westmorland Road) and the intersection of Margaret Street and Ellerdale Street from "R-2" One-
and Two-Family to "RM-l" and "RM-2" Multiple F8lIlily Residential classifications, and (b) an area along and behind
the lots on the southerly side of Westmorland Road east of Margaret Street from "R-2" One- and Two-Family to "RM-
1" Multiple Family Residential classification. He stated that a petition was received from residents of West-
morland Road and Margaret Street whose properties are adjacent to the Ellerdale Place proposal for a multiple
family unit building programme, expressing their formal objection to the proposed C Unit zoning laws as they now
stand. The petition states that the proposal, as it stands, will result in an additional 21 families living in an
area approxirr~tely 200 by 325 feet including a provision for a 29-car parking lot and because of the congestion
of this many people in such a small area and the effect it will have on the petitioners' neighbourhood and on the
future valuves of their properties, they object to any further approval of these plans until they are reasonably
adjusted.
A letter, dated August 29th, 1975, from the Planning Advisory Committee, recommends that the areas so
indicated on the submitted print in the above re-zoning matter be re-zoned from "R-2" One- and Two-F8lIlily Resid-
ential district to "RM-l" up to Three-Storey Multiple Residential and "RM-2" High Rise Multiple Residential
districts, subject to the following:- (1) the zoning is to be pursuant to a resolution and agreement under
Section 39 of the Community Planning Act tying the development to the layout shown on a print being filed with
the Common Clerk and the Department of Community Planning and Development; (2) that Council enter into an agree-
ment with the developer under section 101 of the Community Planning Act to assure the performance of his proposed
landscaping as indicated on the plan filed with the Common Clerk and the proposed play areas as indicated thereon
and another plan also being filed with the Common Clerk; (3) that copies of both Agreements be filed in the
Registry Office so as to be binding on any subsequent owner of the land until discharged by the municip~lity; (4)
that upon the filing in the Registry Office of the sub-division plan which vests the proposed recreation area
shown on the plan filed with the Common Clerk, the City deed back to the Rocca Group the small area off the
easterly end of the proposed development which is being held in trust by the City pending the larger recreation
area. The letter advises that the Rocca Group proposes to construct five 97-unit eight-storey masonry apartment
buildings (325 two-bedroom and 160 three-bedroom, a total of 485 units) on the southeasterly side of what will be
an extension to Ellerdale Street, as well as eight 12-unit three-storey apartment buildings (each with two one-
bedroom and 10 two-bedroom apartments) with seven on the northwesterly side of the extension; in addition, there
would be 20 townhouses in an area lying between some of the three-storey buildings and the rear of lots fronting
on Westmorland Road - eighteen would be in the area being re-zoned - the other two would be on a lot on West-
morland Road in front of the main portion of this area - access to the 18 townhouses would be from that Road _
the most practical way of providing access to that property because of topography. The letter further advises
that approximately 2.3 acres at the southeastern corner of the development are being set aside for recreation
purposes - access to this will be by a service road to be constructed by the developer along the northern bound-
ary of the property - within the development itself, there would be two play areas on each side of the extension
of Ellerdale Street. The letter further states that the reversion of the land now being held in trust (point 4
above) could take place by the City co-signing the Sub-division Plan but not delivering the deed until the Plan
is approved here and filed in the Registry Office; that the parcel in question is Parcel P, as shown on the Sub-
division Plan which was filed in the Registry Office as File 55 No.1 on December 13, 1973; that in order to
obtain these play areas, there had to be a reduction in the off-street parking spaces which would have otherwise
een provided; that the Planning Advisory Committee accepted (by variance) the plan to layout 510 parking spaces
on the easterly side of Ellerdale Street and 110 on the westerly side compa~ed to the 606 and 120 spaces re-
spectively called for by the Zoning By-Law. The letter further states that part of the area easterly of the
roposed extension of Ellerdale Street is very steep, and careful grading will be necessary to provide more or
ess level parking areas at two grades or terraces; that there will be considerable landscaping and lawn areas to
"break-up'! or separate the various lots or areas - it is to ensure this happening that point 2 of the Committee's
ecommendation is being made. The letter states that the Committee would advise that Council amend the Zoning
46
'1?e-:toninff
1? eX:H::iiI G!roap
/-t-,{
,,( f? /YIff 1P. c,.
~ol1,,;1l~ ,,?feN'.'
R~~~rou/,
,(-i-L.
a~h, /1, YI/70'3h
W'esfmor/cwt
(J(tf~sllI70t4Mf ~
SlreeCl'};J/I?i"nff
/J'/lIn/t-if"R/ r-
1Ji#e/o~rnf/kh
~'n/n.:J ~-ACi
C!"hseh/01~/Oh
;Zone
~"nts '1fe.$.r
/fl.;lrsh q reOl
'1?e-:zon/nf
I
~
By-Law in accordance with the foregoing recommendation, and that the Municipal Planning Director reQuests
that the Common Council authorize the Common Clerk to co-sign the appropriate Sub-division Plan or Plans
which would include the proposed recreation area and the land to be reverted to the Rocca Group and
thereafter authorize the execution of the deed for the latter (Parcel P previously referred to) to the
Rocca Group.
.
Mr. Leroy R. Creamer of 245 Westmorland Road, was present in support of his letter of object-
ion, dated August 20th, 1975, a copy of which he submitted at this time, which advises as follows:- he
objects to the 21 units of "c" type housing in this proposed development; he purchased a building lot
from John Bussey of Saint John, N. B., now known as 245 Westmorland Road; when he applied to Town Plan-
ning at City Hall for a building permit he was shown a map or projection of the area, where he had
purchased the lot, and he was told at that time, that the large block of land adjacent to his lot to the
south and to the east was zoned for one- an~ two-family dwellings, also the vacant land immediately
adjacent to his property, to the east, was a proposed street, and he therefore changed his type of
dwelling to a one-family unit to comply with Town Planning by-laws, also to keep a good balance with his
neighbours; the proposal for "c" units as it now stands is going to change completely the structure and
design of the entire neighbourhood - his backyard will be adjacent to a parking lot which will mean
traffic at all hours - the proposal will have 21 families apart from current homeowners living in an area
approximately 200 feet by 325 feet including provision for a 29-car parking lot and a street; he strongly
objects to any re-zoning provision which will allow this; this is entirely too congested for a residential
area; the outlook for the future value of the existing properties will certainly deteriorate.
I
I
Mr. Ronald Merritt of 241 Westmorland Road, stated that on looking at the plan of the proposed
project, he found that the parking lot that is proposed would be practically in his back-yard and he does
not like this, and this parking lot would create a lot of traffic there through his property. He stated
his only objection is, that if the re-zoning goes through, he would like that to be fenced off, but not
at his own expense because it would reQuire a chain-link type of fence which would be costly to erect.
Councillor Higgins asked if there are trees there presently, that could add the buffer zone. Mr. Merritt
replied that there are approximately six or seven large trees at the end of his property - the rest of
the growth there is just shrubs which he presumes would be all cut down for the parking lot; these shrubs
are also at the end of his back-yard.
j~. Creamer stated that he was acting as spokesman for the above named petitioners who object .
to re-zoning for the proposed "c" type housing in this development, and that these residents strongly
object to this part of the development in Ellerdale Place, for the following reasons:- (1) the area will
be congested; (2) in the plan he has from the Department of Community Planning and Development, it is his
opinion that no sidewalks are made available; (3) the area is too small and the development is going to
affect the skyline; (4) there is no play area; (5) there will be heavy traffic; (6) there is not enough
parking provided; (7) he suspects that even the water pressure of this area could be affected as it seems
to be low at the present time. He stated that these residents do not object to all the proposed re-
zoning, but they would like to see some adjustment made to this particular part of the proposal to keep
the proposed housing in line with one- and two-family dwellings. He added that they have no objection to
the other part of the Ellerdale Place plan. Mr. Creamer was asked if either he or the petitioners had
appeared before the Planning Advisory Committee in this matter. Mr. Creamer replied in the negative.
Mr. Patrick Rocca, speaking for The Rocca Group Limited, advised that the plan for this housing
proposal shows sidewalks, although it does not use that wording on the plan; that with regard to the
point concerning parking, maybe it would be two or three single residential houses that would be affected
because the parking would be right behind them - however, the company would be prepared to put up a fence
at its own expense, and would be prepared to look at the parking layout and find a way that there would
be no cars parked close to their back-yards; that the 21 townhouses are not the company's major concern,
but all the apartment buildings, and the company is willing to co-operate with the citizens there to make
it as acceptable as possible to them. He felt that the said 21 townhouses would not change the skyline
of the area. Councillor M. Vincent referred to the re-zoning print that was submitted with the Planning
Advisory Committee's letter in this matter, and stated he thinks that probably the properties at 241 and
261 Westmorland Road is the area along with the properties at the back of Margaret Street, number 3 to
39, where they are concerned about the parking area and development area in that there is, as he knows
the area, very little tree separation or buffer zone area there. He stated he is wondering if, in the
company's planning, some consideration could be given to separating the back of those properties on
Westmorland Road and Margaret Street from the area proposed to be re-zoned. He stated he thinks that
this is one of the primary items of concern to these existing residents. In reply, Mr. Rocca stated he
is sure that the company can do this. Councillor M. Vincent suggested that perhaps a meeting between the
developers and the residents might resolve the Question.
I
.
Councillor Cave suggested that Mr. Rocca might be prepared to delay the proposed re-zoning for
a week in which time the company could meet with the residents who are opposed for the purpose of straightening
out some of these problems. Mr. Rocca replied that the ccompany cannot afford to have delayed the whole
project because of the 21 townhouses, and that he does not know whether there is a way, legally, that the
Council can approve the remainder of the re-zoning area and have the delay just on the townhouses section
of the re-zoning.
Mr. Creamer stated that there remain unanswered a couple of questions in his own letter:
apparently the proposed street has been purchased by the Rocca Group or something - he was told pre-
viously that this was the proposed street, and he noted that now the company is proposing to place there
a three-unit townhouse on it. He stated that he strongly objects to this being done.
I
Mr. Creamer and his group, and Mr. Rocca, at this time agreed to withdraw from the meeting and
to confer together, and then come back to the Council meeting for further discussion of the matter of
this proposed re-zoning.
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the City staff check the records concerning the name "West-
morland Road" because he understands that twenty-five years ago this was called "Old Westmorland Road";
he would like the City staff to determine whether or not it was advertised by Council resolution that the
name was changed to "Westmorland Road". He felt that the name was not changed from "Old Westmorland
Road", and stated that his point is that, if it is still "Old Westmorland Road" the re-zoning advertising
was erroneous in referring to this re-zoning as involving land in the area of "Westmorland Road", and if
there is any way of resolving the problem by saying "and/or". The Mayor noted that this reQuest will be
complied with.
The Common Clerk advised that with respect to the proposed amending of the Zoning By-Law to
establish a new class of zone and regulations therefor to be known as "c" Conservation Zone, and the
proposed re-zoning of land in the Saint1s Rest Marsh area to lie" Conservation classification, and the
proposed amending of Schedule 2-A, the future land use plan of the Municipal Development Plan, to include
all of the area proposed for re-zoning, as Open Space, these changes had been advertised and the public
.
~
,....
4}
. .z017i175
:B!f-kw
~f/n5erl/a-
-tlon Zoh
S.;Jlds '*
/I!a~hdlre.
l1i'e-~DJ?;J7j'
lIJt(h/C~/
.,kV6"~pme.
JJ/.;m
I ;/glJ17 7?
~/h1ep'p.C
F (;.prd,n
~",ve//
.E~;t/, ~r"
WII/a 7--f
fir/fit-
.
I
hearing had been held, and people had reQuested permission to appear again - which reQuest the Council acceded
to, and those people are now present at this meeting to speak on the matter. He stated that, in addition, two
letters have been received in support of the proposed changes, namely:- from Mary Majko of Caledonia Mountain,
Hillsborough, N. B., and from the Major Samuel Holland Branch of the United Empire Loyalists Association of
Canada (Which latter letter was received just prior to this meeting, today).
It was noted that a letter, dated June 17th, 1975, from the Planning Advisory Committee, noting that
the Council has received a number of objections to the Planning Advisory Committee's recommendation based on
tudies by the Planning Department in consultation with the Recreation and Parks Department that the Saint's Rest
Marsh area be established as a conservation zone, and that the Council has also received support for the idea
from various individuals, and conservationist and naturalist groups in the area. The letter submits for Council's
information, copies of three recent letters respectively from the Deputy Minister of the Provincial Department of
Natural Resources, the Director of Environmental Services for the province and the Deputy Director of the Fish-
eries Research Board in St. Andrews, which support the conservation of the Saint's Rest Marsh area.
Mr. John P. Palmer, Q. C., was present on behalf of Mr. F. Gordon Carvell and Mr. Carvell's sisters,
Mrs. Edith Payne and Mrs. Willa P. Hoyt. He advised that Mr. Carvell's farm lies immediately to the west of the
Saint's Rest Marsh area and sort of closes the Marsh on the west, and the proposal includes re-zoning; that a
substantial portion of Mr. Carvell's property which is not marsh at all but which is a spur of upland as a buffer
zone to the proposed conservation area itself; that Mr. Carvell with his said two sisters Own about 21 acres of
the Marsh proper which is one farm over to the east of the above mentioned property of Mr. Carvell. He stated
that he has stressed in the past, and by letter, that this whole proposal, arising as it does from a letter from
a non-resident, and a canvass of a few people whose property is not affected is, he submits, impractical and
improper and should be rejected by the Common Council. He stated that he suggested in the past, and repeats, that
it should be rejected because it amounts to an expropriation of valuable urban land, for all practical purposes,
and without compensation - to take 75 to 100 acres of a person's property worth on today's market somewhere
between $1,000.00 and $5,000.00 an acre and say it cannot be used for anything is a pretty serious blow to
anybody, he pointed out. He stated he also suggested, and repeats, that this proposal comes too late - the
Saint's Rest was Quite a delightful spot twenty-five years ago and that since then, everything has conspired to
make it a real swamp - it is not a marsh, but a swamp - it has been ravaged by adjacent developments and is
flooded by sewage and as the city has been growing up there has been more and more sewage channeled towards this
area and at high tides just wash it back Over the marsh. He pointed out that twenty years ago it was possible to
go duck-shooting there, but just recently, in the winter, when he walked on it, he could not stand the stench.
He stated that he submits, also, and repeats, that a nature preserve is inconsistent with the utilization of this
area for the treatment of sewage from the whole of the western part of the city - proposals envisage pumping
sewage into Saint's Rest Marsh from as far away as the Spruce Lake Industrial Park and that line from the Park
immediately on the Lorneville Road, or King William Road, is nearly complete - and even from the remote part of
the Lorneville Industrial Park, several miles further west, it is all to be drained into the Saint's Rest Marsh.
He stated he cannot see anything more inconsistent than sewage, especially industrial waste and sewage and
birdlife conservation and conservation of plants - when you get this foul emanation from an industrial plant the
natural plants cannot grow; he submits that it is entirely inconsistent; he has heard for some years of projects
whereby the effluent from the Irving pulp mill, the Kimberly-Clark mill and the other brewery will be channeled
into this area, as well - he heard this in Fredericton from the Water Authority people up there - it is not a
definite plan, but it is a project that is under consideration; therefore, he has submitted, and repeats, that
the proposal is incompatible with these other long-range plans, and the Master Plan of the City as regards
sewerage development shows this very clearly. He stated that because he has already said these things (in his
letter to the Common Council, dated June 31st, 1975), he proposed to address his remarks at this meeting chiefly
to the proposed re-zoning of that part of Mr. Carvell's personal farm which is included in the re-zoning for
buffer purposes.
Mr. Palmer stated that the upland involved is approximately 70 to 80 acres, and includes about 14 acres
of marsh in Mr. Carvell's property there; that this is heavily wooded land at present but, physically, it is a
spur of upland rising to 100 feet - the map in this report is very wrong - the contour map is in complete con-
flict with the Provincial plan of this property which shows a contour of 100 feet south of the throughway and 178
feet at the Manawagonish Road; that this spur of land is shown on the present Master Plan as Light Industrial
land, and he submits that it should remain in that classification - this land is suitable for that and access has
been provided by an access road parallel to the Saint John throughway which leads as far as Mr. Carvell's pro-
perty; that this road has been cleared and grubbed but has not as yet been gravelled - the grubbing was done
within the last few months. He stated that the only reason for inclusion of Mr. Carvell's upland in the proposed
. conservation area is because part of it and only a part of what has been included in this zoning drains towards
the Marsh - almost half of what is included in the re-zoning does drain that way, at all, which the detailed
contour plans will show on scrutiny. He advised that the drainage basin of the Saint's Rest Marsh follows this
approximate boundary:- commencing on the Manawagonish Road near the Gault Road, it follows the approximate line
of the Manawagonish Road to Main Street and down Main Street to Lancaster Avenue, to the Sand cove Road, and
close to the line of Sand Cove Road, all the way to Saint's Rest; that whole area drains towards the Marsh, and
just because part of Mr. Carvell's 70-odd acres drains towards the Marsh the City is condemning this land to the
same treatment as the Marsh itself - he submits that is a grievous error and a grave discrimination against one
land owner. He stated that in all the whole buffer area this is the only substantial piece of land that is so
treated - that is, in the whole area subject to re-zoning - Mr. Carvell seems to have been selected out of
I hundreds of owners of lands in the drainage basin and many others in the area - for instance, they did not re-
zone Taylor's Island, half of which drains towards the Marsh as much as does Mr. Carvell's land - the Taylor
peninsula, belonging to Irving's, was not scheduled for re-zoning under the proposed by-law - but you take Mr.
Carvell's property which is similar in the sense that part of it drains towards the Marsh, and it is slated for
conservation and reduced to nothing as in value by this kind of re-zoning. He submitted that he cannot see that
the addition of this very small fraction of upland to re-zoned area is of much help to the birds or to the plants
on the Marsh; in regard to the miles of area that drain towards it, anyway, most of it completely urbanized. He
submitted that including Mr. Carvell's upland constitutes discrimination and that if the re-zoning is to be done
at all - and he submits that it should not be done - he submitted that it should commence at Mr. Carvell's
I eastern boundary, not his western boundary.
t77~. ~ Mr. Adrian B. Gilbert, Q. C., was present representing J. D. Irving Limited, the owner of 574 acres in
1"101)7 . the area under discussion, and referred the Council to his previous letter of June 20th, 1975 to the Council in
~Jltr~/7~4. which he set forth the position of this client. He stated that this land was purchased for an industrial purpose
~-22~I'~/J?t? and it is intended now to be put to an industrial purpose - the largest industry in the West Side will need this
. - ,/ area, and if you want to develop industries in an industrial city, that is the way to do it: let them go ahead
~~~ and develop their lands as they find it necessary. He stated that to take this valuable land - over half a
million dollars in land - plus Mr. Carvell's land and convert it into a place for bird watchers and birds, and
mOSQuitoes, and all other things that accompany marshland - if the City thinks that is commonsense and in the
interests of the citizens of Saint John, he thinks the Council will find a great many people will disagree with
. it. He stated that it is inevitable that if this proposed re-zoning should be given third reading and should be
placed on the municipal statute books or by-laws, that there will have to be litigation to protect J. D. Irving
Limited. He stated that the Council knows the circumstances fully, and he cannot believe that this Council would
act so contrary to the interests of the citizens and the industrial development of the city, as to do what is
proposed. He stated that he is shocked by the whole idea,"! and that if Mr. Carvell alone was involved it would be
wrong to do it this way, and he feels that with a large industry involved in this, in the purchase of this land a
ll....
48
~
;z,hlh!J~-~
tbl7.ser~/on
2tPhe
S~iJTI.s If'e$r
//ldrsh _rea
:7Ie- ;zon/hf
few years ago and needing it for future development, it is little short of madness.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he wished to go on record as saying that the Land Committee dealt
with one owner (the Edward Carvell Estate) and no decision was made, but we have been dealing with one
owner and it is not Mr. Gilbert's client. He stated that what he sees here we are trying to do - he wants
to go on record that he is opposed to this because this is expropriation without compensation; that if the
City wanted that land it should at least sit down and expropriate it and that is fair with him, and then
go to the Land Compensation Board and argue the price per inch of what that land is worth. He stated that
he is firmly convinced that the company involved has spent over half a million dollars and needs it for
the expansion of trying to improve the odours, et cetera, of the pulp mill at the Reversing Falls and that
is why this company spent over $500,000.00 for land. He felt that if the City wants that land it should
not just make it into a place for mosQuitoes but it should at least expropriate it and go to the Land
Compensation Board for evaluation of it, if the City wants it, but he does not think this is far. He
noted that the City would be putting this land into a use that no-one could use it and he thinks that is
not fair and he is shocked that it could happen in Canada. He stated that he is completely opposed to
"freezingll people's lands without compensation.
Councillor Gould noted that. there is already land owned by the Irvings in the area that is
already zoned for Park and is not allowed to be industrialized at the present time. Mr. Zides confirmed
that .this is so, on the Taylor peninsula, stating that a very large part of this area has been zoned Park
for some time; if an individual or a company wanted to use it for industrial purposes they would have.to
come back to Council for re-zoning. He explained that what is different about this matter is that some of
the properties at the edge on the uplands that drain into the Marsh are proposed to be put into the new
Conservation zone and the so-called areas that are zoned now for Park are also proposed to be put into
this new Conservation zone - it is hardly true to say that the land cannot be used - the uses that have
been made of it - farming, excavations, logical tree cutting, and even one-family housing construction is
permissible, or could be permissible. He stated he thinks that the points brought out on behalf of Mr.
Carvell are that perhaps too much of the area he owns is being proposed to be taken into this Conservation
zone - and the contour mapping is wrong, because it is the same mapping that comes from Fredericton, but
it is possible that in this small scale it might have gone wrong someplace. He stated he thinks that,
basically, what we are talking about is a disagreement as to the extent of the land to be brought into the
Conservation zone - he does not think it is right at all to say that the area is no longer suitable for
conservation purposes, not if he can believe the many letters he has on hand from everybody from the
Deputy Minister of Environment and Chief of Environmental Services, and so on. He quoted from recent
letters he received:- from Mr. SQuires of the lIew Brunswick Museum, "I found the Saint's Rest Marsh to be
an ideal resting place and breeding ground for water fowl and marsh birds and in my writings for this past
thirty-year period are to be found numerous references to both the commoner and the rarer species which
have been located there."; from the Chief Park Naturalist of Fundy lIational Park, "I and others have
tramped this area many times but never cease to be amazed at the amount and variety of life one might find
there."; from Northeastern Maritime Regional Editor of "American Birds", "The marsh is still extensive
enough to attract large numbers of herons, water fowl and shore birds, both breeders and migrants, and
undoubtedly constitutes one of the best examples of such habitat on the Fundy shores.". He stated that he
could continue with Quotes like those, from naturalists, from people in government,i.and so on. With
regard to the Question about the use of the area for waste treatment plants, Mr. Zides stated it is one
that has not been ignored in the report - in fact, it is essential if you are going to make the two things
work together that any additional work that is done on arPollution control centre should be done in
relation to the conservation of the rest of the area - it can be done, it is a Question of doing it right
and he thinks that this type of problem has arisen in the past where something similar has been done, in
connection with the Hazen Creek sewage treatment plant.
Councillor Hodges stated that when he was Quite young the Saint's Rest Marsh area did not
contain any of the debris and items such as rusting cars that he observed there this past week-end when he
inspected the area - he feels that this area is disgraceful in its present condition, although at the
present time he did not detect any odour. He stated that he would like to see the Marsh restored somewhat
to as it was in the past, and to see the birds and deer that were there, return again to that area some-
what. He stated he would have a hard time understanding that anybody would put any buildings down in that
area because it would sink out of sight pretty fast there; although he felt that maybe the sloping hill
going back towards the Greenwood cemetery in the gravel pit is suitable for building, but where the water
is or where the Marsh is he thinks that area should be reserved for conservation. Mr;. Zides..pointed.
out that the Planning Advisory Committee is saying more or less the same thing.
Councillor Cave noted that the word "industrial" was used at great length at this meeting by Mr.
Gilbert and by Mr. Palmer, and also by Councillor A. Vincent, and stated that he wanted to assure the
Council that he has been asked by the people in the Island View Heights and the Gault Road, after reading
some of the comment (about this matter now being discussed) in the local newspaper, about this matter, and
he advised that the Council would have the biggest delegation it ever had if it wanted to re-zone that for
industry, because those residents have the cleanest air of any place in the city area. Councillor Cave
stated that he is in favour of the suggestion that there be a conservation area in that particular Marsh
area.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar.as it concerns (a) amending the said by-law to
establish a new class of zone and regulations therefor to be known as "c" Conservation Zone; (b) re-zoning
as a "c" Conservation Zone the following described area: "Bounded on the north by the Saint John Through-
way; bounded on the south by the Bay of Fundy; bounded on the west by a line beginning 600 feet northerly
on the westerly boundary of the G. Carvell property (at Manawagonish Cove and opposite the Gault Road
intersection) from the shore of the Bay of Fundy; thence running diagonally across the said property to
the intersection of the easterly boundary of the property and the said Throughway; bounded on the east by
a line being the intersection of the southerly prolongation of the easterly boundary of the Dorothy Pierce
property and the shore of the Bay of Fundy; thence northerly along the said prolongation to Sand Cove
Road; thence easterly along the said road 750 feet; thence northerly 1300 feet, along a line parallel to
the common boundary of a property owned by_J<.-D. Irving, and gravel pit lands owned by the Province;
thence turning an angle containing 222.degrees and running diagonally across lands of the Province to
Greenwood Cemetery." -- be read a first time.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
Referring to Mr. Palmer's letter of July 31st, 1975 addressed to the Common Council regarding
the matter under discussion, Councillor Kipping stated he believes that Mr. Palmer at the end of that
letter has arrived at the wrong conclusion, because after reading that letter, the conclusion Councillor .
Kipping came to was that it would be better if we cleaned the Marsh up and provided a better sewage
treatment plant over there than allow to continue what is happening there right now - therefore, he
believes that Mr. Palmer's conclusion was an inappropriate one to arrive at after reading his excellent
letter. With reference to the point made at this meeting about "freezing" land without compensation,
~
,....
49
.
Councillor Kipping stated that if the Council wants to talk about such a subject, it has at the same time to
talk about, at the same time, "freezing land without development, and this applies to some of those parties who
at the moment are.objecting to this.re~zoning. 'He ptatedthat there.~p a sch~ethat.he learned about only
recently, whereby the Federal Canadian Wildlife Service will take over certain areas as conservation areas and
when they finally take something over the necessary financial resources are then made available to develop it
properly as a proper conservation area - this means that the proper financial resources to do a proper job
(regarding this particular Marsh area) might well be made available from the Canadian Wildlife Service. He
feels that this is something that the City should look into a little more closely, and he expressed the wish
that Mr. Zides would do that if he has not already done so; he added that he will attempt, at the same time, to
obtain information from people whom he knows in the Canadian Wildlife Service.
I
Councillor Pye stated he felt that Mr. Gilbert drew rather an odious comparison between the Saint's
Rest Marsh as a conservation area as opposed to it being the site of a hugh industrial complex. He stated that
he contends that the time has come when we must consider a halt to industrial expansion within our boundaries
because industrial expansion has now reached a point where, because of its resultant pollution of our waterways
and the very air we breathe, a multiplicity of our citizenry are deserting our city and settling beyond our
borders in order to find an atmosphere that is free from the odour and pollution of our industry. He felt that
our city is beginning to strangle in its Own industrial expansion.
I
Councillor MacGowan stated she feels that what the Deputy Director of Environment's letter says in the
subject matter is very informative; she noted that his letter mentions that of 60,000 acres of salt marsh known
to have existed in Nova Scotia, some 30,000 acres have already been reclaimed, and that he suggests that we
should be taking these steps and that it is in the best interests of the community, and also in his letter, that
he says that "our personal viewpoint is it is the long term benefits which will accrue to the city and the
region conservation of the Saint's Rest Marsh will far outweigh any short-term profit realized by developers".
She stated that she feels that this is very important. She noted that we need industry but we do have ind-
ustrial parks and there are other areas, but this apparently is our very life - to preserve Saint's Rest. She
noted that all these letters say how pleased they are that the Planning Advisory Committee has taken this
forward-looking step and planning now to preserve that area - even though so much damage has been done, she
feels it is better late than never, to preserve it.
.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Re-;zo;,/~
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns (a) amending the said by-law to
establish a new class of zone and regulations therefor to be known as "c" Conservation Zone; (b) re-zoning as a
"c" Conservation Zone the following described area: "Bounded on the north by the Saint John Throughway; bounded
n the south by the Bay of Fundy; bounded on the west by a line beginning 600 feet northerly on the westerly
boundary of the G. Carvell property (at Manawagonish Cove and opposite the Gault Road intersection) from the
hore of the Bay of Fundy; thence running diagonally across the said property to the intersection of the easterly
boundary of the property and the said Throughway; bounded on the east by a line being the intersection of the
southerly prolongation of the easterly boundary of the Dorothy Pierce property and the shore of the Bay of
Fundy; thence northerly along the said prolongation to Sand Cove Road; thence easterly along the said road 750
feet; thence northerly 1300 feet along a line parallel to the common boundary of a property owned by J. D.
Irving, and gravel pit lands owned by the Province; thence turning an angle containing 222 degrees and running
diagonally across lands of the Province to Greenwood Cemetery." -- be read a second time.
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and Parfitt voting "nay".
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John
and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
1Jff417/'ei;?N /
:lJeve/oe -
l'I7ent- Wem
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan
By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan so that the following
described area be shown as "Open Space" classification: "Bounded on the west by a line beginning 600 feet
northerly on the westerly boundary of the G. Carvell property (at Manawagonish Cove and opposite the Gault Road
intersection) from the shore of the Bay of Fundy; thence running diagonally across the said property to the
intersection of the easterly boundary of the property and the said Throughway; bounded on the east by a line
being the intersection of the southerly prolongation of the easterly boundary of the Dorothy Pierce property and
the shore of the Bay of Fundy; thence northerly along the said prolongation to Sand Cove Road; thence easterly
along the said road 750 feet; thence northerly 1300 feet along a line parallel to the common boundary of a
property owned by J. D. Irving, and gravel pit lands owned by the Province; thence turning an angle containing
222 degrees and running diagonally across lands of the Province to Greenwood Cemetery." -- be read a first time.
.
I
-~:~-.,. '~";.c.c:CoimciIlor<lA;, Yind,ent \stated that he ,'feels' that .if.. .theuCi-cy ~wants '~to. 'choose'a ilp0t. .and, .say it is going
to-be a Conservation area, the City should be prepared to buy it and use it as that. Councillor A. Vincent felt
that the city is open for industry, and that the Council has to realize that Saint John is the only city in
Canada, and probably the only city in North America, with this population, that has within its boundaries
- whether we like it or not - two pulp mills, a sugar refinery, a dry dock, an oil refinery and two breweries
and this is the basis for a heavy industrial area, and that the City should take advantage of this. He added that
within the city boundaries, we have the best labour force, bar none, in North America. He felt that we should
harness this and set out an industrial park and take advantage of it. He stated he does not think we ever have
too much work'- he thinks we can train young people and they want to be trained, and he thinks we have the basis
here for a real good city, and rather than make all these restricting laws and regulations of this type the City
should determine where all these sewerage services are going to empty that the City has called tenders for, and on
which the City in the last few years has spent millions of dollars. Councillor A. Vincent asked if all the
projects that we have under way now - the West Side collector sewer and all that is mentioned in the letter from
"IT. Palmer, and all that the Council knows about - will be handled by the existing sewage treatment plant over
there. He received a negative reply, and thereupon asked where we are going to go to take care of all the
effluent. Mr. Barfoot replied that the answer is to expand the treatment that is available at the lagoon whereby
it would be an expansion of the area or by some other method of expansion - that is the location where the sewage
will be treated so that when it finally discharges into Manawagonish Creek it will be treated. Councillor A.
Vincent felt that the Marsh area under discussion is the proper place for the second sewage lagoon.
I
.
Councillor Kipping stated that he agrees completely with the previous statement made during the fore-
going discussion, that there are industrial parks where industry should locate.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and Parfitt voting "nay".
lrl...
50
~
I1'/d/"f/.lfldj * 0
~.I' SdPJliel h6/A
:/!r., v".KMfJ..Ioyal- Major Samuel Holland Branch of
i#/JsSt>t:. Palmer, Q. C., be received and
nhl7 ~ 761mel';6I.
S~IV~9:~ !l/SPD5D/ where
/1Je/l/llsterr. that a
J;,JiIlff. ~,.A-
lIIun/ci ~/
:J) eve;;' r men
'P/~n
S.;J/I7~.s Rest-
1I1.;m~h ~,.eQ/
Re>CCil 6lrtJf,tI''''
,Hlerd.;l/e Sf;
Dl rea
1(e- ^Oh t'J1.f
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal
Plan By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan so that the
following described area be shown as "Open Space" classification: "Bounded on the north by the Saint
John Throughway; bounded on the south by the Bay of Fundy; bounded on the west by a line beginning
600 feet northerly On the westerly boundary of the G. Carbell property (at Manawagonish Cove and
opposite the Gault Road intersection) from the shore of the Bay of Fundy; thence running diagonally
across the said property to the intersection of the easterly boundary of the property and the said
Throughway; bounded on the east by a line being the intersection of the southerly prolongation of the
easterly boundary of the Dorothy Pierce property and the shore of the Bay of Fundy; thence. northerly
along the said prolongation to Sand Cove Road; thence easterly along the said road 750 feet; thence
northerly 1300 feet along a line parallel to the common boundary of a property owned by J. D. Irving,
and gravel pit lands owned by the Province; thence turning an angle containing 222 degrees and running
diagonally across lands of the Province to Greenwood Cemetery." -- be read a second time.
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, which was not seconded, that the matter be tabled
until the Council can obtain some information regarding where these industrial parks are emptying their
sewers.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
Read a second time. the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letters,
the United Empire Loyalist Association of Canada,
filed.
from Mary Majko, the
and from Mr. John P.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Common Council be provided with information regarding
the sewage from McAllister Industrial Park, and so on, is presently emptying. The Mayor replied
report in this regard will be obtained.
Mr. Rocca and l~. Creamer indicated that they were ready to report back to Council, having
consulted in the matter of the proposed re-zoning for townhouses in the Ellerdale Street area. Mr. Rocca
advised that The Rocca Group Limited has agreed to delete townhouses numbers 19, 20 and 21 and leave that
area as green space and has further agreed to have townhouse number c-18 at least 30 feet from the ad-
joining property line, and the company has agreed to supply a fence at the company's expense behind every
property on Westmorland Road and Margaret Street. He stated that it is his understanding that with those
agreements, there would be no objection to the proposed re-zoning. Mr. Creamer stated that Mr. Rocca said
he would never build any house or dwelling on this site where it was proposed to situate townhouses
numbers 19, 20 and 21. He stated that the petitioners are now satisfied with the said agreements, as
stated.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend.The Zoning
By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning (a) the area
between the G & R apartments on Ellerdale Street (next to the Lebanese Club on Westmorland Road) and the
intersection of Margaret Street and Ellerdale Street from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district
to "RM-l" up to Three-Storey Multiple Residential and "RM-2" High Rise Multiple Residential districts, and
(b) an area along and behind the lots on the southerly side of Westmorland Road east of Margaret Street
from "R-2" One- and Two-Family district to "RM-l" Multiple Family Residential district, be read a second
time.
11'an17. /I d ,,/.s .
~ l~. Barfoot stated he does not believe that the Planning Advisory Committee was aware of the
on?~. following information when it considered the above named proposed development at Ellerdale Place, namely,
~ / ' that this development is on the Dutchman's Creek storm sewer area and that this storm sewer is completely
.vufehmiill?~ at capacity now and further development on it will cause problems with surcharging of the storm sewerage
~/'ef!!K 5101"'" down through the valley of this Creek towards the Courtenay Bay causeway. He added that, unfortunately,
he does not believe this matter was brought to the ~ttention of the people concerned up until this time.
~elVe~ C1~eD1 He stated that something has to be worked out on this particular storm sewer - he would think it can be.
l?~~~nG1<<~~1( worked out in connection with the other servicing. Mr. Zides noted that this matter will be placed with
./ ~ the other service problems for resolution before the sub-division plan is approved. Councillor Gould asked
if there will be sufficient water for fire fighting purposes when this development gets under way, and if
the City is prepared to make sure that the water is sufficient for fire fighting purposes in the area.
~~fer jP"ess~ Mr. Barfoot replied that the servicing plans for this development would have to be approved by the Works
~. Department and this would be one of the concerns - that there is adequate water pressure for both domestic
~'re ;V~1fe~t716n supply and for fire fighting. Councillor Gould asked if that would be done before the development, or
after. It was noted that this would have to be done before the sub-division was approved. Mr. Zides
pointed out that there really would be a couple of stages here: both stages would reQuire sub-division
approval because Ellerdale Street as shown on the plan still is not there; there should be an attempt to
package the whole thing because you are going to be doing the development in two phases - the massive bulk
of the building will be in the later phase while the first phase is the fifteen 12-unit townhouses and the
rest of the project, of around 600 units will come afterwards. He stated that he thinks that the design
aspect which is just being talked about at the joint staff meetings on sub-divisions and an agreement will
have to be reached between the Works Department and Mr. Rocca's engineers so that the services will be
adequate to meet the City's requirements. He added that the Fire Chief attends the said sub-division
meetings.
$u.6-r;l"vi.si~n
reFjC(; ,..ement oS
Councillor Pye stated that he would oppose the request of the Rocca Group that Ellerdale Place
~ J1 i~o~ f?~e be re-zoned to permit the erection of multiple dwellings and high rise apartment buildings on the fol-
6~ t: -' lowing grounds;- it will be approximately two years hence before adeQuate schools, power and telephone
facilities can be pro~ided for the project and the present water supply in this area is reported to be
critical for fire fighting which makes the entire venture both premature and hazardous; in addition to
this, an abnormal traffic congestion will occur which could seriously clog our already burdened eastern
traffic arteries.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Theretoll.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"...
51
.
I
1?e- Aol7/n
WOCCOl
droey.J ,(6
.tfI/el"a<2je
St-; .;;J 1'>eOi/
I
7J12P'Jn,/ldvl
aPlIn.
.
I
.
I
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning (a) the area between the G & R
apartments on Ellerdale Street (next 'to the Lebanese Club on Westmorland Road) and the intersection of Margaret
Street and Ellerdale Street from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to "RM-l" up to Three-Storey
Multiple Residential and "&\1-2" High Rise Multiple Residential districts, and (b) an area along and behind the
lots on the southerly side of Westmorland Road east of Margaret Street from "R-2" One- and Two-Family district to
"RM-l" Multiple Family Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Pye voting "nay".
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto",
was read in its entirety at this time.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation contained in the letter dated
August 29th, 1975 from the Planning Advisory Committee, the re-zoning of the areas that are being re-zoned at
Ellerdale Place for The Rocca Group Limited from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" up to Three-
Storey Multiple Residential and "RM-2" High Rise Multiple Residential classifications, be subject to the fol~
lowing conditions:- (1) the zoning is pursuant to a resolution and agreement under Section 39 of the Community
Planning Act tying the development to the layout shown on a print being filed with the Common Clerk and the
Department of Community Planning and Development; (2) that the Common Council enter into an agreement with the
developer under Section 101 of the Community Planning Act to assure the performance of his proposed landscaping
as indicated on the plan filed with the Common Clerk and the proposed play areas as indicated thereon and another
plan also being filed with the Common Clerk; (3) that copies of both Agreements be filed in the Registry Office
so as to be binding on any subseQuent owner of the land until discharged by the municipality; (4) that upon the
filing in the Registry Office of the sub-division plan which vests the proposed recreation area shown on the plan
filed with the Common Clerk, the City deed back to the Rocca Group the small area off the easterly end of the
proposed development which is being held in trust by the City pending the larger recreation area -- and also
subject to the following conditions to which Mr. Pat Rocca committed the developer verbally at this meeting:- the
developer will delete townhouses numbers 19, 20 and 21 and leave that area as green space; the developer will
locate townhouse number c-18 at least 30 feet from the adjoining property line; the developer will supply a fence
at the developer's expense behind every property on Westmorland Road and Margaret Street; the developer will
never build any house or dwelling on the site where it was proposed to situate townhouses numbers 19, 20 and 21
(WhiCh is to be retained as green space).
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Pye voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like the Council to deal in public session of this meeting with
the item known as Item 13 that appears on the Committee of the Whole agenda of this meeting. The Council members
did not comply with this reQuest.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~~k
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the eighth day of
September, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Higgins, Hodges, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye,
A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief
Engineer of Operations, Engineering and Works Department, H. Ellis,
Assistant to the City Manager, J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administra
tion and Supply, Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides, Commissioner of
Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector, D. French,
Director of Personnel and Training, P. Clark, Fire Chief, E. W. Ferguson,
Chief of Police, C. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, R. Thompson,
Chief of Rehabilitation Services, Community Planning and Development Department
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
. ~1'''P'J~eef'~- The Mayor noted that the first annual Volunteers-Important
~~~o~~ to 14th this year for the purpose of thanking hundreds of volunteers
~e' 1L7l'e city and all across Canada and who, through their efforts, saVe time
'}~~ in appreciation of the work of these volunteers.
....
People Week is being held from September 7th
who participate in organizations in this
and money to the taxpayers. The Mayor spoke
,.,
52
e()UI7.II()d~~ s
SIr/ire
~".;lt;t' ill 1fIi're-
Cd/pie ,I'-t-L
,
\e'Uh<!/lh7ln
(!()I"I'e~l-~d
&17~I'b7f-",Wl
3 Field 1i'0/
(7/,e AOYd/ -
t!oo/od"Ihffl
/!/h'ea ChtllnifA1
&"d~ A-i-d.
C.;/k/um c/'~,,/
ro,;,Ji G/p'/,Ik.;1t-ioJ'/
.Eq(,WlI~hE /e1tk
$tef/kn Coh~.
Ce:>. A"~I/l
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council held on
August 25th last, be confirmed.
Councillor Hodges referred to the section of the above named minutes which records discussion
pertaining to the incident at the Canada Wire & Cable Limited plant on August 7th, 1975 when a Police
Department constable decided not to cross the picket line and asked to have someone come out from the
company building to see him about the breakage of six windows at the said plant premises. He noted that
during that discussion he has been recorded as saying, "Councillor Hodges commented that on reading the
correspondence from the Chief of Police in this matter he feels that the constable performed his duties
in the manner that he knew, and there was lack of supervision and therefore he does not see any reason
why this officer should be chastised in the manner as has been done by City staff....". He stated he
believes he stated "...he does not see any reason why an officer should be chastised in the manner as has
been done by a City Councillor.". He stated that he does not chastise the City staff in public - it is
not his policy. The Mayor advised that the minutes will be so corrected.
~
.
I
I
.)
I
.
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that tenders I
~J1~1' cl~ were called for the construction of sanitary sewers as follows:- Myles Drive, 10-inch - 8-inch; Garnett
~~eJ" cr. ~ Road, 10-inch - 8-inch; 8-inch watermain -- which are included in the 1975 Capital Programme, and that
~ the lowest tender was sixteen per cent above the Engineer's estimate for this work, and that this tender
/I1!f(eS ~Il, t:-dM et all the tendering requirements -- and recommending that the contract be awarded to the low bidder,
~~. i~~~"~/1? Gerald J. Ryan & Company Limited in the amount of $76,812.50 -- be received and filed and the recom-
t7e/'l:il'd Y:1?!fd~ mendation adopted.
~o_ ~~~. On motion of Councillor Hodges
/J1/l?hrh(y J"ef'O'
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council held on
September 2nd last, be confirmed.
The Mayor advised that the Common Council has had prepared a resolution of congratulations to
The 3 Field Regiment (The Loyal Company), and that present at this time from that Regiment were Colonel
James Turnbull, Honourary Lieutenant-Colonel of the Regiment, Colonel Ronald M. Fitzpatrick, commander of
the Regiment, Major A. Robert W. Lockhart, Major W. R. MacNeil, and an honour guard of four Artillerymen
from the Regiment, two of whom were dressed in Colonial period uniform, and two in Canadian Armed Forces
dress rmiform.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALL COME, OR MAY IN ANY WISE CONCERN, GREETING:
BECAUSE we have been informed that The 3 Field Regiment (The Loyal Company) has been awarded
the Commandant's Challenge Cup for the period 1974-1975 (this trophy is awarded to the winner of the
National Regimental Gun Practice Competition);
AND WHEREAS John Colville, the founder of The 3 Field Regiment (The Loyal Company) in 1793, was
a member of the original Common Council of the City of Saint John;
AND WHREAS John Colville can be considered a direct lineal colleague of this present Council,
)
we feel a particular kinship with 3 Field Regiment (The Loyal Company):
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council, here in session, vote to congratulate the
Regiment and commend the officers and men of The 3 Field Regiment (The Loyal Company) on their achieve-
ment."
The Mayor thereupon extended the congratulations of the Common Council and the citizens of
Saint John to Colonel Fitzpatrick and to all members of the Regiment in the work of the Regiment in
winning this gunnery competition in the years 1974 and 1975, held at the Armed Forces base at Gagetown,
N. B., and spoke warmly of the loyalty shown to the City of Saint John by this Regiment since it was
founded. Colonel Fitzpatrick was accompanied in this presentation by Gunner Nason, who was attired in
period uniform of the Regiment.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, approval be granted for payment of the invoice from Allied Chmeical Canada, Ltd. in the total
amount of $7,787.05, for the purchase and application of liQuid calcium chloride to gravel roads in the
outlying areas of the city.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
given for payment of the invoice from Stephen Construction Company Limited, dated August 18th, 1975, for
supplying rental of eQuipment to the Works Department for the period August 1st to 15th, 1975, in the
amount of $2,472.00.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the report for July of the Street Division of the
Engineering and Works Department, be received and filed.
.
~
,...
e I1spb/c
s-tepA;; n
e(N'7pi~<<.
et?, ~
1-GI<<-tt'I1e.1
Y'(Z <;;/
CJ,iH/eK5
(Itf~:2).J-t~
7i!np{e/l
I <#'t'eFttd
.z.;J~.s1 pi e.
/"6lS!71Jt?tpa
+e~
lI/etl"/7 (!r7n
s~rU<d/'n
A-t-,!.
.
I
Fr'nal?ci<i11
St-~mr2wt.
Sf4t-K/V.
DJtf/'lt?emeld
.C.;,I'/o ,/ .hl.
~d
::l>obj,in
14~t;i
JJI/~/~
~-i,{
L.1<.F.E:.
l/;;;runO
$ euldfl1!
/;.eat-#9;e.
'P/.>mr
eOt?R/re!f
1ls.sl7d~5
~.fr.L
1d/ff'hI, efc. 2.
(10/1. Sea7eJ'l
t91';t:;t'e Is
I7s5oc. ~-li
llr...
5~)
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
authority be granted to pay the invoice from Stephen Construction Company Limited, dated August 29th, 1975, in
the amount of $38,712.89 for the supply of asphalt to the Works Department during the period August 18th to 29th,
1975.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the invoice from Chitticks (1962) Ltd., dated August 20th, 1975, in the amount of $4,464.00,
for supplying rental of eQuipment to the Works department during the period August 1st to 15th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the Bayside
Drive reconstruction and extension project consists of several phases, three of which have been completed (widening
Little River Bridge, widening Canadian National Railways overpass, and road work from Little River Bridge to Red
Head Road), and that tenders were called for Phase IV (Kane's Corner to the Railways overpass) Station 13+00 to
Station 50+00 and that Metro Construction Limited was the only bidder and this tender has been checked and was
found to be in compliance with the City's tend~.ing procedures, and further advising that the bid price was also
reasonable as it compares Quite favourably wit~~the estimate of $615,000.00 -- and recommending that the said
tender be awarded to Metro Construction Limited in the amount of $652,187.00 -- and advising that the Liaison
Committee is in agreement with this recommendation -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Hodges asked if the bridge that goes over the Canadian National Railways overpass is not
open completely. j~. MacKinnon advised that he believes that it was just a matter of resurfacing of the project
(it was a separate tender call from the tender under consideration at this time) and all lanes should be open
now, and the barricades taken down. Councillor Hodges asked that these points be checked, to ensure that all
lanes are now open and that the barricades are down. He added that he will check these items, personally.
Councillor Cave asked if this street will be all scarified and rebuilt. Mr. MacKinnon replied that it will not
all be scarified; the portion of Bayside Drive that will be rebuilt is that section on the west, and the existing
lanes on that street will be padded and resurfaced, and the portion next to the curb will be rebuilt and there
will be concrete curbs next to the houses. He confirmed that the eXlsting pavement will not be disturbed and the
resurfacing will be laid on top of the existing pavement except where there is any poor asphalt that has to come
out (where there are any wet areas), or where the laterals have to go across the street in which case those areas
will have to be rebuilt -- however, the rest of this street will basically be resurfaced. Councillor Cave stated,
that his reason for broaching the subject is because for many years it has been necessary in the fall and spring
to lay some pavement on Bayside Drive in order to make the street passable for motorists, and he pointed out that
this portion of the street should be scarified and rebuilt. Councillor Cave asked when work will commence on the
above named Phase IV contract. Mr. MacKinnon stated that once the Council approves the project, the insurance is
reQuested of the contractor and the contract can be signed and the project commenced. He added that we are
assuming that it can be commenced very shortly.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for July, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that Caldo
Limited represented by Mr. Dermot Dobbin, is developing a parcel of land off Woodhaven Drive between University
Avenue and Birch Grove Terrace and that this development will involve approximately 3,200 feet of street and
create 55 lots for one- and two-family dwellings, 1 lot for a 22-unit apartment building and 3 lots for 24-unit
apartment buildings, and that servicing plans have met the approval of the Engineering and Works Department, and
further advising that according to the City's sub-division policy, the City will be responsible for the following
costs:- (1) water materials (watermains, gate valves, fire hydrants, et cetera) $36,900.00 (2) sanitary sewer
materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $17,300.00, (3) storm sewer materials (pipe, manholes, catch basins, et
cetera) $21,300.00 -- totalling $75,500.00 -- and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water
and sewerage materials to be charged to the 1975 Capital Budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized
to execute the sub-division agreement. in due course -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be granted for
payment of the invoices for eQuipment rental, as follows:-
D. Hatfield Ltd. - to the Works Dept.
August 1-15, 1975
(dated August 19, 1975)
August 1-15, 1975
(dated August 19, 1975)
$ 27,521. 30
$ 8,717.90
- to the Water Dept.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded
by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the, City Manager, authority be granted
following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services,
that were undertaken in connection with the Department of Regional Economic Expansion pro-
for payment of the
regarding projects
gramme, namely:-
Hazen Creek S.T.P.
Godfrey Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment,
Progress Estimate Number 32,
dated July 31, 1975
l,402.l0
$ 32,997.35
$
Milford-Randolph-Greendale
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Collector Sewer System
54
J
~
:J}. R. L
$147,957.05
~~~j He:7)1'>.
,.e~;?d~ y. <2Kf-,
7e;u/er ~17?P1.
.L/H/~ ~'ve"..
.flew. .&:Jh€l77e
'JJlheeh C'Oh~
r~/~) /~~
#. 7?!I~J? lb..1-
/IIII./ONLetc.
~I/ S elf/er
~5fJt? and
~-6L.
t/rhOJn
1?enewql
(l1/d/o)?
Ae6"I-)
/H1.ElM/c-
Surf/edJI .("t1
~ f 11//11 $c.
:i)us;hes5
tLf'si <<,.J,;;,~~.
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 46,
dated August 12, 1975
.
$ 6,358.04
3.
Bayside Drive Reconstruction and Extension
Power Commission of the City of Saint John
Relocating Power Commission of the City of Saint John facilities
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 6, dated
August 22, 1975
$ 27,406.45
$ 45,056.53
4.
I
Little River Sewerage Scheme, Contract "B"
Dineen Construction (Atlantic) Ltd.
Construction of Hickey Road and Lakewood Sewage Pumping Stations
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 13
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated September 2, 1975
5.
Little River Sewerage Scheme, Contract liD"
G. Ryan Co. Ltd.
Champlain Heights Collector Sewer
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated August 31, 1975
6.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale
Gaspe Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate
Retention
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
Collector Sewer
$1,463,230.25
611,592.55
91,738.88
384,510.16
$135,343.51
Number 5
approved
payment, Progress Estimate Number 5,
dated September 2, 1975
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the
Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, advising that 29 Mill Street (F-6-11-13) is reQuired
for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme and negotiations with the owners, Atlantic Surgical Ltd., have
resulted in an offer being made to settle total compensation for all freehold interests in this property
for a figure of $125,000.00, and that an agreement has been made with the said company that the City will
transfer title of this property and subsequently arrange for it to occupy the premises under a rental
arrangement mutually acceptable to all parties concerned, until such time as the site is required for the
development of the Market Square complex, and further advising that officials of the company have advised
that it iseihier intention to relocate within the city and that subseQuent to their move they will be
submitting a claim for business disturbance, including legal and appraisal fees, moving costs, et cetera,
and further advising that the approval of the Partnership for the acquisition of the of the freehold of
the said property for a figure of $125,000.00 has been acknowledged -- and reQuesting and recommending
that the Common Council approve the acquisition of the said freehold interest for a figure of $125,000.00,
this figure to be subject to the normal adjustments for outstanding taxes, et cetera -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
Councillor Davis stated he does not see why the Council should approve a purchase without
knowing how deeply the City would be involved in a bu~iness disturbance. Noting that the Council has
gone through this exercise several times before, he stated he would like to know why it is being proposed
in this particular case. Mr. Barfoot replied that, basically, this is what has been done in several
instances and sometimes the Council has disagreed with the procedure, but in this particular case the
settlement is being made for real estate - that is, the value of the building and the property itself;
the company intends to relocate within the City of Saint John and the settlement for business disturbance
will be based upon actual audited costs of the relocation of the business to the new premises, but until
such time as they obtain new premises the proposal is that, first of all, they continue to rent the
property that we are now purchasing and then when the new premises has been obtained and the company is
ready to move in then audited costs will be made of relocation of the actual business disturbance costs
at that time, which may not be for a year or two, depending on the progress of the Market SQuare pro-
posal. Noting that the above letter refers to "legal and appraisal fees, moving costs, etc.", Councillor
Hodges asked what "etc." means. Mr. Barfoot replied that these are items defined as legitimate costs of
moving the business. The Mayor suggested that Mr. Barfoot produce a list in this regard for Council.
j~. Barfoot stated that if the Council wishes further information, he would be prepared to provide this
information. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he cannot support the above motion to pass this because
of previous experiences where we have had this type of an arrangement, before. He asked who would do the
audit, and in what manner, as to the business disturbance amount. Mr. Barfoot noted that this has been
done on a large number of acquisitions, already, carried out in the east end urban renewal area and in
the North End-West Side Urban Renewal area, that by agreement the City engages an auditing firm to
monitor the cost incurred in moving any particular property. Mr. Thompson confirmed that the procedure
has been followed, as outlined by Mr. Barfoot, in previous cases of this kind. The Mayor noted that
although Mr. Thompson could not recall a specific case of this kind, he would have to say it is not
common. Mr. Thompson made affirmative reply. Councillor M. Vincent asked, in the matter of Atlantic
Surgical Ltd.'s relocation, are we con~iaent that this company is going to relocate within the city. Mr.
Barfoot stated that he understands.-tlie company is prepared to put themselves down in writing to this
effect. Councillor MacGowan stated she sees nothing wrong with the motion, because if we leave it,
prices could go up, and this company is going to rent from us. She made the point that in a year's time
the property might be appraised at a higher figure, so she felt it would be alright to pass the above
otion, at this time.
.
I
I
.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors MacGowan, Higgins, Cave and Parfitt
voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors M. Vincent, Hodges, Davis and Pye voting "nay".
~
"...
-.....
ub
~1'6ah
i!?ellew..<J 1
.8zfA1~b'c
SUI"&flCOl/
.:l."I lf1//1 St:
Iif~P5j,
I C'pee;'
,Q,~/"ee,.-
In.! $-Idy
;pgpf, Ellvlr
t?/'Imeqt-
P"'M'I"+
l1?etLkrn
,(-&-rL
F/6'6'IIIHf
.
I
.
I
I
.
.....
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for further information.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated September 5th,
1975, advising that further engineering study of the Marsh Creek area is considered to be necessary prior to
making decisions on a long-term plan of action to lessen flooding and the City and the Provincial Department of
Environment have been closely co-operating on the matter, and following agreement on the terms of reference
between departmental and city representatives, proposals were reQuested from three engineering firms, MacLaren
Atlantic Limited, Proctor & Redfern Limited, and Montreal Engineering Company Limited; that proposals were
received by the Department on August 20th; that all three proposals have similar cost estimates varying from
$40,000.00 to $45,000.00 and all are based on actual time estimates with a completion date of four to five
months; that on the basis of method and approach, liaison and reporting to client, caliber of people who would
be assigned to the project, and experience of the firm with similar problems, the Department's recommendation,
which is concurred in by the City staff, is that Proctor & Redfern Limited be selected; that with regard to the
cost of the study, the Department suggests a fifty-fifty split of the costs - the City would, therefore, be
reimbursing the Province for fifty per cent of the cost of the work up to an amount of $22,500.00; that the City
Manager recommends that this cost-sharing arrangement be confirmed by Council as being a fair and equitable
arrangement, having regard to the fact that the Province had not previously shared in the cost of such engin-
eering studies; that further joint work between the Province and the City reQuires to be done in the matter of
land ownership and other legal matters, but because of the time reQuired for both studies, the engineering work
should be commissioned right away -- and reQuesting that the Common Council concur in the appointment of Proctor
& Redfern Limited as Consultant for detailed studies on flooding in the Marsh Creek area, and that the City
cost-share in this work in the amount of fifty per cent to a maximum of $22,500.00 -- be received and filed and
the recommendation be adopted and the request acceded to.
Councillor Pye asked if the above arrangement means that Proctor & Redfern Limited will continue from
where they left off in their original report to the City, or is this a completely new study. Mr. Barfoot
replied that the first report from this firm of consultants was based upon the terms of reference given them at
that time - that report identified certain preliminary solutions and because these solutions are all.costly and
several other ideas have been introduced the new report will investigate a number of other alternative solutions _
it will build upon the information gathered for the first report, and the date gathered (mappi~measurements
taken, et cetera) will provide a much fuller report dealing in much more detail with what has t~ done.
Councillor Pye asked if the other companies were planning on using the Proctor & Redfern report as a basis. Mr.
Barfoot replied that they would use as a basis every bit of information that was available and the Proctor &
Redfern report would be one of the major reports to date on the Marsh Creek flooding. Councillor Pye advised
that the pumping system in the Glen Falls area and the Glen Falls sewerage system was devised according to the
records to accommodate no more than a total of 1,400 beings - there were only 200 people in existence at the
time this service was put in, in that particular area, when that system was devised, and it was recommended then
that an additional 1,200 could be added and that would be its maximum capacity - and now, a short time ago, he
pointed out that the Council permitted the Rocca interests to establish a total of 600 units which means ap-
proximately 2,400 people - this, to him, adds up to a badly overburdened system. He stated he feels that the
Council had better look into this matter carefully before it proceeds any further. Mr. Barfoot noted that it
was the Canadian-British Engineering consultants who designed the sewerage system, and he would have to refer to
the report of those consultants to determine that Councillor Pye's figures are correct. He stated that from
being involved in the design process the figures taken by the consultants in designing for people, the basic
document was the Comprehensive Community Plan which set out the population levels to be designed for in the
Marsh Creek watershed and these have not been changed by the proposals of recent developers - these are still
valid, and he would be somewhat surprised if the figures mentioned are correct. Councillor Pye replied that Mr.
Barfoot will find the record in the Works Department, and that he checked them, personally. Mr. Barfoot stated
that although he did not have the document with him at this time, he knows that the total design population for
the Marsh Creek system was 15,000, as he recalls, of which the majority would be in the Glen Falls area.
Councillor Pye stated this was not so, not according to the way he read the map. He stated he would like Mr.
Barfoot to check it. Mr. Barfoot replied that he will check into that point.
Councillor Cave expressed amazement that, eight months after the flooding which occurred last December,
we are going to have a study. He noted that he has been assured right along that the Provincial Government was
preparing a study, but, evidently, that Government has not taken any action on this problem. He not~d that this
means that we will be going into next year before we get a complete study regarding what has to be do~ut
there as far as flooding is concerned. He stated that Councillor Pye's statement is erroneous in that Councillor
Cave asked a Question: an 18-inch sewer under pressure with a 12-inch sewer coming down the Golden Grove Road
was ample sewerage to look after that area - all the developments in future years, because he was concerned
about the size of the sewerage at the time, and it is on record, somewhere, that there is no need of any bigger
pipe because it is all under pressure with regard to the sewerage system. He stated he is amazed at the Provincial
Government waiting so long for this study.
The Mayor asked, where we have a report now, have we not got engineers who along with the Government
engineers, could come up with another report using the Proctor & Redfern report as a basis. Mr. Barfoot replied
that our engineers are all highly Qualified in this field and if they had enough time no doubt they could
produce a better report than any consultant but the amount of resources that have to be placed into such a
report means employing several people, full-time, for several months in order to provide all the measurements,
do the calculations, and the various network and analysis and computer work which is necessary for such a report
- and neither the Province nor the City - basically, organizations which are set up for service and not for
research and design - have the resources; the Province have had their own staff look at the Proctor & Redfern
preliminary report and at the limited time available to them they have analyzed it and have come up with the
fact that more information, more measurements, more investigation, is needed in order to come up with a solid
recommendation regarding the expenditure of several millions of dollars.
Councillor M. Vincent asked why do we have to have another study and spend another $22,500.00 in this
regard. He felt that this Marsh Creek situation has had many studies and if were devoting some of our monies
and energies into getting something done, rather than doing studies, perhaps there would not be as much discussion
and deliberations on this matter as there is now, and probably will be in the future. He asked if we have any
specific things that are determined that have to be done, that we can proceed with and do, and get into something
tangible, rather than waiting for another study. Mr. Barfoot advised that the Province is most anxious to get
going on this study, and the Province is the client for this particular study, but the Province wishes to have
the Council's opinion on the cost-sharing before beginning. He pointed out that in the Proctor & Redfern
original report the mention of these were all preliminary figures - that even had no further investigation be~~
required further very detailed engineering work would have needed to be commissioned in order to get ahead with
any of the particular solutions they have recommended; the solutions range up to five million dollars or so,
and, normally, you would anticipate spending about two to four per cent of that figure in devising the engineering
criteria before you get a design - to adeQuately prove that you have investigated every alternative and come up
5'S.
~
1f/';1I~~;' tJ.~h
Flo(uL/J?.!
.kl1ffl net'l"i nfJ
st<<~
P~t'P+
7(e6i-/ern ,,(6/.
(}gal!, /(/if'inff
1(e-~ol7i/?'l
fYPrl'l1.;u1,€ :>",/
.:7; /lrHJu" F/.?",
~e- 2t?I?f'nf
Se'J"v/~e /j$.sa=-
,:"'-!-es ~-6-L
7Qhn #. ~,.r
~;Ia~/~6e,/
4"~-
:Oel'11ol/-e/ t?J7
I!Q<<5in1' -!O,r1
r;l/sf/k ed'
Te?Jan~ s
.s../. //sf-
/lK:~t7I"'t-!ff
with the most economical solution.
He added that engineering money is always well spent.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if there are any things that can be done to the system as it 4It
presently exists now that we know have to be done with the money we have to do it. Making affirmative
reply, I~ Barfoot advised that the Proctor & Redfern preliminary report mentioned several areas for
immediate action and these are now being done, and are being started: we have done a lot of the small
items, we have authorized $150,000.00 out of a total something like $350,000.00 for the very necessary
work on storm sewers, so we are well into the programme recommended by the Proctor & Redfern preliminary
report, as a first stage - and this work is on-going.
Councillor MacGowan stated she is wondering if this matter commits the City or the Province in
any way as to whose responsibility the solution to the Marsh Creek problem is, or will it just strengthen
the City's hands, to get Federal funds. Mr. Barfoot stated he thinks that this report will get some of
the evidence needed to strengthen the City's hand for other assistance.
Councillor Davis felt it should be made clear that this engineering work will determine how
many millions of dollars it will require to solve a very difficult problem, but it does not necessarily
mean that nothing is going to be done while this study is going on because the Proctor & Redfern report
said that some of the drains - some of the sewers - were absolutely plugged - this is a housekeeping
problem, he noted, and a lot of work of that nature should be done at once, and that is what we are
doing. He agreed that it would not be very wise to get involved in a major set of dams or a major set of
sewers without having all the facts of how much run-off is going where. He stated he is sure the study
will be of great value, but one has really nothing to do with the other - the neglect has been doing on
for a great number of years. He advised that because the area is so flat these sewers and this drainage
system get plugged - they silt up very fast; closer attention should be paid to that area and to all
these flat areas in other areas. He added that one has nothing to do with the other and the City has to
go ahead and spend that $350,000.00, as before.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor Kipping, recalling
that a few weeks ago during discussion of the Marsh Creek flooding problem, he asked about the status of
the proposed combined City and Provincially funded study for the purpose of focusing upon determining
what long-term steps should be taken as Quickly as possible for the solution of this serious matter, and
that the Question was based on information that the Province had allotted its share of the necessary
funds and had, he understands, tentatively selected a consultant to do the study as soon as the City
agreed and put up its share -- and asking whether the City is going to put up its share, and when -- and
stating that he believes the Council can agree that time is running out for favourable study conditions
and early initial action, and conseQuently for the citizens of the Glen Falls area whose properties are
vulnerable -- and stating that since the implications of this matter are, or should be, well known to all
of use, his unavoidable absence from the Council meeting of September 8th on private business out of the
Province should not prevent this subject from being handled and the question answered as a normal agenda
item -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning
By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of
approximately 7.5 acres behind the Simonds Medical Centre at 243 Loch Lomond Road from "PD" Planned
Development district to "RM-l" Multiple Family.Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and
the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety at this time.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning property at the
northwest corner of Adelaide and Metcalfe Streets (Flash Muffler Ltd.) from "RM-l" Multiple Family
district to "I-l" Light Industrial district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common
Seal affixed thereto. /Jpi?Jded~..'JI C Co .flee: /.:3, /;776 (7! /// '2i'oo,f- 77"')
The Common Clerk advised that a letter was received from Mr. John G. Carr of 175 Metcalfe
Street submitting comments on the affect on the present tenants of the property next to the property at
41 Adelaide Street, of this proposed re-zoning, as it means that they will be displaced when the tenement
building is removed. Mr. Carr's letter states that the only reason the said tenement house would be
classified as dilapidated is because there has been no effort made on the part of the landlord to try to
fix it up, and that it is not true that two families in this property have found other accommodation _
that none of the families in this property have other places in which to live beecause none of them have
been told anything about the future plans for this property.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the present building of Service Associates Ltd. at the corner in
Question, and the said residential building, are to be demolished. Mr. Zides replied that just the
residence behind (on the western part of the lot along Metcalfe Street) is to be demolished. Councillor
MacGowan asked if Mr. Zides has any plans yet for this proposed building, and Mr. Zides stated that he
has just a sketch, which is for service bays for cars on Metcalfe Street. Councillor MacGowan expressed
the view that this is a very bad corner for a business operation, and that she strongly opposes it.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors MacGowan, Higgins and M. Vincent
voting lInayll.
/~
/~
-/
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor
HodgesY~~
RESOLVED
that the above mentioned letter from Mr. John G. Carr be
received and filed.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution. '
Councillor Parfitt advised that in talking with Service Associates Ltd. and the company told
her that there will be a lapse of time regarding this building demolition, and the Saint John Housing
I
I
4It
I
.
I
I
4It
.....
"...
.
7?e-~OP1/J7
"Rt7eeGl
t7~",p .L t-.
IIY~ I~Oh !1"4~
Sab-ellv;
IVt1I'/),el"n
I~K ,P"e.sStAla
.' /l1i7l'-I-/' (?yt h
kXjJY'e5S
I
e e?U If. :JJciJr/"
/Vi'f't-~11
~1J(f7I"(JSSaQ
. ;<'(:m; n.!l
~-,.(aw
-t<!!K-r
-"//'I1g>?dPle
I
I
.
....
-....
;j l:
Authority will give consideration for other housing for these tenants, in the North End area, if these tenants
have to move. She stated that she obtained the latter information when she contacted the said Housing Authority.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning approximately 86 acres of land north
and south of the Pipeline Road immediately to the west of the Clark property off Manawagonish Road from "RF"
Rural and "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "R-2" One- and Two-Family, "RM-l" Multiple Family (low rise),
"RM-2" Multiple Family (high rise), "B-2" General Business, "R-2" One- and Two-Family and "R-IB" One-Family
districts, 'be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. .
Councillor MacGowan pointed out that she had reQuested information as to where the Northern Expressway
was going to go through that property, when the proposed re-zoning was discussed at the September 2nd last
meeting of Council, and she was told that Mr. Barfoot would check with the Province. She felt that this third
reading would be held up until the Council knows exactly where the said Expressway is going, because she felt
that the alignment should be determined, first. Councillor MacGowan moved a motion, that was not seconded - that
this matter be tabled until the Council receives this information regarding the Expressway. Mr. Barfoot advised
that the City staff have not been able to get together with the Province on that matter since it was last raised.
He noted that the Planning Advisory Committee report points out that the area where the Expressway was designed
was pointed out in that, and this would be covered. Councillor MacGowan felt that it could happen that the City
and Province might not agree on where the alignment of the Northern Expressway could be, and, much as she would
like to see a housing development there, she sees no purpose in approving this development until we find out
where the Expressway is going to be; her point is that we must plan in advance for the alignment of the Expressway,
and that it is costly to aCQuire land for it at a later date. Councillor Davis noted that there was a preliminary
route for the said Expressway, and he suggested that perhaps it was farther north than this particular area under
discussion.
It was noted that Mr. Pat Rocca, of The Rocca Group Limited, was present at the meeting and he was
invited to speak in the matter. Mr. Rocca advised that there is a plan in existence which shows the preliminary
location of the Expressway, and it is shown on the plan which The Rocca Group Limited supplied to Council re-
garding the Nelson Vale development; the location of the Expressway is shown and it is almost at the end of the
company's property and it is at the area that probably would not be developed for at least three years, but the
company shows it on the plan. He stated that the company has had discussion, also, with the Department of Highways
who do not even know when and if the Expressway is ever going to be built, but if they decided to build the
Expressway, the company shows it on its plan and can make the land available at that time; the company also has a
note saying that should the decision to build the Expressway be made the relevant part of the sub-division plan
can be adapted - it is intended that construction would begin in the south end part of the land, anyway. He
stated that the company has 86 acres and the Expressway would only affect perhaps 5 or 6 acres, at the most.
Councillor MacGowan felt that in all these years (that she Expressway has been under consideration) the City and
the Province can state where they think the Expressway alignment should be; she noted that we have been talking
about it for fifteen years, and that it will take another ten years, and perhaps fifteen - and that before we let
houses come near it, it should be approved or disapproved. The Mayor noted that one of the problems is that as
times change, so changes the designs, and location, possibly. Councillor MacGowan made the point that it can
also so change properties that have been built there.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay".
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto",
was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
Councillor Davis stated that, as an opponent of the Northern Expressway, he would like to be recorded
as such; we are destroying too much land, as it is.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns
1. amending Section 2 by: (a) inserting a new clause (na) after clause (n) to read as follows: "(na)
'Dwelling Group' means two or more buildings containing dwelling units located on a lot or a number of adjoining
lots where all buildings, recreation areas, driveways, parking areas, landscaping and all other features have
been planned as a single or unified development."; (b) substituting the following for clause (at): "(at) 'Place'
eans an open unoccupied space other than a public street, permanently reserved as the principal means of access
to a dwelling group and approved as such by the Committee.";
2. inserting the words "or recreation" between the words "community" and "centre" in Sections 13(2) (c);
20(2) (c); 68(2) (b); 79(2) (b); and 90(2) (b);
3. substituting the word "zone" for the word "district" and the word IIzones" for the word "districts"
through the By-Law;
4.
174 (4)
substituting the figures "39" for the figures and letter "19A" where they appear in Sections 58 (2) and
of the Zoning By-Law;
5. amending Section 68 by: (a) inserting the following as clause (c) after clause (b) of subsection (2):
"(c) a dwelling group";
(b) redesignating clauses (ba) to (r) inclusive of subsection (2) as clauses (c) to (s) inclusive:
(c) substituting the term "clause (p) of subsection (2)" in subsection (3) for the term "clause (0) of
subsection (2)";
(d) substituting the term "clause (10" in subsection (3) for the term "clause (k)";
6. amending subsection (2) of Section 79 by: (a) redesignating clauses (c) to (1) inclusive as clauses (d)
to (m) inclusive; (b) inserting a clause (c) to read: "(c) a dwelling group";
7. amending subsection (2) of Section 172 by: (a) redesignating clauses (viii) to (xxiv) inclusive as
clauses (ix) to (xxv) inclusive; (b) inserting a new clause (viii) to read "(viii) a dwelling group";
8. substituting the following for subsection (2) of Section 72:
"72. (2) The maximum height of a main building or structure may exceed 35 feet subject to the following
conditions being satisfied (a) the Side yard shall be not less than four feet plus one additional foot for each
three feet of the building height
58
~
71?17/nf
:Bff-,,(~w
-&-6!!x-t-
""//?7el1d -
Q/t?d$
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding
35 feet in height shall be located at least its height from an abutting "R" zone other than an "RM"
classification .
exceed 45 feet.";
(c) In no case shall the height of any building or structure
9.
substituting the following for Section 83:
"83. (1) with respect to height
(a) no main building may be less than two storeys; and
(b) subject to subsection (2) no main building or structure may exceed six
storeys .or 75 feet.
(2) The maximum height of a main building or structure may exceed six storeys or
75 feet subject to the following conditions being satisfied
(a) The side yard shall be not less than one foot for every two feet of height
and an additional 0.75 feet for each foot the building or structure exceeds
75 feet.
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding 75 feet in
height shall be located at least its height from an abutting zone other
than 'RM_21, 'RM-3' or 'pi zone.
(c) In no case shall the height of any building or structure exceed 15 storeys
or 150 feet."
10. substituting the following for Section 94:
"94. (1) with respect to height
(a) no main building may be less than two storeys; and
(b) subject to subsection (2), no main building or structure may exceed ten
storeys or 100 feet.
(2) The maximum height of a main building or structure may exceed ten storeys or
100 feet subject to the following conditions being satisfied
(a) The side yard shall be not less than 0.3 times the height of the building
or structure up to a height of 100 feet and an additional 0.2 feet for each
foot the building or structure exceeds 100 feet.
,
(b) Any main building or structure or part thereof exceeding 100 feet in height
shall be located at least one-third of its height from any other abutting 'R'
zone.
(c) In no case, shall the height of the building or structure exceed 20 storeys
or 20 feet.";
11. (a) substituting the word "or" for the word "and" at the end of Section 93 (l)(b)(i);
(b) repealing Section 93 (l)(b)(ii).
12. substituting the following for the words "of at least 15 feet in width" in subsection (2) of
Section 144: "of at least 20 feet in width clear of any projections or encroachments therein";
13.
amending Section 131 by:
(a) repealing clause (2) of subsection (1);
(b) redesignating the remaining clauses of subsection (1) appropriately;
(c) inserting a new clause after clause (1) of subsection (2) to read, "a club or lodge,
fraternal or private";
(d) redesignating the foregoing new clause and all succeeding cluases of subsection (2)
appropriately;
14. amending Section 217 (1) (k) by inserting the words "that this reQuirement shall not apply"
after the word lIexcept";
15. amending Section 217 by: (a) redesignating clauses (12) to (16) inclusive as clauses (13) to
(17) inclusive; (b) inserting the following as a new cluase (12):
"(12) A driveway to a parking area which is not the sole means
of access to a building shall be at least 20 feet in width";
16. amending Section 221 by:
(a) changing the title to read, "Places on Which Dwelling Groups Front";
(b) substituting the following for the first line: "Where a dwelling group fronts
upon a place";
(c) inserting the following as the last line of clause (a): "and shall contain such
provision for a turnabout as considered satisfactory by the Committee";
(d) striking out the words "one to four family houses" for the words "group houses"
in clause (b) --- be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor M. Vincent voting "nay".
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as fOllows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Tuesday, September 2nd, 1975, when there
were present Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Cave, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation,
namely:-
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
~,+,J;t7~ee
e>rUlho/e
e W,rAil7!,
/l'fI't?lt'/17rJ?11
5:T%//ee-
,
mens 'Prut;
/155<<. /VO,h.
C~J?e//i.at-/o.
Iu "e.
If/in/ster
ff ,f.OJbour
IW/?/"kiI15
/J 2!t?e '?,I?J
S.:/. ~II~-
mens 'PI-ul-.
Ils5oe. /6'61.6
/l/Oh7. CbMP1.
e8,P,pc,inf.
et?h?Pf/
~/'n.;ance
H'Ppks
'Persol7rf1e/
r:t:-t5 )
I (7J/.ahn/n
2)6"ve~
~o~ee <fI-
~/Y'e
.E~ph.~
~dlut
'P"Ot"edl 'on
t'q/7JP'Qe~
e liwl7s of
/Ie'Il?l"Qhee
PMPlPI.lldtl/
CbI11H?
I/lGsePJt-~o
:l/t?1?~od
$<<.b-d/v.,
'Phase LL
~/c;Jh
IlK:Jmlh.!:
&&P>eH.s
'P.;JYP1e<<- ,."
liel<{ err pUb-
lie f?<<"f7".$e
/.;;1ntJI
elfo!1 (;?,
II1c C<</Io
.tf"-t-6e/
~/emvelltH.
....
59
1. That the Common Council accept the August 13th, 1975 report of the Conciliation Board relating to the
Working Agreement between the City of Saint John and Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local 61,
C.U.P.E. with the exception of Items 26 and 28-therein, and the Minister of Labour be so informed.
~aint John, N. B.,
8th September, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recommendation
contained therein adopted.
Mr. Barfoot advised that further to the above matter, the said Association has responded; they have met
on the changes authorized by the Common Council and have accepted them basically with one negotiated difference
in that the Desk Personnel East and West Division, instead of being removed July 1st, 1976, it has been agreed
that they will be removed December 1st, 1976; he thinks that they have accepted the principle which the Common
Council has stated.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the City staff be authorized to prepare the 1975-1976
Working Agreement between the City of Saint John and the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No.
61, C.U.P.E.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance
report from the Nominating Committee, the following appointments be
namely: -
with the recommendation contained in the
made to the following Council Committees,
.
ENGINEERING
& WORKS
FINANCE
WORKS
PERSONNEL
Chairman
Vice-Chairman
Higgins
Pye
Parfitt
Kipping
Cave
Hodges
Pye
Davis
Green
Parfitt
Hodges
M. Vincent
PLANNING & POLICE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT & FIRE DEVELOPMENT
LAND PROTECTION COMMERCE
Chairman Davis M. Vincent Kipping
Ifice-Chairman A. Vincent Gould MacGowan
MacGowan Cave Gould
Green Higgins A. Vincent
The Mayor noted that each Chairman of the above noted Council Committees will call a meeting of the
individual Committee, and as soon as possible. The Common Clerk advised that whether any of the Committees have
met yet, or not, the first item of business will be determining the terms of reference of how these Committees
are going to work; terms of reference will have to be prepared for all of these Committees, and it should be the
first item of business when each of the Committees meet.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
Advisory Committee, the Common Council assent to the plan of sub-division for Phase II of the Bon Accord Sub-
division, which is shown on the submitted print, and which consists of a 250-foot extension to Bon Accord Drive,
a 700-foot section of a new street named Inverness Avenue, five large lots for apartments and four lots for two-
family dwellings.
In reply to the Mayor's Question as to who has the authority to name streets in these developments, Mr.
Zides advised that for new streets the developers usually make the suggestion and if the names are not in con-
flict with existing street names in the sense of repeating them, or are not excessively similar to them, they are
usually accepted. The Mayor recalled that some time ago, he had suggested that it would be nice that streets be
started to be named after people who have given good service to the City, and away back to start with Councillors
nd members of the Common Council. He felt that it would be good if we could encourage them to do this. Mr.
Zides stated that he agrees with that suggestion, and explained that what actually happens is that most of the
builders we are getting at the moment are naming streets after members of their faily or the places from which
they came.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the
following named sums of money be accepted in lieu of land for public purposes:-
1. from Roy G. McCullough, S-29 - the sum of $240.00 (a one-acre lot with a frontage of 210 feet is being
severed from the Roy G. McCullough property on the west side of Red Head Road; based upon the Real Estate De-
partment's appraisal of $3,000.00 the said sum of $240.00 is the amount payable in lieu of land for public
purposes);
from Ethel Flewwelling, C-IOlb - the sum of $1,440.00 (the Flewwelling property is situated on the
corner of Millidge Avenue and Boar's Head Road; the present proposal is to divide this property into
60
~
Councillor MacGowan at this time discussed the letter to Council from her, dated September 5th,
1975 in which she recalls that some time ago she requested the Council to take the necessary steps to have
the tolls removed from the harbour bridge, but the subject was deferred because it was suggested that "we
have big things in the making there", and she asked that the matter be on the Council agenda again in four
weeks' time; that the four months have elapsed, and the Reversing Falls bridge will be closed for repairs
in the not too distant future and the harbour bridge will be our only means of access to West Saint John,
but the Council has still taken no action to have the tolls removed. Enclosed with this letter is a copy
of an editorial which appeared in the Evening Times-Globe at the time the brldge was Officially opened
across the harbour. The letter notes that the Premier of the day, Louis Robichaud, said at that time,
"Tolls may be in effect for another week, for another month, for several years, but we must look forward
. r: ~ to the time when our magnificent new bridge will be as it was first conceived to be -- a toll-free bridge".
}?t?~~J9~I')7~,-~,I,. Councillor MacGowan proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the Council take whatever steps are
~,.;~ ~ ~~i~ necessary immediately to insure the removal of tolls from the harbour bridge not only as a temporary
!J r measure but permanently. During ensuing discussion, Councillor MacGowan pointed out that in the financial-,....
statements for July, it is listed that the City spent $932.00 in July for bridge tokens, which means that
it is costing the City, alone, a lot of money to use that bridge. She felt that there is no reason why
Saint John should have the only toll bridge in New Brunswick. She felt that this would be policy that
this Council is interested in - to have the tolls removed from that bridge. Councillor Higgins felt that
the proposed motion is far too sweeping, and stated he feels that the way to start on this matter is to
meet with the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority, as has been done in the past, and determine what their
policy is, and what the Council's thinking is with reference to policy. He suggested that Councillor
MacGowan go along with the idea of the Council once_again meeting with the Harbour Bridge Authority and at
least resolving the problem of what is going to 'be' done when the Reversing Falls bridge is closed and find
y .
out what obligations that Authority has as'far as making the harbour bridge a toll bridge or a toll-free
bridge, and stated he thinks that the Council can start from there.
PkhrJ. /ldns.
(/01>>h1.
'Pen.Ai'~ s?OI~
V~"';&lhce$
A So fnterpN:
.,{-EII. .
9-/1' .55rLhe!j
---
ldlvt?Pl1s
0#- s-t,.,eE
. PdJ;>/fin1
5p4~~6
1?~i,..(/mt!nr
7?ClY!"DI1L',C.
H.a !/CP J(
'Pension .23".
edUI1. P1.5JC
/fa,,; IIU" ",,' (/g
-to//5
two lots each 13,150 sQuare feet in area; the Real Estate Department has appraised these lots at $9,000.00
and the amount payable to the City in lieu of land for public purposes is 8% of $18,000.00 or $1,440.00).
.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from.the Chairman of the Planning
Advisory Committee, Mr. Leonard D. Andrews, advising that the Committee has noted the comments about
variances at the Council meeting which discussed a letter from LSO Enterprises Limited in connection with
their proposed beverage room at 9-11 Sydney Street, and that it is not fair to say that the Committee
discriminates in the granting of variances; that the very nature of variances and their granting make it
necessary for the Committee to consider each on its own merit; that the Committee does not make a decision
for or against granting a variance without consideration, in each case, of the impact of the proposed
variance upon the proposed development itself and upon neighbouring land and sometime of the public need
for the particular development at that particular location; that, in other words, the apparent discrim-
ination comes from the necessary careful consideration that must be given to the special circumstances
concerned with each case; that the Committee is not concerned with personalities but with justification of
the need for variances within the general intent of the City's Development Plan and its implementing by-
laws on zoning and sub-division; that the Committee also makes its decisions in full cognizance of the
fact that the implementation of these decisions by the Development Officer leaves him open to appeal to
the Provincial Planning Appeal Board; that the Committee, therefore, does not accept that one decision on
ariances is at all a precedent for what might on the surface appear to be a similar application elsewhere
but, in actual fact, has its own circumstances and considerations -- be received and filed.
I
I
Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Zides if there is available a manual or document which sets
forth the authority, the' terms of jurisdiction, or otherwise, for the Planning Advisory Committee. Mr.
Zides replied that the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Planning Advisory Committee are set out
in several documents: first - they come from the Provincial Planning Act which is the primary source - in
some instances that Act says that certain things can be done by a city but only if they are delegated to
the Planning Advisory Committee in a particular by-law and primarily the Zoning By-Law - therefore, the
two sources are the Planning Act and the Zoning By-Law. Councillor M. Vincent asked if it would be
possible to have either the Planning Advisory Committee or Mr. Zides or staff, within a reasonable period .
of time prepare some type of a document for Council, portraying the interpretation that the Planning
Advisory Committee has of its authorities and jurisdiction. Mr. Zides replied that he can prepare such
information for the Council.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee in
reply to the Common Council's reQuest for information as to whether it is reasonable to reQuire taverns to
provide off-street parking, advising that the Committee recognizes that when people consume too much
alcohol, they should not drive; that, however, the Committee believes that the car owner who wishes to
visit a tavern beyond his normal walking distance will take his car there whether or not there is off-
street parking; that very few will take a taxi to the tavern - they will park where they can - if there is
no parking on the tavern site, they will park on the street, someone else's parking spot or a driveway;
that very few people who consume too much alcohol will be wise enough to leave their car in the tavern
parking lot where, there will be at least avaiable parking or wherever else they have parked it; that these
views are flected in the reQuirements of the various other cities which are submitted on a sheet with this
letter; that the Committee therefore believes that it is reasonable to require taverns to provide off-
street parking -- and further advising that the present reQuirement of one space for each six seats in the
tavern with a lesser reQuirement of one space for every ten seats where the tavern is in the central
business district appears reasonable -- be received and filed.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that .the letter from the Board of Trustees of the Civic
Employees' Pension Plan, advising that the Board at its meeting held on September 4th last resolved to
reco~nend to the Common Council that effective September 1st, 1975, Mr. Raymond L. Haycox of the Works
Department be retired in accordance with Section 9, sub-section 1 of the Pension Act, he having complied
with the provisions of the said sub-section by providing medical reports as to his permanent disability,
be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
."
.
I
I
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
.
S..I. #dlrbf?Ur
:lJ,.i tLffe l1rd'h<Jn .
/ /. L /"'/' Bridge
rr.5iJroOUr p"'/(j<.~
-Cf?/Is
"\io,
Seconded by Councillor
Higgins
RESOLVED that
of having meaningful
a meeting be arranged with the Saint John Harbour
discussion on the subject of removal of the harbour
Authority for the purpose
~
,....
61
.
tYdl4-h,
/IIqei:Ww~17
Polle!!. "e
-:e-J'>,4yc/
eK,oel7;1.es
o-F' eou,n<!/
I~.$':#
I
.
I
.
bridge tolls as a temporary measure but with the aim of making such removal permanent.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED.that the letter from Councillor MacGowan, recalling that two
months ago she reQuested that the Council formulate a policy governing travel expenses, and this reQuest was
referred to the City Manager for recommendations which the Council received On July 28th last and tabled for one
week; and advising that two months have now elapsed and The Six Cities will be meeting in Bathurst before the
next meeting of Council, and she would therefore request that at this time the Council approve the recommendations
of the City Manager in this regard as contained in his letter to Council dated July 23rd, 1975, namely:- (1)
travel advances to Councillors will be approved by Common Council; (2) travel advances to staff will be author-
ized by the City Manager; (3) all fund necessary before any given trip will be secured through the advance
system - airfare and accommodations will not be billed to the City; (4) receipts must be provided when accounting
for advances for such items as fare, accommodations, registrations, et cetera; (5) accounting for advances should
be made within one week of returning - no further advances will be made while one is outstanding and unaccounted
for;;,(6) that periodic reports as indicated by the Commissioner of Finance be made to Common Council by the
Finance Department showing the travel advance made for each trip with the related "refund" or "claim", so that
expenditures for travel will be displayed on a net basis -- be received and filed and the said recommendations of
the City Manager be approved.
The Mayor asked if there are any outstanding accounts. Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply, stating
there are such outstanding accounts at this time; he thinks some action has been taken regarding these accounts -
we are attempting to get all travel reports filed promptly; there are still some past accounts reports outstanding
and we attempt to speak to the people concerned about filing. He added that he does not know how far back these
outstanding accounts go.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting at this time)
Councillor M. Vincent noted that the discussion seems to refer to accounts that have been delinQuent
for a number of years and as he does not know anything about the matter, he would like to find out, and if the
Council does not want to discuss it in open session, he would make the following motion, and ask his Questions in
Legal Session, and find out what is wrong.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until Legal Session of
this Council meeting.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with Councillors M. Vincent, and Cave, and the Mayor
voting "yea" and Councillors Higgins, A. Vincent, Parfitt, MacGowan, Hodges, Pye and Davis voting "nay".
Councillor M. Vincent stated that in order for him to vote on the original motion, he has to have
information:- what are the delinQuent accounts, who are they, how much, and what is the story behind them. He
asked for such information, right at this time. Mr. Barfoot replied that he did not have the detailed information
with him at the meeting. Councillor MacGowan stressed that all the motion is asking for is a policy from Council
in the matter. Councillor M. Vincent stated he supports that point completely, but he wants to know what the
matter is about; he asked how can he intelligently vote for or against the motion if he cannot get the information
he seeks, which he wants to receive right here in open session of Council. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he
has never taken any expenses as a Councillor and that he is shocked that this matter is on the Council agenda.
Councillor MacGowan reiterated that this is a policy item and she is not naming anyone in this regard. She made
this point in reply to Councillor A. Vincent who felt that the person placing this item on the agenda would have
to be prepared to name the people in public. She stressed that any business that is run in a business-like
manner has policy; and it does not have to refer to Councillors, or to staff, it is still policy. Councillor A.
Vincent asked what is the definition of "policy" when people's characters are at stake - he explained that he has
received several telephone calls from people wanting to know how much money he drew in advance and did not return
to the City, and he wants to answer those calls, but he wants the Commissioner of Finance to answer them. The
Mayor noted that we will get an answer to this Question put by Councillor A. Vincent. Councillor A. Vincent
stated that this matter does not affect him, and he wants it made clear at this meeting that it does not affect
him, by verification from the Finance Department officials.
"nayll.
On Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent, Cave and Hodges voting
Read a letter from the Saint John Fire Fighters' Association, Local Union No. 711, advising that this
Union which is a unified body of fire fighters, fire fighting being their livelihood, is displeased that the
Common Council granted a sum of money ($1,800.00) recently for the operation of another fire department within
the jurisdiction of the boundaries of the City of Saint John of which the said Union members are permanent fire
fighters employed by the said City.
$, .I. ~ire
Fi~/d-e/7$ ,
1/1$5 t7e./!/P.
Councillor Hodges asked for a report from the Fire Chief on when the City will be able to take over the
6?~I?~~1' whole section of the City's jurisdiction with regard to the said volunteer fire department of Grand Bay-Martinon-
/? -I ~ Morna, since it is in the City of Saint John limits. Mr. Clark stated that he submitted his report in regard to
e>~J7P{ ~~~ this matter to the City Manager on July 24th last and he believes the Council acted upon that report; in that
e~c. &I~I't(I7- report, he pointed out the three possible solutions, with his recommendations; the area in Question is within the
tee,.. Flf'Ie boundaries of the City and it is perhaps his opinion - and he could be wrong - that the City is responsible for
the fire protection in that area. He pointed out that the problem facing the City is the fact that the closest
I ~t!?~tS fire station (on Church Avenue) is too far removed from that area to give proper fire protection and for that
reason the Fire Chief of the City in 1967 had supported the proposition of retaining the volunteer department in
S JrFi' Martinon, Morna and Grand Bay to cover that area on the initial response and backed up by the Saint John Fire
..,. Ire. Department from its Number 7 station. He stated that he finds it strange at times that portions of the city
~e.~~.~~e~ which come under the jurisdiction of another fire department, to some degree, and another fire chief; however, he
C -er.;JlJTe has had no problems and has had good communication and good co-operation from that volunteer fire department, but
QY. 7 he sometimes wonders where the jurisdiction lies - with the said volunteer fire department, or with the Saint
John Fire Department. He stated that, to his knowledge, it is not a recognized fire department by the office of
the Provincial Fire Marshal; it is his understanding that that office can only recognize one fire department in
One municipality. The Mayor asked Mr. Clark if he could accept that volunteer department as a subsidiary of the
Saint John Fire Department as co-operation from the local citizens. Mr. Clark stated that he would, if he ever
had the opportunity to read the terms of reference - he stated that he has not found any terms of reference as
yet in the files of the Saint John Fire Department regarding this volunteer fire department as it relates to the
Saint John Fire Department. The Mayor asked if it would be possible for Mr. Clark to have a meeting with the
said volunteer fire department and discuss this matter. Mr. Clark replied that there is no harm in that.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he feels that the Fire Fighters' Association should be advised of the Council's;
.'
....
62
s.:r: t:/';oe
hffh-C~"S' /lss~
/Yo. '7'71
6?r.. nr
t9~ntL ~~-
JI'p/an#e~r FX
:k,PC:
s'T5~,6oo/ oF
/!brine Ut"hhO/~
~~a5e
11~Jt..lYm. St.
~~/I"S +-
; h7 1m' "e""eht s
t/,H.:B. - $. T
tlr'4n-t-.s
Hhh.O"u:e!If/
(/, /V.:B. - s: T
eOI'U7, Il. f/h~eh
1i'e-~()h;171
/I. t: NifY#e.
or .5;,ns ,(-t-r;t.
~.ast/1'JQ<< Irr 1
Sup-<<iv.
'PI8I11J, t1~(/IS.
C'omPf.
IJ/Cll"ion :]jillt~
'Po//Ur/Ph
~/t'k ~v~,.-
1?ed fla'. b~~
q/tetiii
~11!//kn,.1?t
J!I HrL.
7hfHt~1 ,Plane
l:,..vil?~ rt!I"ine.
?o//' ~hllPlt$.
Hc?C4se 41/' /lli1
~-td.
~;f/a~ J>.4Z01
~'m~Ol e
~easeho, ~~ .4t
'P/aII". ~/ s.
C"Ofl7.h>.
thinking in making the said grant to the Grand Bay-Martinon-Morna Volunteer Fire Department on August
11th last. Councillor Hodges felt that the Council should give some study to which part of the Grand Bay
area covered by this volunteer fire department comes within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of
Saint John. Mr. Clark advised that in the past, the people who live in the said three areas have con-
tributed to the up-keep of that volunteer department and he believes that the problem now is that they
cannot get the necessary canvassers for such funds from the people in those areas to support that de-
partment; he believes that Grand Bay has taken the approach of making a contribution to that volunteer
department and asked the City of Saint John to do the same thing. He stated he wants to make it very
clear that without the Grand Bay-Morna-Martinon Volunteer Fire Department it does create a problem with
the Saint John Fire Department because of the time it takes the Saint John Department to respond from the
Church Avenue fire station to that particular area. He added that if the City is accepting its full
responsibilities in the Morna-Martinon area it reQuires the constructing and manning of another fire
station.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Saint John Fire
Fighters' Association, Local Union No. 711, be received and filed and an explanatory letter be forwarded
to the Association regarding this matter.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John School of Marine
Technology, who are occupying premises in the City-owned building at 115 Prince William Street, asking
that a few electrical fixtures on the second floor where the School now is located be repaired to working
order and that the lamps on the third floor that have been removed be repaired or re-installed, and that
the water facilities on the third floor (including both toilets and sinks) be put in working order - and
advising that school registration for the Fall term will comprise about 12 students in Navigation, 4 in
Marine Engineering Technology, and 4 in Naval Architecture and Ship Construction and that the said
reQuested repairs are therefore urgently needed - and further advising that classes start on September
9th with PhCh 1000 (special combined Physics and Chemistry course for Engineers) and Computer Programming
courses being taken.at the University of New Brunswick in Saint John campus by the School's regular
course studnets -- be referred to City staff for a report back to Council.
. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that when the above named School of Marine Technology received
some financial assistance, which included assistance from the City of Saint John, it was with an under-
standing and commitment from the Department of Education of New Brunswick that after one year this would
become a course at the Saint John branch of the University of New Brunswick. He asked what has tran-
spired in that regard. The Mayor replied that he believes the University was asking for some Qualifi-
cations from the instructor of this Marine Technology SchOOl, Mr. Edoardo Weis, and there are some other
things that are being tied in, but they all agreed and so this year they are allowing certain portions of
the School's courses timetable to be taken at the said University branch campus; this means that the
University is slowly moving into that field. Councillor.A. Vincent expressed the view that it is im-
portant for this city, being a seaport with shipbuilding industry, to have such a facility here for
students in marine technology, and that the obligation and responsibility for having these courses
continue in Saint John with the Board of Governors or the Senate of the University of New Brunswick. He
felt that the City staff should take into consideration the previous correspondence with the Minister of
Education that the City has in relation to the arrangements made initially to give financial assistance
to this School of Marine Technology and in relation to having this School become part of courses offered
by the University of New Brunswick in Saint John. He asked that the minutes of Council meetings that
relate to this subject be handed over to the City staff when the matter is being discussed. Councillor
. Vincent asked for a report back on the information he requested. The Mayor advised that this will be
done.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application from A. C. Fairweather & Sons Ltd.
for re-zoning of 187,325 square feet of land in the Eastmount Sub-division to permit the construction of
nine 12-unit apartment buildings thereon, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recom-
mendation, and that authority be granted to proceed to advertise the proposed re-zoning.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the $50.00 cheque which accompanied the above named re-zoning
application was a certified cheQue, and was advised that it was not, but the cheQue was insured.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Marion Billiard of the Red
Head Road, Saint John East, advising that there is a recurring pollution problem in the Little River-Red
Head area in that wood fibre, chips, et cetera from the MacMillan Rothesay Limited mill are again building
up on the beaches in that area and that there is a stench from this pollution at low tide and that the
gas given off by this debris on the beach has discoloured the homes of residents of the area with the
brown-black covering they experienced in 1971, and further advising that Little River is now only a
pollution canal, taking the effluent from the Irving Refinery, the said MacMillan Rothesay mill, the
thermal plant and sewage from Midwood Avenue and that some of these industries are putting something more
in the river this year than they did in the last three years, and that the residents of the area would
like it investigated and some curbs put on these polluters so that the residents can breathe reasonably
ure air again, and further advising that the problemcco~enced at the end of July last and has continued
to the present time, and asking if the Irving Refine;y's sour water is now being emptied into Little
River - and reQuesting that something be done in regard to these problems as early as possible -- be
referred to the Pollution Control Committee for a report.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. J. Ian M. Whitcomb, solicitor
for House of-Hay Limited advising that his client herewith makes application for approval to lease and
utilize a portion of the K-Mart Plaza, Saint John West (by lease from Cambridge Leaseholds Limited) as a
fried chicken outlet, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....1
,....
.
I
I eoan,
~e
'j)o/iee~
FWfI'DIHn
~ /<1;'/1
or A!!~diJh s-r-
:B<<I"'I';,;;,/
. G!/YJ(.Ll1d
rl'lf"x/~
pel'$ohS
:lJ I"K -- - -
-t~"8fi
I.
.
1
I
.
.....
6:3
The Mayor advised that Councillor Green was absent from this Council meeting as he was representing
the City of Saint John at the Port Day in the city of Halifax, N. S.
Councillor Pye advised that he would like to discuss at this time the matter of patrolling of the King
SQuare and Old Burial Ground, which had been laid on the table by the Council two weeks ago.
Mr. Barfoot advised that he would like to have added to the agenda of this meeting his letter re-
garding a sub-division agreement concerning Stage II of the Highmeadow Park development.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he had asked last week about obtaining information concerning
whether the Chief of Police of the City of Saint John had any negotiations with the Royal Canadian Mounted
Police to take over patrolling the Lorneville and Throughway projects.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above noted three items of business be added to the
agenda of this meeting.
Councillor Pye stated that in view of the excessive damage to flower beds, constant bicycle riding,
the extremely annoying presence of inebriates and the disturbing reports of drug smoking and trafficking in King
SQuare and the Old Burying Ground, he would make the following motion, "That the Common Council instruct the
Chief of Police to prepare a routine Order to advise the patrolmen assigned to the Charlotte Street beat to
daily and periodically patrol King Square and the Old Burial Ground for the purpose of curbing vandalism,
enforcing the Bicycle By-Law, apprehending inebriates and eliminating drug smoking and trafficking in King
SQuare and the Old Burial Ground, the said patrolling to occur between the hours of 8.00 a.m. and 12.00 midnight
from June 1st to October 31st.".
Councillor Higgins stated that he would like the Chief of Police to answer whether or not, in fact,
the men on the Charlotte Street beat do a routine beat of King SQuare and the Old Burial Ground. Councillor M.
Vincent asked if there is a lot of damage or vandalism being done to the flower beds in these two areas. Chief
Ferguson replied in the affirmative, adding that it is also occurring in other areas and that the damage and
vandalism that occurs in King Square and the Old Burial Ground is not any greater than in other areas of the
city. Councillor M. Vincent asked if it is on record that drug smoking and trafficking is taking place in King
SQuare and the Old Burial Ground. Chief Ferguson replied that it is taking place throughout the entire city,
and not just in those two areas. Councillor M. Vincent asked if it is any worse in those two areas than anyplace
else. Chief Ferguson replied in the negative. Councillor M. Vincent asked if men of the Police Department are
automatically detailed to patrol the King Square and Old Burial Ground, as they would be doing in any other part
of the city. In reply, Chief Ferguson advised that this summer, the Department initiated a special non-uniformed
patrol of two men and an unmarked car and they go around and check these areas - these men are just designated
and delegated to do this type of work - they have picked up numbers of inebriated persons, or intoxicated
persons, in this area this summer than ever before, and this is being continued. He stated he does not think
that the Council should direct the Police Department, which would mean it would be really interfering with the
operation of the Police Department, and the Department on a certain day would need men at such and such a place,
so instead of having them up around the park the Department would have to put them somewhere else where serious
problems are being experienced in the city, such as on the West Side at the present time. He stated that he is
cognizant of the problems we are having and the damage, and he will be meeting with his senior officers and they
are formulating a plan daily, but it has to change due to manpower and due to the problems that are occurring in
other areas. He stated he does not think that the Council should direct the Chief of Police where to put people
and when to have them - he thinks this has to be governed by the type of offences that are coming in, and also
the hour of the time that the offences are happening, and this is the only way that we can combat the problem;
there are real problems, but they are everywhere, he pointed out.
Councillor HOdges stated that he personally checked the two areas in Question and noted there were a
few people lying-on the grass, and four people were kicking a football around (he agrees they should not have
been doing this, there), but the day he was there he found no bicycle riding through the area and there was only
the one sign there. He stated he cannot see any reason why people could not sit on the grass, or walk on the
grass because it does not hurt the grass to do so. He stated he noticed that some of the flower beds looked
pretty ragged, which is perhaps bad, but he did not find them as bad as did Councillor Pye. Chief Ferguson
stated that he has discussed the problem with Councillor Pye on several occasions, and that he is concerned
about the problem.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he was prepared to second Councillor Pye's motion. Councillor A. Vincent
asked if, the other night, the Police Department station wagon with a flashing light and a well-marked crest of
the City on it, drove through the King Square on its sidewalk in front of the Riviera Restaurant on Charlotte
Street, and stopped some people. He asked if that is what the Chief of Police described as a non-uniformed
group. He added that he was an eye witness to the above noted incident. He asked if the Chief thinks that our
patrols should enter the Square with a flashing light on a station wagon and drive up and check somebody at this
bench, and the next bench. He stated he was an eye witness to that the other night. The Chief replied he
thinks this is something he should look into and find out what the circumstances were; if the constable was
committing something that was not right and proper he thinks it should be dealt with in another manner (than by
asking the Chief this type of Question); he thinks that Councillor A. Vincent should approach him in the matter.
Councillor A. Vincent explained that he just wants to know what the Chief means by "non-uniformed", and that if
the Chief has another programme, he would like to know. He stated he does not think they are investigating a
real serious crime. Councillor Higgins felt it is up to the Chief to answer that at the proper time and at the
proper place, and that this Questioning of City staff is uncalled for and unwarranted, and if it continues, he
will withdraw from the Council chamber.
Councillor Pye stated to the Chief, that when he discussed this matter with him on four occasions in
the past couple of months he emphasized to the Chief that the patrolling would be done by the man on the Charlotte
Street beat without interfering with his other duties. He stated that he has personally observed bicycle riding
in the SQuare with no action taken to stop them by any patrolling policemen or policemen nearby at the head of
King Street.
At this point, Councillors Higgins, MacGowan and M. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.
Councillor Pye noted that there is no patrolling in the SQuare and that is all he is asking for, to
provide protection for one of the beauty spots of this city.
Councillor MacGowan re-entered the meeting. She advised that recently a woman from Victoria, B. C., a
city that is reknowned for its flowers, paid a compliment to the City of Saint John in saying that she had
travelled all across Canada and she had never seen a city with such beautiful flower beds as those we have in
Saint John, including King SQuare.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he seconded Councillor Pye's motion because of grave concern for people
64
~
S~-L/v,
eiI~ N~eP7el?-C-
l/i9'hm~dOw
llri"k, ~.!e.zz:
lI1e/l Ills -&-t!Jr
:Pl"ive
f'e-,;1!IPh men-c
;7' Councillor A. Vincent stated that he wants assurance from the Mayor that the City is capable and the Chief
~~i}'?A7 ")1~'~Of Police is capable, and that the City does not need any assistance from the Royal Canadian Mounted
)I Police to police the Throughway down to the end of the City boundaries or on the old road down the St.
Stephen highway and then joining the Throughway on to the limits of the City. He stated that there were
some remarks made which he found very offensive on behalf of our traffic prOblem with the Irving Oil
refinery and that they did not want this to tolerate at Point Lepreau or Lorneville. He stated he does not
accept the decision of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police that they are going to police that road in the
City boundaries. He asked for assurance from the Mayor that there is no deal being made by him that the
Mayor has given the City's jurisdiction to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, because he wants it on the
record that there would be no Labour peace with that Police force sitting in with any meetings that
Councillor A. Vincent is negotiating a labour contract because he is not in a dictatorship. In reply,
Chief Ferguson stated that he has had no negotiations with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police dealing with
policing the Throughway - he has talked with the City Manager and has said it is something we should look
at as. he contends it is a Provincial responsibility, and not, he guesses, a Chief of Police's responsibility
he feels it is a Provincial highway and that maybe the Province should be responsible for policing it and
maybe gi ve"the~Ci ty.. an'.extI'a .grant ,.because we will need extra people for policing the Throughway. Insofar
as assistance from the Royal Canadian Police is concerned, he stated that the City does get excellent and
a lot of assistance from that Force in different investigations and cases in the city; he has had no
negotiations with that Force, and gave them no word, or anything like this. Councillor A. Vincent stated
that the point is that the meeting he spoke of was convened for Foundation Company of Canada, bargaining
authority, which was also attended by the members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police he has referred to,
and they gave a telephone number to call if there were any problems at Lorneville, and Councillor A.
Vincent at that meeting made it clear that he was going to call Chief Ferguson regarding any problems, if
it was in the City of Saint John they occurred. He stated that he is asking the Mayor and Common Council
to confirm that the City has not given up its jurisdiction and has no intention of giving it up in this
regard. He felt it was unfair of anyone to try to judge the City's traffic patterns or its problems with
6,300 people working at the Irving refinery plus the people who work at other industries in that area,
including the dry dock, to try to compare Point Lepreau which at its peak would have 2,100 or 2,200 people
as compared to 10,000 people - to talk about a traffi'c jam from Stella Maris Church to the Irving refinery
is not the same thing. He stated he would-have:w~lcomed the Royal Canadian Mounted Police members there
if it was a joint venture, that they were going to say to us that we are going to patrol the road between
certain points and then take them there. He stated he does not see any reason in the City of Saint John
or Martinon (he took it up with the Minister of Labour and he is prepared to take it up with the Premier
and everybody else) it should not be governed by the City's Police Department. He felt that the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police thought there was a Police strike coming up and they were going to move in, and
stated he took a real exception to that issue. He stated he does not feel there is any room for the said
Federal Police Force to police or patrol the streets of the City of Saint John - if we cannot do it due to
rAhI/11'I'7I)t..h 'Pn
~/pf' ~ -rb//ce
11I#t?p/sis
dpa"'~SY
1f, C', tyJ, -p
?dli~e .7Jept:
TA l"iJ U !fA W6l fI
Do/It:!'lnR +-
r 'i:!it~ !J6'N?t!fs
I;.vl"1; "Rt?-/'il'Jin
/-tL. ~r.;l"I7~/t! J
~"oblem
'PrPlf, {}p vt-:
(h.;;Jnt -Eo
C't'i9 re,7fi J
~ff poltC'1 nff
who are handicapped who have been knocked down by bicycles; since Councillor Pye first brought up the
subject, he himself has spent some time in the King Square-Old Burial Ground area, and he thinks that this
said area is no place for motorcycles, Police cars and bicycles. He thinks that the elder people of our
community or anyone who has a handicap should not be forced to jump off the sidewalk on top of a park
bench, in order to gain protection, which is what is happening. He stated he is not happy with the
situation, and that is why he seconded the motion.
.
Councillor Davis observed that there is no by-law that we can pass that is going to prevent some
young person from knocking over an elderly lady with a bicycle, and that this has been occurring in the
city for many, many years up to the present time. He stated he does not think that the Bicycle By-law as
written is going to make better young people and he does not think we are going to collect too many ten-
dollar bills (fines) because nO-One complains. He noted that the licenses on bicycles now have identi-
fying numbers on them. He stated he does not think that the Police Department can patrol everywhere, but
he thinks that the citizens can patrol the situation; if there are drunks lying around on the Old Burial
Ground, report them and the Police will pick them up. He stated he objects very strongly to the matter of
ordering patrols in such and such a place at such and such a time, and so forth, we do not need the Chief,
we will do it ourselves.
I
Councillor M. Vincent re-entered the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Pye
I
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Chief of Police be instructed to issue a
routine order which would assign the man patrolling the Charlotte Street beat to periodically and daily
patrol through King Square and the Old Burial Ground, from 8.00 a.m. to 12.00 midnight, from June 1st to
October 31st.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that as seconder of the motion, he understands that the above is a
directive to the Chief of Police, not to tell him where to put the man or who the man may be but, if
necessary, he even pay overtime to carry out this regulation; that for the protection of the elderly and
handicapped people who use King SQuare daily, if it is necessary to hire off-duty Police at the Chief's
decision as to when it should be done, and if the Chief does not have the man on the roster, that he calls
one or two men in for such duty. Councillor Pye pointed out that the Chief does not have to hire extra
men for such duty.
.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Pye and A. Vincent voting "yea" and
the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Parfitt, MacGowan, Hodges and M. Vincent voting "nay".
Councillor Davis withdrew from the meeting.
Councillor MacGowan felt that the Council would JOln with her wholeheartedly in commending the
Chief of Police for the new approach he has to motorists, in the form of a courtesy award.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, recommending that
the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute a sub-division agreement for Stage II of the High-
meadow Park Development, be laid on the table until this Common Council can, as planned, visit the site to.
re-align McAllister Drive, which commitment to so do was given to the Irving interests some time ago.
I
~
Councillor A. Vincent stated that on August 27th and 28th last at a mark-up for the A.F.L.-
C.I.O. Building Trades department which includes 70 building trades, held at the Holiday Inn, he repre-
sented on August 27th the Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers and took strong objection to an Inspector, a
Sergeant and a Corporal from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police at the meeting, claiming that they had no
jurisdiction within the City of Saint John - he added that he will have a private conversation with the
Chief of Police any day, and the Inspector and so on regarding some of the remarks that took place.
.
I
,1
.
~
,....
I'
cYomm,
Whr;/e
LEG A L
e/~
I', s/ltl-l-or
Fines
e(ll/edea
under
IJ'/dpr
f/eh/e/~
/lc-r
J)e/rt:
. ;TU$~1ee
/Ifonfff7n
J?ei-ed-iol?
,r~/hes
monies
I-
.
I-
I,S..I. .5~-
p.::JII19.5$o
:&se,6,;;,/ I
-COiL rn<ill'l7en
1?een+'PCiJI"fi:
:Popf;.
:65
pressure of the influx of traffic, then ,the Provincial Government should give the City more money to do it. The
~ayor noted that is what the Chief of Police is saying. Chief Ferguson stated that he heard on the radio that
the said Federal Police Force is doing a study on Lepreau which is that Force's area. He noted that the Trans-
Canada Highway goes through the cities of Fredericton and Moncton and the police of those cities do not do the
patrolling. Councillor Hodges stated he supports Councillor A. Vincent that the area of Saint John is going to
be patrolled by its own Policemen, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police patrol outside the City. Councillor A.
Vincent asked if this matter will be followed up. The Mayor replied in the affirmative.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, the Committee arose at 8.40 o'clock p.m. and the Mayor
resumed the Chair in legal session of Council, when there were present Councillors Davis, Hodges, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent, and Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager and F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor,
also H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor advising that he has been
informed by Mr. Beverley G. Smith, Solicitor with the Department of Justice, Fredericton, that the Justice
Department caused an investigation to be made of Public and Special Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New
Brunswick which pertain to the City of Saint John, in connection with the retention by the City of voluntary
payments collected by the Police for offences under the Motor Vehicle Act, and that such search failed to reveal
the basis whereby the City of Saint John may withhold the voluntary payments, contrary to Section 357 (1) of the
Motor Vehicle Act; that the Commissioner of Finance of the City confirms that the City has been retaining for
several years, voluntary payments collected for offences under the Motor Vehicle Act, by virtue of a letter dated
November 7th, 1962, from the Premier of New Brunswick Louis J. Robichaud, to the Mayor of the City; that in view
of the foregoing, the City Solicitor examined correspondence and the relevant statutes and he concurs with the '
opinion of the Department of Justice, and by virtue of the said Section 357 (1) it seems abundantly clear that
the City has no authority to retain money collected by the Police in connection with violations under the Motor
Vehicle Act, and he recommends that the policy of the City to retain fines in this manner be terminated and that
the City comply with the Motor Vehicle Act -- be received and filed and the recommendation of the City Solicitor
in this regard be implemented:
AND FURTHER that the City Manager and the City Solicitor ascertain from either the City Manager or the
City Solicitor of the City of Moncton how that city's by-laws were prepared in a manner to enable that city to
retain monies collected in connection with violations under the Motor Vehicle Act, and that the City Manager
negotiate with the appropriate Provincial officials for the retention by the. City of the said fines monies that
are collected in the City of Saint John.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Co on Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the fifteenth day of
September, A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt and Pye
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis,
Assistant to the City Manager, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering
and Works, I. Bruhier, Chief Development Control and Assistant Development
Officer, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, A. Ellis, Building
Inspector, and E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police
Major Ralph Stanley of The Salvation Army, offered a prayer which opened the meeting.
Councillor Gould drew attention of the Council members to the copies of letters supplied to them by
the City Manager, one letter being that of the Saint John Softball Association of appreciation, and encourage-
ment for efforts of the Recreation and Parks Department in assisting the Association with its programmes, and,
in particular, during the recent Senior "AU tournament that was held in Saint John from July 18th to 20th last.
Mr. Keith Dow was present on behalf of the President and Board of Directors of TEL-AID, SAINT JOHN,
hose brief that was before Council at this time contains the reQuest for financial assistance from the City of
/7 Saint John in the amount of $2,000.00, which amount would be directed to renta of $1,300.00 in the City-owned
tr~nzL City Market building, and the balance would be applied to other operating expenses. The brief advises that this
;r-/- /I ~ group received a start-up grant of $4,000.00 in September of 1974 from the Department of the Secretary of State,
. ~ - I, and that to date in 1975 they have received a further grant of $3,000.00 from the Secretary of State, a $3,000.00
~1~~~)1grant from the Saint John Kinsmen Club, and a $4,000.00 grant from the Provincial Department of Social Services;
his is a charitable organization registered by the Department of National Revenue and has received clearance of
its name for registry with the Corporate Services Branch of the Province of New Brunswick. The brief states
that the organization commenced on-line operation on December 2nd, 1974, having aCQuired the services of a full-
....
68
~
b!rClnt-
Tel- /ktiC,
$,xll'rt- %1, n
1{ tJec;a an
~~d.
ekrJ-, :ZJrul17PfI
+c".
C'tJl15C-rNdion
6a;arel;n~ on
51deweJlk
Car/do", $t-, <?-
I (,(/elk"eh 1?
time Director (its only salaried person) and a group of trained volunteers from the community; that the
centre was located in the City Market building and initially provided its service Monday to Friday
inclusive, between the hours, of' 1. OO,P.ll), (l,nd 10,00 p,ll)t;th",t < durin!,,:' it& initial nine months of oper-
ations the centre has experienced an increasing number of calls as the public became aware of this
service, and the centre has expanded both its volunteer staff through additional training sessions to the
present level of thirty and the hours of service (11.00 a.m. to 11.00 p.m.) to meet the increasing
demand; that a fifteen-member Board of Directors, including three of the volunteer staff is responsible
for policy and direction; that administrative assistance is also provided to the Director by Board
Committees active in the areas of finance, training and public information; that the organization is
planning a major volunteer recruitment and training programme during the month of October in order to
expand its delivery of services toward the ultimate goal of a twenty-four hour, seven day week operation.
The brief asks that the Common Council support the reQuest for the above named grant in order that this
organization may continue to provide an efficient and effective service to the citizens of Saint John at
minimal cost.
.
'I
Mr. Dow advised that the aims and objectives of TEL-AID are threefold in nature: to function as
an information and referral service and as a crisis response centre in this city, to identify community
needs as a result of reQuests received from citizens, and to maintain a staff of highly trained telephone
counsellors. He stated that research indicated the citizens are often faced with a twofold problem in
seeking service assistance; that services are available to them (this includes the three levels of
Government, churches, the private sector, et cetera), and where does the citizen go to serve a particular
need - that is, to determine which of the numerous service agencies to approach regarding a particular
need. He stated that at the present time there are approximately forty-five individuals associated with
the TEL-AID referral service, thirty of whom are trained telephone counsellors; all forty-five individuals
service in a volunteer capacity, giving of their time and talents, freely. He stated that while the
growth and development that is taking place in the Greater Saint John area is to be encouraged, we must
be concerned with the social impact of the rapid growth and change associated with that growth which will
bring changes to the physical as well as to the demographic base of our community, and that TEL-AID
believes that the thrust of the growth and change that we are now experiencing in the community has
placed additional emphasis on the need for the information and referral service such as is offered by
this organization to our citizens. He stated that, considering the fact that this organization has
established itself as a viable community agency, supported by the two senior levels of government, it
feels it is justified in approaching the Common Council to seek the City's financial support as outlined
in the brief.
I
.
Mr. Dow advised that the organization is aware that the City's 1975 budget regarding grants has
been brought down, and, therefore, there is no provision for such a grant from that budget.
In reply to Councillor Higgins' reQuest for an explanation of the difference between TEL-AID
and the Social Services Council of Greater Saint John, Mr. Dow stated that the service that is provided
by the latter organization, and not by the former named organization, is information and referral on
crisis response. He further advised that there were two organizations (FISH which was associated with
churches, and Aware House which is no longer operative) that dealt with crisis response or help-lines,
per se; in May and June of 1973 representatives of FISH, Aware House and Social Services Council got
together and as a result of their joint deliberations research was carried out over a fifteen-month
period that established the need for the type of service given by TEL-AID that was not associated with 'I
any established agency or group; the vast majority of the calls received by TEL-AID are of the nature of
information and referral - crisis response, which is also important, is only part of these calls service.
He stated that his organization is not assisted at this time by The United Way although it has had
deliberations with respect to it becoming a member agency at a future time - that is presently being
considered by the TEL-AID Board of Directors.
(Councillor Kipping entered the meeting)
Councillor Parfitt made the suggestion that individual citizens could contribute towards the
fund raising of TEL-AID through the holding of a tag day, or by voluntary giving from office staffs, such
as those in the employ of the City of Saint John. Mr. Dow replied that consideration has already been
given to the matter of holding a tag day - however, the organization does not wish to encumber citizens
unnecessarily with another tag day - there are many in the year. He made the point that this operation
is freely given because the organization has freely received - they want to give of their time, their
talent and of their treasure, which, in effect, is what Councillor Parfitt is saying. .
In reply to Councillor Green's Question as to what continued financial support the organization
is looking for from the Department of the Secretary of State, Mr. Dow advised that the Department gives
the start-up money for a maximum of two years (the second year's amount, if received at all, is usually
less than that received in the first year); unofficially, they have been advised that even on a third_
year basis, due to the success of this operation, that Department is willing to look on a basis of merit
on the organization's justified needs and on the merit of the service it provides, to give the organiz-
ation financial aid in the third year.
Councillor MacGowan in discussing the hours of service offered by TEL-AID, felt that it is very
important that the service be provided up until midnight at the present time and on the week-ends, for
those who are in need of this service. Mr. Dow replied that it is hoped, after the training programme
that is to take place in October, that by the middle of November the organization will be able to offer
additional service; it is their priority, to cover the week-end period, he added.
I
Councillor Parfitt asked if TEL-AID would consider having the volunteer counsellors receive the
all-night calls for information and assistance in their own homes through Telephone Answering Service
assistance. Mr. Dow pointed out that this organization operates out of the City Market building and with
espect to any form of an answering service, the organization feels that direct contact with the volunteers
as information referral and crisis response is more necessary and immediate than having to go through an
nswering service to get to its telephone counsellors.
.1
The Mayor advised that the Council would render a decision in this matter, later in the meeting.
Mr. David Peacock, representing Rocca Construction Ltd., was present in support of the letter,
ated September 12th, 1975, from this company which advises that the company has entered into a contract
ith Clark, Drummie & Company for the construction of a new office building on the corner of Carleton
treet and Wellington Row, and that soil conditions have necessitated excavation to encroach on the
edestrian walk-way area, and because of this the company finds it necessary to utilize more than the
our feet of sidewalk for which it has a permit and the company therefore reQuests that permission be
ranted to it to utilize the total sidewalk and grassed area for a period of time necessary to complete
he shell of the building; and advising that the company will restore the sidewalk and grassed area at
uch time as the protective hoarding can be removed.
.
~
,....
67
I
Mr. Peacock advised, as follows:- the building site had been excavated previously, and the contract of
Rocca Construction Ltd. to build the office building was to begin fro~ that point; because the building occupies
the total lot-to the property lines (the lot-~e~~ure~ ~pprox~~tely lOQ:by 80 feet, and the building measures
approximately 96 by 78 feet) and the property lines are the boundaries of the sidewalk; the company has encountered
the problem whereby it needs a little extra room to construct this building and has applied to the City for a
sidewalk permit which has been received - he believes this permit entitles the company to approximately one-half
of the usable area of the sidewalk; however, with the building excavation coming to the edge of the sidewalk the
company has encountered another problem whereby {t cannot-excavate straight down (the banks of the excavation
must retain a certain slope); also, because the building is of masonry construction the company reQuires between
5 and 6 feet on the exterior of the building in order to do a satisfactory job on the masonry and brickwork on
the exterior of the building; the company has presently erected a fence which is utilizing almost the total area
of the sidewalk - the company understands some problems have arisen from this and it is for this reason that it
is applying to the Common Council for permission to leave this fence in its present position until approximately
December 5th. He stated that one solution to this sidewalk problem may be that pedestrian traffic could be
routed by way of additional cross-walks which the company would be willing to paint on the street at its own
expense to cross Wellington Rowand two additional cross-walks on Carleton Street (one above the construction
site and one opposite Wellington Row) to be sure to route all pedestrian traffic clear of the construction site.
With regard to the point made to the Council that the fence has been causing traffic problems, whereby vehicular
traffic on Wellington Row could not see on-coming traffic on Carleton Street, Mr. Peacock advised that on Friday
last the company replaced approximately 30 feet of hoarding in each direction with chain link fencing which the
company believes has adeQuately alleviated this problem. He stated that he brought with him photographs taken
recently of the excavation on the said site, if any Council members were interested in seeing them, which might
aid in indicating to Council exactly the company's problem in this matter. The Mayor asked if there is any
thought of elevating this barricading so that pedestrians could walk under it in this particular area. Mr.
Peacock replied that the problem is that the sidewalk itself has fallen directly into the excavation and at the
present time, as the photographs show, there is not even a sidewalk left; the company's fence extends to just on
the inside of the parking meters there; this problem with the sidewalk applies to both Wellington Rowand Carleton
Street, and there are parking meters along both streets; the company received permission from the City Traffic
I?t't?(?~ Engineer to use one parking space for its job office and has done so - the rest of the parking meters are still
~)?~~CtS there - the problem is that when you park at one of those meters you would have to walk along the edge of the
~~6f. fence to reach the sidewalk. He added that the fence in Question was not erected by Rocca Construction Ltd. but
. ~~~ by the owner, possibly through the people who did the excavation; the Rocca company did not become involved in
~'/7 he project until this point in time and the excavation was done and the fence erected before the Rocca company
~ ~':-_~~~ arrived on the site. In discussing the placement of the new building on the site, Mr. Peacock advised that it
(,O~~~~ will be basically on the same site as the old building, with a foot or so between the new building and the
~~~;AP~ OJ? existing building, and a couple of feet at the rear next to an alley of the people next door. He advised that it
s,~e~~I'Ar is possible that the fencing can be taken down as soon as the steel is erected for this new building, and the
~I>~~~ sidewalk is replaced, which could be about the middle of October - it will definitely have to be taken down to do
/J/. ~.tD" the masonry work, but at the same time they need approximately 5 feet in order to build scaffolding for the
~el1/" masonry work; the two-story job office building of the company is presently against the said fence and is occupying
~e one parking meter space. The Mayor suggested that the company, instead, elevate that office building to permit
pedestrians to walk under it. Mr. Peacock outlined the problems that this would present for the company. He
added that the company wants to co-operate with anything the City can suggest that is going to assist the company
in resolving these problems, to obtain the best solution for both the City and the company. Councillor Higgins
had made the suggestion that, later in the Council meeting, this matter be referred to the City staff for re-
commendations to Council with regard to resolving the problems under discussion, after negotiating with the
company. The Mayor advised that he believes this would be the procedure to follow, that is, that the City staff
and the Rocca Construction Ltd. people consult together and come to a settlement.
I
.
I
Notice had been sent to Mrs. Dorothy May Durley, Mrs. Helen Pettigrew and Mr. George A. Durley to
appear at this meeting to show cause, if any, why the building located at civic number 19 Park Street Extension
should not be removed or destroyed as a dangerous or dilapidated building. Neither of these owners was present,
nor were they represented.
Mr. A. Ellis referred to the written report to Council regarding the condition of the building in
Question and stated that he believes this building is dilapidated and deteriorated and that he recommends that it
be condemned and demolished under the provisions of the 1925 legislation. He distributed pictures for the
Council members to see the state of the said building.
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
~~1J!/1'11<
bftt" l!?,f,
fie, ir?1? PeHi-
fJrew
tTetJJY.e t9.
JJar/o/
I J};Ia'p((;{~
,6la5'
If ~,..k $t-.
..f" ;((t? PI.
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that notice having been given to Mrs. Dorothy May Durley, Mrs.
Helen Pettigrew and George A. Durley, being the owners, as appears by the records of the Registrar of Deeds for
the County of Saint John, of the building located at civic number 19 Park Street Extension, in the City of Saint
John, reQuesting that the said owners appear before this meeting of the Common council to show cause why the said
building should not be removed or destroyed as a dangerous or dilpidated building, and having considered the
report of the Inspector of Buildings, and no-one having appeared on behalf of the said Mrs. Dorothy May Durley,
s. Helen Pettigrew and George A. Durley; the Common Council hereby deems and declares the said building located
at civic number 19 Park Street Extension, in the said city, to be dilapidated and dangerous:
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the said Mrs. Dorothy May Durley, Mrs. Helen Pettigrew and George A.
Durley are hereby reQuired to remove or destroy the said building situate at 19 Park Street Extension, in the
City of Saint John, within ten days after receiving notice to do so by the Inspector of Buildings:
I
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon failure of the said Mrs. Dorothy May Durley, Mrs. Helen Pettigrew
and George A. Durley to remove or destroy the said building situate at civic number 19 Park Street Extension, in
the City of Saint John, in compliance with the reQuest of such notice, that the Inspector of Buildings cause such
ork to be done and the cost thereof recovered from the said Mrs. Dorothy May Durley, Mrs. Helen Pettigrew and
George A. Durley.
The Mayor asked that the Council approve the adding of an item to the agenda at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
agenda of this meeting.
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the item which the Mayor wishes to present be added to the
. ntkni,"c
/I/4io170l1
Exh;bi-t-i~n
The Mayor read a proposed motion regarding the Atlantic National Exhibition.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
.....
68
t',.NII?/~~ I'
m4mf/e
/f/4/t:?neil /
Uhl'6i-i-/Ph
~h7/~/J?ff
~.Nh1.
~hJm.E~hoP,
.7J~i/~Ib/Nnt!?
./97~
/l1111~U/ / ~
h~iht'~rin.r
1(/1//'1-$ 2J ej:d;
~B. /(Ippin!f
St?//,t ~ste
p{,!;?o.sal
$i?urh ~11'"
I.i/ml .p$se~
#" hS ~, ~ r>1Jl!/t
,(anrL t:bNftI '
s..t. ell!! f4:J/1
El17plo!jet's'r/n/
/Yr? 4i'h
afP"'; J7 .!/l1"~-
med
C',l1ei/tdlt/oh :9/.
Y'e'pol't-
/I1ihistr?r o-f"
~60<<r
1?e-~(jhl/?.ff .
'Plal'lh. /111I(/1 S.
C. T Simf?n
F T Ct?rbln
1?e- ;zohi'!fJ
SQelrlh -~..!f
,qelv~/st- o,fA
PklJ. /!t/fVIS. ~
J: 2. /!1/iDt-
ShClITJ/"fJ~ k '1? sl6
.I-ta.
$<<.1,-<<11/,
....1,.e~PJe;d-
HljlJmea clQIf/
'P.tJPK, SlClffe {I
Sf-reefs
"WHEREAS the Atlantic National Exhibition can be a major attraction in Saint John with benefits
for Saint John City and the Province as a whole;
AND WHEREAS the successful operation of the Exhibition is of interest and importance to the City
of Saint John:
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that a special Committee be constituted for the purpose of securing
information on the organization, administration and operation of the Atlantic National Exhibition and of
making a report on its past and future development and status, and recommending ways and means how it may
be improved:
AND FURTHER that such Committee be composed of not less than five, and not more than nine
persons:
AND FURTHER that the Nominating Committee be reQuested to submit names for appointment within
three weeks:
mittee."
AND FURTHER that the Commissioner of Economic Development be ex officio a member of such Com-
Councillor Cave asked if the above motion would mean that the above named committee would come
to Council with a recommendation that the City spend money on the said Atlantic National Exhibition. The
Mayor replied that we would encourage the operation of that Exhibition, as recommended. The observation
was made by Councillor Gould that the Council would deal with this subject at the time the committee would
be making its recommendations to Council.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Cave voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the annual report for 1974 of the Engineering and
Works Department, be received and filed.
Mr. MacKinnon was commended by Council members on the excellence of the above mentioned report.
Councillor Kipping expressed the desire that in receiving and filing the above noted report, the Council
members will not be precluded from discussing certain relevant subjects, as in his own case, he would like
to discuss the Sanitation Division and the solid waste disposal problem and the fact that the City has to
arrive at a solution to it before it gets to a crisis stage. Councillor Parfitt noted that the report .
refers to the City's aCQuisition of a property on St. Andrews Street (at a price of $40,000.00) as coming
out of the Recreation b.udget, under the heading "Capital construction Recreation 1974", and asked .if there
is a plan yet for recreation land for the South End. In reply, Councillor Green stated that the Land
Committee has been trying to assemble land for housing development and for recreation purposes where it
becomes available in the South End.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated September 12th,
1975, advising that the City has been advised by Saint John City Hall Employees' Union, Local 486, C.U.P.E.
that the membership has voted to accept the latest wage offer by the City, and that he, therefore, recom-
mends that in accordance with the Industrial Relations Act, the City advise the Minister of Labour and
Manpower that the City accepts Sections:'l (d) to (j) inclusive of the Conciliation Board Report, that it
rejects Articles 1. (a) to (c) inclusive and Articles 2 (a) and (b) - and noting that Articles 2 (a) and
(b) are rejected in both the original report of August 12th, 1975 and the clarification of August 22nd,
1975, and that aforementioned Articles that have been rejected have been the subject of negotiations and,
as amended, will appear in the new Working Agreement - and recommending, therefore, that City staff be
authorized to prepare the Working Agreement for final ratification by Common Council -- be received and
filed and the recommendations contained therein adotped.
The Mayor noted that when the new Working Agreement has been compiled and the matter comes
before Council, the Council members will have an opportunity to discuss it.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the application submitted by Messrs. C. J. Simon and
F. J. Corbin for re-zoning of property consisting of eight and one-half acres of land on the Narrows Road
o permit the operation of a private club thereon, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a
recommendation, and that authority be granted to proceed to advertise the proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the application from the Maritime Conference of the
Seventh-Day Adventist Church, 451 St. George Street, Moncton, N. B., seeking the rezoning of the lot of
land situate at the corner of Woodward Avenue and Boar's Head Road to Planned Development or other suit-
able zoning to permit the establishment of project consisting of a nursing home, school and church on this
5-acre site, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that authority be
granted to proceed to advertise the said proposed re-zoning.
Mr. J. B. Elliot, General Manager of Shamrock Realty Ltd., was present in support of the letter
from this company, dated September 12th, 1975, regarding a sub-division agreement with the City which the
company is seeking for Stage II of the Highmeadow Park development. The letter states that in 1973
following an appearance before Council to obtain approval for a planned unit development at Loch Lomond
Road, McAllister Drive and Silverstone Street known as Highmeadow Park, the company entered into an
agreement with the City of Saint John for the company to build this project, which it did; that in 1974,
the company appeared before Council and received approval to amend the above planned unit development for
the number and type of units on the north side of Highmeadow Drive; that in 1973, the company built 52
town houses on the south side of Highmeadow Drive, and some months later built another 24 units on the
south side; that the company is now building 24 units on the north side of Highmeadow Drive and submitted
the sub-division survey plans to the Town Planning office and was informed that, even though Highmeadow
Drive was built, the company had to have a new agreement with the City, which agreement was drawn up by
the City, but was subseQuently tabled by Common Council (on September 8th, 1975); that the company has
also had discussions with City Hall regarding use of land included in its holdings in this area, pur-
portedly reserved for future widening of streets and interchanges; that the company is being financially
~
.
I
I
.
~I
.
I
.1
.
~
JI"'"
.
I
I
.
~"y 11I.1'"
.$ uJ-dlv.
~q/'{?€me.
S7t~Mr()l?k
11 e.;J II ff ..(,
111t'.fhl'J7e.;]
%ffl-, SlCJ!J
If
-
streets
fI!5~/I1eat/o
7JN lie
(;!r.;a n-t-
Tel- /I i,(,
.' S.iillht- ..Hh.
:13<<;,( ~et-
<:2- 'Iy II/fr.
1? t?Ca5J Cn-
d/'Kd L~
I ctar<<, :J).
<I- Co.
{};a,./el6I1.5"t;
Wefltn~(7h
1?~w
C!t?h$/rueeI
IS (7';lI',{/nlf
1 pt:I;ee trl/.ept
side 641c2llr~
, LEG A L
e, "y S,i'ello.
Sl'l'<<ee ,fa
e ofl-esetP!
inl-caKe pi
. /I.:JJ,L L-i,t.
.1I/~e,{.;Jf't!m
IJt(.gl7bc
Lej'O! I
tPotLnsel
..... .7bhl7 :fi;J1"P'!/
6~
embarrassed by the delay in completon of this agreement as it has many thousands of dollars tied up in the 24
units on the north side of Highmeadow Drive and cannot arrange any form of financing for them until approval by
Town Planning of the survey plans; that some of these 24 units will be ready for occupancy October 1st, 1975 and
help ease the housing shortage in our area.
Mr. Elliot advised that on the side of McAllister Drive bounded by Loch Lomond Road and Silverstone
Street, the company built Highmeadow Drive, to meet the terms of the agreement signed with the City - Highmeadow
Drive has now been built, paved and finished by the company, and the company was of the understanding that this
agreement covered the land on both sides of this street because this street goes between the two parcels of land
held by the company; having finished building on one side of this street the company is now proceeding with the
building of 24 town houses on the other side of this street; the company needs to have the plan for this project
signed by the Planning office in order to be able to get bank financing and mortgage money draws; however, the
company finds that the agreement covered only one side of this street and it is financially embarrassed because
it cannot get financing. He stated the company understands that the Council laid the matter on the table on
September 8th last because of a Question regarding the widening of McAllister Drive. He advised that when the
company got the piece of land and started working on the planned unit development it was given a plan by the
Planning office telling the company that it was going to necessarily lose 32 feet of its land on that side of
McAllister Drive and, also, a pie-shaped piece, because of a future interchange that somebody thought that some
day they migqt do - and the town houses have been built within the bounds of this piece of land. He stressed
that the company needs to have the new agreement with the City so that it can build the town houses a.nd finish
them, and ob~ain the financing. He stated that that is the main problem the company has on that side of the
street; it s~ill has a piece of land on the other side of the street that it cannot get any Provincial or City
representative to tell the company what the problem is - the proposal the company submitted to the Planning
Advisory Co~ittee has been shelved, waiting for somebody to give the company an up-to-date plan. He advised
that the company, in the area under discussion, has left 32 feet as requested by the Planning Advisory Committee,
regarding th~ houses that are now under construction, and there is also a Y-shaped piece between the company's
houses and the street that is being held because maybe, some day, somebody is going to want it. Mr. Elliot noted
that in front of White Motors McAllister Drive is 100 feet wide, and at the present time it is 66 feet wide in
the area of the said town houses, and that it is scheduled to be 132 feet wide when it is completed. He stated
that the company has held on its plans the reQuirements laid down by the Town Planning staff regarding street
widening land. Councillor Cave stated he does not know of any highway in our area that is 132 feet wide, which
is what We have for McAllister Drive.
Mr. Barfoot advised that as far as the City staff is concerned, the matter regarding the agreement Mr.
Elliot is seeking has been cleared away and it is a satisfactory agreement to enter into.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that Stage II of
Highmeadow Park that is being developed by Shamrock Realty Limited, which involves the construction of town
houses, reQuires no City cost-sharing in the services as they had all been constructed under a previous sub-
division agreement for Stage I; that, however, a sub-division agreement is still necessary in order to cover
matters such as inspection, completion of landscaping, house designs, et cetera; and recommending that the Mayor
and Common Clerk be authorized to execute a sub-division agreement for the said Stage II -- be taken from the
table (having been laid on the table on September 8th last) and the recommendation contained therein adopted.
Mr. Elliot asked if it is possible that the Mayor or somebody direct the City staff to meet with the
people who own the land, including Shamrock Realty Limited and Mrs. Deschamp, on the other side of the street,
and tell these land owners what is going on because Mr. Large would like to speak on the matter, if he may do so.
He pointed out that Mr. Large and Shamrock Realty Limited has not been able to find out from any of the Pro-
vincial or City departments concerned, or from the Planning Advisory Committee, who wants what. The Mayor
replied that a meeting in this regard will be held for the purpose of explaining to these land owners the matter
in detail concerning use of these lands for street purposes.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the reQuest received from TEL-AID, SAINT JOHN for a grant of
$2,000.00 from the City of Saint John, be referred to the Committee on Budget.
Mr. Barfoot advised that subsequent to the presentation made by Mr. David Peacock on behalf of Rocca
Construction Ltd., earlier in this meeting, the Building Inspector and he met with the representative of this
company and this company has agreed, as recommended by the Building Inspector, to construct a covered sidewalk
along the edge of the fence right around the perimeter of the property and to raise up the office building that
is now sitting on the parking area. He stated that this solution is recommended by the City staff.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager and
the Building Inspector, and as agreed to by Mr. David Peacock representing Rocca Construction Ltd., the said
company be permitted to construct a covered sidewalk along the edge of the fence on Carleton Street and Wel-
lington Row, around the perimeter of the property at the corner of these two streets on which a new office
building is being constructed by the said company for Clark, Drummie & Company, and, also, that the said company
be permitted to raise up the office building that is now resting on the parking area on the street adjacent to
this site, so that pedestrians can pass under the said office building.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole at this time, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed
the Chair, in legal session of Council.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, with regard to his
investigation of the Spruce Lake 72-inch FRP water intake failure and the examination by the independent co-
nsulting firm of A D I Limited of the entire design and specifications covering the installation of the collapsed
intake pipe at Spruce Lake, advising that the said consultants recently completed their investigation to the
point where they have submitted to the City, in draft form, a report on the water intake failure and will be
meeting shortly with City representatives for the purpose of bringing the draft form of their report into a final
stage document - and further advising that from an examination of the draft form report, it appears quite evident
that the City Solicitor will be recommending the commencement of a legal action against several parties including
the City's consultant, MacLaren Atlantic Limited - and requesting, at this point, that the Council authorize the
City Solicitor to engage outside legal counsel to assist him in preparation and commencement of this action, and
stating that with Council's authorization he intends to engage John Barry, a solicitor specializing in litigation -
and further advising that before the actual Writs are issued and legal action commenced, he will be informing the
70
,(e/l..;J/ aP~h~e.
./ t?hh ~J"J.~
fY/-#!f S'o//C/ifbr
$1'1'a.~~ ~Kt!
~QI/a?sd
i"t-.;"Ike f7lpe
~"!f SDI/cllo
~im'>>. Q.p{(/hDh
:JJb~S/l,II/.Ei
Wi'llt~m ~
Flynn
hind //~~hse
;rut/et! t?-r
If'lp-t-ion
(J()t(I1. P.!f~
77Jxi ~-,/01W
alh1en;t;"eh-t S
Oh/~f" C)-f'
~!lce
ClI!! Sol/ei:fbr
!f/t?tDr ~h/~/e
/Jet-
Hhes- mpl7le
tYo//,eteL
J}e;d. :7Us-t-/
:po/![ 'Pro/1'-
StX"re-CClI"Y
Ci-t!l ;Jfc1~.ffe,
~
Common Council in more detail of the findings uncovered by A D I Limited which information should be
available for Council following the meeting when the City representatives discuss with A D I Limited the
form of the final report be received and filed and the City Solicitor continue on with his recommendations
and negotiations, and he be authorized to engage outside legal counsel as outlined above.
.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor with reference to
the hearing by Common Council, sitting in Committee of the Whole on September 8th last, of the reQuest
made by Mr. Douglas A. M. Evans, solicitor for Mr. William P. Flynn, that the suspension of his client's
taxi license be lifted, at which hearing a point was raised as to whether Mr. Flynn had been convicted for
an offence under the Criminal Code of Canada, in that he was given a conditional discharge, advising that
upon investigation, he has determined that Mr. Flynn was found guilty under Section 312 (1) (a) of the
Criminal Code of Canada (possession of stolen 'property) and the Judge in imposing sentence ordered that
the accused be discharged upon conditions which were prescribed in a Probation Order; and advising that
ection 662.1(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada read, "where a Court directs under subsection (1) that an
accused be discharged, the accused shall be deemed not to have been convicted of an offence to which he
pleaded guilty or of which he was found guilty. . ."; and stating that in view of the fact that the Taxi
Inspector suspended the taxi license under Section 14 (1) (a) of the Taxi By-Law, which calls for a
conviction, and having regard to the fact that Mr. Flynn was not convicted of an offence under the Crim-
inal Code, it is the City Solicitor's opinion that the matter is improperly before Council for a hearing,
in that the Taxi Inspector had no authority to suspend Mr. Flynn's taxi license in the first instance; and
advising that while this matter centres around the taking away of a person's livelihood, and to avoid the
possibility of the City becoming liable for any losses of income incurred by Mr. Flynn related to the
suspension, he has informed the Chief of police that no authority exists for this suspension, and he has
suggested that Mr. Flynn's license be reinstated forthwith - and advising that, conseQuently, the Council
has no jurisdiction in the matter at this time -- be received and filed.
I
I
Councillor Pye noted that the above type of situation could occur time and time again, which
could be very embarrassing to the Chief of Police and the Taxi Inspector, and the Common Council, and,
therefore, in order to overcome that he wished to give notice that at the next meeting of Council he will
move, or cause to be moved, the following motion, namely, "RESOLVED that the Taxi By-Law be amended by
deleting from Section 14 (1) (a) thereof the words 'the Criminal Code and the LiQuor Control Act of New
Brunswick', and by amending Section 14 (1) (d) thereof to read, 'The Taxi Inspector may suspend or cancel
the license of any owner or operator of a taxicab whom the said Inspector has reason to believe is guilty
of discreditable conduct whether or not the believed offence was committed in relation to a taxicab or a
taxi stand. '. He explained that that gives the Chief the power, having reason to believe that this man is
guilty of what he is suspected, to act accordingly. The Mayor noted that Councillor Pye will be providing
this proposed motion for the next open session of Common Council, and he asked that Councillor Pye in the
meantime discuss this proposed motion with the City Solicitor and with the Chief of Police. Councillor
Pye stated that he will do so.
.
Considerable discussion ensued regarding a letter, dated September 12th, 1975, from the City
Solicitor further to Common Council resolution adopted in legal session on September 8th, 1975 whereby the
Council directed that the City comply with the Motor Vehicle Act and terminate its policy of retention of
voluntary payments collected by the Police for offences under the said Act (and, also, whereby the Council
asked that the City Manager and the City Solicitor ascertain how the City of Moncton's by-laws were
prepared in a manner to enable that city to retain such monies; and asked that the City Manager negotiate
with the appropriate Provincial officials for the retention by the City of these fine monies that are
collected in.the City of Saint John). The letter advises that on September 11th last, the City Solicitor
informed the Provincial Department of Justice, by letter, of the said decision of Council in this matter,
and noting that on the agenda of this legal session of Council is the letter to Council from the Depart-
ment of the Provincial Secretary respecting this item. The letter further advises that having regard to
the fact that the Deputy Minister believes that back amounts which have not been submitted should be made
the subject of negotiations, the City Solicitor is reQuesting that he be authorized by Council to cor-
respond with the Department of Justice to outline in more detail the reasons why the City has been re-
taining voluntary payments for the past several years and that back amounts should be forgiven and not
made the subject of negotiations;
I
Also considered at this time were the following letters:- (a) from the Deputy Provincial Secre-
tary, dated'September 5th, 1975, advising that Section 357 of the Motor Vehicle Act provides that voluntary
payments made'pursuant to its provisions are to be remitted to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles and that
the retention of. such payments by the City of Saint John appears to be in contravention of the said
Section 357 (although the City of Saint John forwards to the Department of the Provincial Secretary the
ticket book stubs relating.to offences for which voluntary payments have been made, for purposes of point
calculation), and it is not the course of action followed by other municipalities in the Province, and
that he is not aware of any reason for the City of Saint John withholding remittance of the aforesaid
voluntary payments made to its police agencies pursuant to the Act, and that this statement is made
following an examination of statutes pertaining to the Charter of the City of Saint John, which Charter
and statutes are now made subject to the provisions of the Municipalities Act by virtue of the amalgam-
ation Regulation 68-99 (effective January 1st, 1967) - and, further, no opinion to the contrary has been
received from the City of Saint John Legal Department although comments were invited by letter dated July
14th, 1975 from the Department of Justice - and advising that, accordingly, this letter will serve as
formal reQuest (but without prejudice) that commencing September 17th, 1975, the City of Saint John
through its appropriate agency shall commence forwarding to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles of the Pro-
vince of New Brunswick all monies received by way of voluntary payments under the Act and particularly
Section 357 thereof, with no deduction or abatement - and further advising that, without prejudice, the'
matter of back amounts of voluntary payments due pursuant to the Act but as yet unpaid to the Registrar
should, he feels, be made the subject of negotiation; (b) from the City Manager, dated September 15th,
1975, advising that the City has been retaining the said monies by virtue of a letter of authority, dated
November 7th, 1962, from the then Premier of the Province, and pointing out that the cost to the City in
complying with the statute and remitting the said funds could well reach $100,000.00 by the end of 1975
(to August 31st, 1975, the sum of $77,000',00 has accrued to City revenue) - and stating that he is aware
that the City of Fredericton does comPly with the Motor Vehicle Act and has done so since 1967 and that
city expects to hand over in the vicinity of $50,000.00 for the year 1975 (the fines received do not enter
city revenues, but are handed directly to the Motor Vehicle Branch daily in cash), and that it has also
been learned that Moncton and Oromocto circumvent the said Act and lay charges under local by-law - and
noting that it has been pointed out by our City Solicitor that certain aspects of these by-laws relating
to speeding are in conflict with the Motor Vehicle Act, and are, in his opinion, not legal, but invalid
for the levying of fines for local retention - and further noting that the City of Saint John does not
enforce the said Act to produce revenue but to preserve law and order, but, however, the sums raised in
fines and accruing to City revenues, off-set the cost of personnel for both enforcement and administra-
tion, as well as the cost of eQuipment, such as radar, motor vehicles, et cetera - and noting that the
problem then is not one of administration but of policy - and stating that the City Manager agrees that
the City must comply and remit the fines as prescribed by statute, and recommends that the Provincial
.
I
1
.
~
"...
71
- .
.
I
1
.
1H;J::ht:/
PMV. tP~ve-.
Fines
/'I'1t?!1ie s _
eollede#t
IIIfut-tJ yo
(/~/tJ/e I/.
.lJep./. 'fJN!/;
Seem-G-dl'Y
.
e,.,
d/!'citor
:lJl"'fllre ~
/;6"$ L-t:-d.
..:J)oe/!;f-t. /(Z
I PNJ!rlHy
11~Q&-1&Ti/lJ}1
, IYJ //1 st.
pro~ert.!J
l..tepn9~ic
:tJl!Ve/. CDM""-
.
ll...
Government should be petitioned through the Minister of Municipal Affairs, or any other Minister or member of the
Government concerned with local affairs, that the funds once remitted should be refunded to the municipality in a
manner similar to the' System prevailing before 1967 - and advising that the City administrative staff will pursue
the matter with administrative officials in Fredericton, but there is little possibility at thls level of making
any changes or amendments to existing statutes, which are indeed the very basis of our difficulties in this
particular instance.
Mr. Rodgers advised that on talking with the City Solicitor in Moncton he has learned that Moncton is
retaining money for offences committed under that city's by-law; the City Solicitor of Moncton did not give him
any indication that that city was retaining monies for offences under the Motor Vehicle Act. He stated he has no
indication that the City of Moncton has any provision in the by-law that might be invalid. Mr. Barfoot commented
that he thinks that the City of Saint John has been acting apparently in a certain way in the matter of these
monies since 1962 on the said letter of the Premier and it could be argued by the cities of Moncton and Freder-
icton that this was not legal, according to their terms of reference. He added that it is just a Question of the
light that we have that we are guided ,by - if we have received more enlightenment then he thinks we have to
follow the legal opinion.
Councillor Cave recalled that prior to 1967 the former Parish of Simonds policed the area, called the
Highway District, which extended as far as the Hickey Road, and during the course of discussions on amalgamation
the City agreed to extend the boundary as far as the Range Road which is approximately six miles beyond the
former boundary, and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police policed this area, and that when they withdrew that said
police force it cut down the cost to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police but increased the cost to the City - and
the same procedure applied in the western sector of the city. He referred to the section of the above noted
letter from the Deputy Provincial Secretary which makes reference to amalgamation, and stated that there was a
tremendous saving to the Province in that it did not have to police the outer areas but it was an additional
burden to the City of Saint John after amalgamation. He stated he feels that the City has Quite an argument from
this aspect.
The Mayor made the point that when the throughway opens up the City will have to tell the Province that
it cannot afford to police it, and he noted that, therefore, the Province will have to arrange a method of
policing the throughway.
Consideration was given to the possibility of discussing the possible amending of the Motor Vehicle Act
at the September 19th and 20th meeting of The Cities of New Brunswick, so that municipalities could retain the
monies referred to in the letters of the City Solicitor, City Manager and Deputy Provincial Secretary, that are
collected by municipalities pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Act, being voluntary payments of fines.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Solicitor be authorized to discuss on the
morning of September 16th next, b~ means of the conference telephone line, with officials of the Provincial
Government the matter of extending from September 17th, 1975 the date for remittance by the City of Saint John of
voluntary payments collected by the Police for offences under,the Motor Vehicle Act, and to also discuss the
finding of a way by the Province for the City of Saint John to be refunded such remittances, and to be forgiven
the back amounts that the City has been retaining for the past several years in this matter.
The Mayor advised that he has made a note of the suggestion that the matter of retention of such
voluntary fines by municipalities in New Brunswick, through amendment to the Motor Vehicle Act, be placed on the
agenda of the said forthcoming meeting of The Cities of New Brunswick. He added that the City Manager and the
Chief of Police will be present during the above noted discussion with the Provincial officials on the conference
telephone line.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above noted letter from the Deputy Provincial Secretary,
be received and filed.
Mr. G. Baird, Commissioner of Economic Development, was present at the meeting at this time.
A letter from the City Solicitor, dated September 12th, 1975, was considered, in which he informs the
Council that he has examined the correspondence as forwarded to him by Mr. Baird, in compliance with the Council's
reQuest in Committee of the Whole on July 21st last, with a view to determining the City's liability as it
relates to negotiations which have taken place between the City and Brooke Bond Foods Limited, and that although
the City has given every indication that the property is reQuired for civic development, he can find nothing in
the correspondence made available to him to indicate at this point, any legal liability or any commitment which
binds the City to proceed further in this matter; and further advising that, in view of the foregoing, it is his
opinion that the Council may, if it so wishes,cease negotiations without being bound to financial liability from
past correspondence - however, should the City continue negotiations, the Council ought to be aware of the fact
that some further correspondence might create a firm offer and acceptance to which liability could be attached.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above letter be received and filed.
Mr. Rodgers advised that the City is free to continue negotiating if it believes it needs the Brooke
Bond Foods Limited property, and that in the future the City might be bound by some action that is taken.
Councillor Kipping noted that the above is good news, but felt it is perhaps obviated by a meeting that
the Council Committee on Economic Development had with the President of Brooke Bond, Mr. Bryden, which meeting
was arranged by Mr. Baird and was attended by Councillors Gould, MacGowan and Kipping, Mr. Baird and Mr. Bryden's
assistant, Mr. Roger Gravell. Councillor Kipping stated that it turns out that Brooke Bond would be Quite happy
to remain in the Mill Street property if we leave them alone, which means that what we understood previously _
that this company, no matter what we do, is leaving and it is going to cost us around one million dollars - is
not so because the said Committee learned from Mr. Bryden that if we leave this company in that property and do
not need that ground for the Market SQuare project, this company will be very happy to stay tnere with its
present operation, but there is a problem if we need the ground and the company has to move because even if the
company moves to one of the industrial parks (and it is looking at McAllister Industrial Park) or if it moves to
Montreal, no matter which way the company goes it is going to cost us somewhere between nine hundred thousand and
one million dollars. He added that, then, no matter what happens in that way the whole deal could fall through
because of failure of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion to come through with full grants, if we do
relocate this company, and then the company would be gone from the city, for sure, to Montreal - so, the City
does have those problems, he pointed out. He stated that the Commi~tee also learned that time phasing is very
1-
<
72
~
(;117/IJII1,tt!ee 17/1
EdlJhIJPf.:JJ eVill
eOI17P7. ~t!ol1()/1f/
.J)!t've!,
:lJ~IJKe 2ona(
Hod s ~""tL.
/fI/11 Sf, ?!",pen,
n e!,o-tiJd/O/1s
/f!al"!-d Sf- -
:DocK .s-t-. CeW?
J), 1?.E. E:
s.x f/a,.6pur
:JJri t4Je 11 tdk-/
I/.;Jrb~ br/~
--tolls
important to the company and the company has to know in plenty of time in advance whether it has to move,
and not a matter of three months' notice to the company in this regard. He pointed out that the company
has a deadline from the City right now of December 31st, 1975 which is unrealistic and impossible for this
company to get out of there by that date; this notice was done by staff in the normal course of negotiations.
Councillor Gould felt that although the discussions with the Urban Renewal Office said that the said date
of December 31st is the date they are talking about, both the company and the City realize that it is not
going to be possible for the company to move by that date and we are not going to be ready to take the
Mill Street property by that time - he noted that during the discussions the phase dates have been pushed
ahead each time. He stated he made the point that the plan for Market Square development is not final as
yet because it is being re-designed all the time; his further point is that we do not really know how
large an area the said development will take in and it has not finally been decided, or whether that area
would include the Mill Street property of this company. Councillor Gould stated he feels that it first
has to be decided whether the property of Brooke Bond will be reQuired, and if it is decided that it is
reQuired and as the City cannot afford the approximate sum of one million dollars that this property would
cost, the City must get this property included in the Urban Renewal programme so one-third of that cost
can be taken care of under that programme; following that, he feels that we have to endeavour to see that
the Department of Regional Economic Expansion makes it appealing enough.to keep this company in the city,
if the Mill Street property is reQuired for the Market SQuare development project.
.
I
Councillor MacGowan noted that the City wants to know immediately whether the said Mill Street
property is going to be reQuired for the said project. She asked if we are going to be in the position to
tell the company in this regard. Mr. Barfoot replied that the Market SQuare project is in the process now
of the Province in conjunction with the Department of Regional Economic Expansion and with the technical
advice, but not the financial in-put, of the City, obtaining proposals from consultants who are going to
evaluate the ability of the City to undertake the Market SQuare project and, also, the timing of the
project in connection with the present Trizec Corporation Limited proposal; it is anticipated that pro-
posals will be in by September 24th at which time a decision will be taken to award by the Department of
Municipal Affairs of the Province who is the client in this case, and we expect to have the results of
that study around the end of October and it will be made available to the City for its perusal; with this
report on the actual costs and the ability of the City to undertake such a project, he thinks that the
Council will be in a position to decide when it will go ahead with the project and under what terms (that
is, only if it can get massive financial commitments from the Province and the Federal Government), or
that it will drop the whole project now. With regard to when the final plan for the Market SQuare de-
velopment will be ready for Council's perusal, Mr. Barfoot advised that since the plan presentation that
was made to Council in Committee of the Whole in June last, there has been one further change in that plan
in that the Library Board decided it did not like the location for the library and so the architectural
consultants in conjunction with the developer are now looking at a different location for the Library
within the complex, and this should hopefully be done very shortly.
I
.
Councillor Higgins asked if the property of Brooke Bond on Mill Street is needed in the im-
mediate future. Mr. Barfoot made negative reply.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the Council Committee on Economic Development and the
Commissioner of Economic Development continue in their good judgment their negotiations with Brooke Bond
Foods Limited regarding the Mill Street property and report intermittently to the Common Council as to the
progress of such negotiations, and that the Urban Redevelopment Office be asked to immediately retract the
December 31st, 1975 date regarding removal of this company from the said property.
I
Councillor Higgins stated he would not go along with aCQuisition of the above property and
trying to move this company to another site unless the Council is told that there is no way the Market
SQuare development can proceed unless this property is aCQuired and the company vacates in three months,
and that the construction is starting on the development project there. Mr. Baird was asked if he had
anything to add regarding the foregoing discussion. He stated that it is eighteen months' notice that
Brooke Bond Foods Limited would need in order to put up a new facility. Councillor MacGowan discussed the
Question of urgency in lining up Department of Regional Economic Expansion financing now in case Brooke
Bond does have to approach that Department, and Mr. Barfoot explained that a fairly complex timing has
been tentatively worked out for the Market SQuare project - he feels that the timing for the department
store for this project is in the second stage of construction, but when the second stage would come really
depends somewhat on the market; their ability to market a department store.
.
The Mayor advised of receipt of a letter from the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority in reply
o the Council's letter to the Authority advising of the Council's desire to have .a meeting on the subject
of removal of the harbour bridge tolls, advising the Authority would be pleased to meet with Council to
discuss matters of joint concern, and that it suggests that the meeting be held on September 18th next, at
12.30 p.m., at the office of the Authority. The Council members concurred in this arrangement.
The Mayor advised that, further to the September 8th last Committee of the Whole meeting at
/1 '~ ~~~ which he was authorized to notify the negotiating team of Saint John City Hall Employees' Union, Local I.
l-()Ar~' 486 C.U.P.E. of the terms ratified by the Council at that meeting regarding the new Working Agreement
11.1~~0~ with that Union, he heard that same information announced the next morning on his way to work on Radio
~X~'tf~~~I'I', Station C F B C - it was announced on that radio station that the Council had agreed to meet and that the
/ ./ . ~ information would be passed out to the negotiating team that day. The Mayor pointed out that this means
~~?/~~ ~/~J? that in some way the said radio station got that information. Councillor Kipping asked the Chief of
#0. ~~(p Police whether the eighth floor board room has been screened for electronic "bugs". Chief Ferguson
replied in the negative, and explained that he has arranged to have it done by an expert from outside the
~"~/'I1~ city who has not been able to come to the city, as yet; however, this man is coming and has promised to I"
~ have a look at that room. Councillor Kipping noted that the New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited has
tS7jY~e~e~ personnel who could do this screening of the room, very easily, and he felt that it is a matter of some
t'f::8C' '1?,;;u;~;17 urgency to have it done so that the electronic "bugs" can be removed, if they are present. . ,
$#.;rI-/pn On motion
-Zn-/OrmOl-l1i?n The meeting adjourned.
"!f ledlrs "
~, .
.....1
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that the Pro-
vincial Department of Transportation, through its consultant, Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation
Limited, has reQuested formal approval from the City of Saint John for removal of the Stanley Street structure
and the pedestrian overpass from Lombard Street to Station Street and that these structures will not be removed
until construction of the Throughway and Wall Street Interchange commence in the area with all removal costs to
be borne by the Department of Transportation; that approval from the City is required by the Railway Transport
ommittee, Canadian Transport Commission, before they will issue the Board Order permitting construction of the
Wall Street Interchange structure; and further advising that the Wall Street Interchange is in approximately the
same location as the present pedestrian overpass from Lombard Street to Station Street and when the Stanley
~,.~~.f~ Street bridge is removed, this will mean that there will be no pedestrian or vehicular access across the through-
way between the new bridge at Wall Street and the new bridge at Gilbert's Lane and that this should provide no
~~~ ~cf, particular problem for vehicles as the two new bridges will provide much more capacity than the present facilities,
. ~,.;a(, e but pedestrians will have a long way to go around, and stating that a pedestrian bridge at Stanley Street would
e v~1' meet the need, be received and filed and the Common Council approve the removal of the existing bridge at Stanley
. ~ ~~_~. Street and the pedestrian overpass from Lombard Street to Station Street, on condition that a new pedestrian
"6'~f7/~J? overpass is constructed at Stanley Street. .
(}VerF5$
,(oPlIkJ1li -
Si-.5l/;'on 5/:.
"..
.
I
I
.
€i. "O~bHS
d~ ~pf
S/~ fk
~we7(7
nI:f;;,e/W<I-
~~'r,t 'P C't?,
Cl-.;, ufe
e,?,,/_U~/'-E
'1?~idt/l
I C'Qrp, X-t-IL
C'QI,./d (j17
Jk6//c fIq//
t1sJ,./ tlJ~<<h
~:ebt-"'e
eaU n.!J, $'1
~1v1.floDr
~e. 'fIfBr.d
c.: ec;1PJ in
(~5' e'J!len
.5erv/ee
/I~ SOt! l.HIe5
A -t-;/.
/l!6b;!e t?I/J.'
'PlUs h~,.
.efm~-tn A
T~ P1fP6t ~Awa
I Sewer-'lffe
st1~m"5 +
5(ftU1fiol'1,
U/..5.. JOhn
l.7Jep!.
Tm"sf7oJ"1" ~
. cron
FOlihtllalif//1
~.Kn
....
7~3
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-second day
of September, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Pye, Parfitt, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal
Services, C. Nicolle, Director of Recreation, E. W. Ferguson, Chief of
Police, P. Clark, Fire Chief, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations,
C. Sullivan, Senior Project Engineer, J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, Engineering and Works Department, I. Bruhier,
Chief Development Control and Assistant Development Officer, and D. French,
Director of Personnel and Training
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on September
8th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor HOdges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on September
15th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager, the
Quotation of Standard Machinery & EQuipment Co. in the amount of $4,833.00, including sales tax, for supplying
one sidewalk sweeper, and the quotation of Robert Morse Corporation Ltd. in the amount of $5,443.20, including
sales tax, for supplying one refuse collection unit, be accepted.
On motion of CoUncillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that tenders have
been received for the following three projects at the Carleton Community Centre, namely: (1) supplying and
installing gym floor; (2) modification of heating system; (3) cleaning exterior of the building; and advising
that the bids received on items (1) and (2) exceed the budget allocations and are therefore not acceptable and
that staff will be reviewing the specifications for these items in an effort to accomplish the reQuired results
and at the same time stay within the budget limitations, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that as recommended by the City Manager, the tender of Service Associates Ltd. in the
ount of $8,400.00 be accepted for cleaning the exterior of the Carleton Community Centre building.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Community Planning and Development, permission be granted for the placement of two temporary mobile offices at
the northwesterly corner of Gilbert and Forest Streets by Pitts Engineering Construction Ltd., which firm has
een awarded the contract for the construction of the Gilbert Street arterial structure and associated constr-
uctions, such work to be completed in approximately one year.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Engineering Works, supplying information relative to the sewerage systems and situation in the western part of
the City, which information had been reQuested at a previous Council meeting, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor
Hodges
RESOLVED
that the letter from the City Manager advising that a public
,
Fine :J)eef
s. T b!~n. ~..s;
/I/17b,,/anc e
,
se,.V/t:es
~NH}~;e
sel'vlees
7?esc<<.~ s:,~~
I9/11Jula17c.e
-6-/'I.;//hln!J ~,.o- additional eQuipment; that the matter of mechanical maintenance of these vehicles was discussed, as well
~"~h7~~ . as certain maintenance conditions required of the City for the granting of the aCQuisition funds; that
vf . . ~~ services to unincorporated areas was discussed and it was agreed that services could not be provided to
a~~J7.7~I?/~ ~ these areas but that the Mispec area was considered as an exception to this policy, primarily because of
5~S-t-eP7JS; the City's recreational facilities located in the area; that it was agreed that the recent large increase
q/17pu./eg"ee $ "If- in costs reflected mainly in wages and salaries, which in 1976 will double over the present base, must be
~~~/~~~17~ passed on to users rather than assumed through taxation generally; that it was agreed that rates should be
. ~ I'~~ set for the Rescue Service of the Fire Department when it is used for the transportation of sick or
11.1,17, T7~ injured and it was also agreed that the proposed paramedic service should be subject to a user charge, and
~~J.7~ that the matter of special service to the aged and the method to institute such a procedure was discussed
IPl'Py, ~~. at length, and submitting the following recommendations: (1) That the City of Saint John accept the grant
~ ~~"Afs for two ambulances and eQuipment subject to arranging with the Minister of Health conditions that are
'.7j7~'~ compatible with our communications network; (2) That the City ambulances henceforth be serviced by the
~~~.~~C~7' City Maintenance and Supply Department; (3) That the jurisdiction be extended to include the unincorporated
/":-'/) and un-subsidized area of Mispec only; (4) That user charge rates be increased by the same degree as wages
~tl~~/jf and other costs, adjusting upward the rate from $15.00 to $30.00 in the City with the basic rates to all
other areas now subsidizing the service being increased by $15.00; that the same basic rate of $30.00 be
11.11~~ ~~ charged by the Rescue Squad for transportation of invalids, and that a basic rate of $35.00 be considered
/ for the paramedic service (these latter two services to apply to the City area only unless the service is
~J>1~~/~J.7e~ otherwise rendered under existing arrangements between Fire Departments; (5) That a special reduced rate
~~Jr to the aged would bring comfort and relief, but mainly to Blue Cross and the Department of Social Welfare
and therefore, a rate reduction here is not recommended at this time; and (6) That all recommendations be
~e,,/'o~ er1f,'~~ put into effect as soon as possible after adoption by Common Council, be received and filed and the
recommendations adopted.
74
/luff/on or
sur?/~s ~i
",ed
:T~hh :lJt".;?/
/luet-iQI'J ~t!",.
/lGpha/-6-
ste/J~h CPI7's-cr.
et7~ ~I-d.
.IE ru../p", e 17 t-
I"e 11 ~ 011'
Ch/H/cksr;~~~ )
-<-twl.
RG.ii~:f ~
~-t-L
SI~na/7.
. a, ~rltt'.
t/"ban 1? eh
,,(a J.7;{ a;", p.. fj.
dllVe1;!ds
,;( $""~ aes/ey
~r() c#e.s;ey
3:2?ae.5/e~ .$l
Ilk C'oNr,tatJff ~
zdhn'/~/7~~ .
n.~
auction was held on September 13th for .the purpose of disposing of 23 units of surplus eQuipment, as shown
on the submitted list, and at the time it was decided to hold this auction it was hoped that a net revenue
of approximately $19,000.00 would be realized, further advising that the actual results of the sale were
total sales of $27,055.00, less the auctioneer's fee of $2,705.50 for a net revenue of $24,349.50, and
recommending that the auctioneer's fee, amounting to $2,705.50, be paid to Mr. John Beal for conducting
this auction, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
(Councillors Green and A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Discussion ensued on the success of the said public auction and it was suggested that in future
the replacement price for the eQuipment being auctioned be included in any reports to Council.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
given for payment of the invoice from Stephen Construction Company Limited, dated September 16th, 1975,
for supplying asphalt to the Works Department for the period September 2nd to 15th, 1975, in the amount of
$37,889.67.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
granted for payment of the invoices for eQuipment rental, as follows:-
Chittick's (1962) Ltd. - to the Works Dept. August 16-31, 1975
(dated August 30, 1975) $ 9,718.20
- to the Works Dept. August 16-31, 1975
(dated August 30, 1975) $ 3,766.00
Ready Rentals Ltd. - to the Works Dept. July 31-August 14, 1975
(dated August 14, 1975) $ 2,332.80
.
Stephen Construction Co. Ltd. - to the Works Dept. August 18-19, 1975
(dated August 29, 1975)
$ 2,624;00
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Deputy
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, approval be granted for payment of the award of the Land
Compensation Board in the amount of $191,875.00, plus 5% interest on the unpaid portion from April 1st,
1971 to the date of final settlement for the properties known as F-11-3-4 (254 Chesley Street), F-11-4-3
(290 Chesley Street), and F-11-4-6 (326 Chesley Street) to McCormack and Zatzman Limited.
I
In reply to a Query from Councillor M. Vincent if the above figure represents all possible costs
in aCQuiring these properties, Mr. Barfoot advised that the costs would be the amount of $191,875.00 plus
interest to the date of final settlement. In reply to a further Query from Councillor M. Vincent, Mr.
Rodgers stated that he would assume that this property transaction could be completed within two weeks.
(Councillor Kipping entered the meeting)
On motion of Councillor Green
Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that on
September 12th he and City staff met with representatives of the Saint John General Hospital staff to
discuss the information contained in a booklet dated August 20th, 1975, published by the Department of
Health, describing the new Provincial organization on ambulance services, and that other items discussed
were user charges, jurisdiction, the City's rescue vehicles, and the proposed paramedic services; that the
Department of Health will now be responsible for financing (a) a Provincial Ambulance Training program;
(b) the purchase and installation and maintenance of communication systems; (c) the purchase of ambulances
and non-expendable eQuipment and the City will be reQuired to continue financing operating~ costs through
taxation or user charges; that under this program, the Minister of Health has offered the City a grant of
about $22,500.00 for the purchase of two Tristar ambulances, and about $2,500.00 for the aCQuisition of
Seconded by Councillor
.
I
I
Councillor Pye asked if he was to infer from the recommendation concerning reduced rates for
senior citizens not being implemented, that senior citizens who do not have Blue Cross can also appeal to
the Department of Social Welfare to take care of their ambulance charges. Mr. Barfoot replied that in
discussions with Hospital staff they commented that a majority of the ambulance charges for this group of
people were in fact being paid by Blue Cross or Social Welfare and therefore a rate reduction would be of
more advantage to these organizations than to th .
e senlor citizens themselves. Councillor Pye stated he
.
.....1
,....
7.5
.
Re5ecee
$r~C1 d
Ilfr/bu/JI>>
tlef'vieeq.
rDJf-e 5
I
1
lfi'9h- poise
6/4$.
Ft;.e pro-
ti2cd-;OI1 ;
.sf//"'/nlr/e;.
Q/. 5fr;pJe '$-
,e/re a/aN;.?
f!l;!/~-t:eI?fS
/I!.;d-/ ()J'}.R /
F/,.e {l()tLe
:lJIt/!I,Ii7~p-
I
?eh~&...J
dleetlJ ~
.Pu~/h.f %1'1
tJ1/n:;,;(it~ e6:.
ad!/. 5~ep'
sq3kP?
~o;'nOlS
Ihd<<$, ,5,.;,k.
. ,,(-e-e;t.
.J), 1?E:.E.
/i1e/lll/slel'
:LnbffJ
.s el:!-e,.
t7e11ii/<< J:
1f'eraJ'? edJ~
.1: ~
~'.$/,te:J).
./ 2.
r I1S-,;-/7, ~
(l X'te 11.
7J€ot.lh~-
I~ W~!lS
t::k~$ea/.;l~ 3.
.;Jf7fJl'oache:.
/l.TdJ//a-
. !}h.;Jhc/- /l~~
llr..
realizes the reluctance of many of our senior citizens to appeal to welfare and he feels it is extremely dis-
advantageous and unfair to this group of citizens to increase the rates, rather than reducing them. Councillor
MacGowan stated she is concerned with the $30.00 charge for the Rescue SQuad for transporting invalids as she
feels this is a necessity and does not feel such people should be charged under the circumstances.
(Councillor Gould entered the meeting)
Councillor Green stated it is gratifying to see the above action being taken as it has always been his
feeling that ambulance service was a responsibility of the Provincial Government. He stated that with regard to
the comments of Councillor Pye, he would suggest that any senior citizens affected might contact the City Manager
and that a percentage of the people affected could be arrived at and be given due consideration in the budget.
In reply to a query from Councillor M. Vincent, Mr. Barfoot stated he understands that the amount of the Pro-
vincial grant being offered in this regard is sufficient to cover the cost of the two ambulances. Councillor M.
Vincent noted that the Council had considered that other outlying areas be included in ambulance services, and he
asked why these areas were deleted. Mr. Barfoot stated that as the Mispec area can only be reached by going
through the City ,and as a major recreational facility of the City is included in this area, it was decided to
extend the ambulance service to this area at this time. Councillor A. Vincent stated he is pleased to see the
service being extended to the residents of Mispec and he asked that Council be supplied with a list within thirty
days of all other outlying areas which are presently not receiving this service.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Pye voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager submitting recent infor=
mation submitted by the Fire Chief concerning fires and fire protection in high rise buildings, advising that the
Fire Chief recommends that the installation of automatic sprinkler systems and automatic smoke and fire alarm
systems in all buildings in excess of 75 feet in height be mandatory in the City of Saint John and that such a
provision could be incorporated in the Building By-Law, be received and filed and the Common Council enact the
necessary by-law amendments making it mandatory for the installation of automatic sprinkler systems in all
buildings in excess of 75 feet in height; and further it shall be mandatory to install automatic smoke and fire
alarm systems in all buildings in excess of 75 feet in height, and no building permit shall be issued for the
construction of any building in excess of 75 feet in height, unless these provisions are included in the building
plans submitted for approval.
Councillor Gould suggested that consideration should also be given to incorporating similar regulations
for senior citizens homes and boarding houses in the City. Mr. A. Ellis advised Council that he has just re-
ceived the 1975 National Fire Code and amendments thereto and he will be submitting same to Council in possibly
two weeks time for adoption by Council. Councillor Davis stated he feels the Council should also be concerned and
be involved with buildings of less than 75 feet in height also. He stated that in discussions with the Fire
Chief, the Council has been told that heavy industrialized traffic of tankers carrying materials which are not
identified, are travelling our streets and railways. He stated that there is a code to identify such materials,
however, it is not in force in this Province. He stated he feels if the Province is not going to proceed in this
matter, the City should take action to adopt this code. In reply to a query from Councillor MacGowan, Mr.
Barfoot stated that the above resolution does not cover existing buildings in the City. Councillor MacGowan
stated she feels smoke alarms should be mandatory in existing buildings over 75 feet in height and that she would
like to see the 75 foot limit lowered and that the regulations should apply to existing buildings as well.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the tender of Thomas
Industrial Sales Ltd., in the amount of $27,583.00 for the supply of a prefabricated sewage pumping station for
the Milford-Randolph-Greendale sanitary sewer collector system, be accepted, this being the lowest tender received.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services,
regarding projects that were undertaken in connection with the Department of Regional Economic Expansion pro-
gramme, namely:-
1.
McAllister Industrial Park
External 30-inch sanitary sewer
Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 6
Retention .
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 6,
dated September 13, 1975
$ 145,560.00
151,920.00
Nil
147,363.03
$ 4,557.62
Bayside Drive Reconstruction & Extension
Province of New Brunswick, Dept. of Highways
Engineering services and supply of materials
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, including invoice numbers
2877 2878 2930
2975 3011 3018
3080 3134 3148
3149 3162 3164
3229 3230 3261
3264
$ 99,816.18
$ 27,883.52
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
A. J. Callaghan & Associates
Engineering services for eastern approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 41,
dated September 2, 1975
$ 141,583.48
$ 975 . 00
if
76
.~.
CaH-'~W.-'f /
-l f/f/r~""e.s
/I. :lJ.L A-tFL
/I1//.,eont, ek.
Cd//. 'sewer
G'-In'e/s /7550C
,(~~
~ ,'HIe '1(1 vel"
G e<</. SCheme
'}J1't't!.-I-oJ" "F
~fl'd'-f"ern .t-ilf.
A_Ke~otil /lvI?, 7.
~u//l1e ~.
We5-!b/'tJ()K Ilve.
Ot!eal7 ~.sE~
ah~d- L-.
&p#~~-L
:BatJI ff~r;
/J,..en.;;l$
7( o~C.;1 anse.
.(-b:L
PMV- {;!t?td,
1Ia,.b"~" tr/tft.
~oll$ I"e
reF/":> -Eo
1i'evef'$! ':f, ~//s
b/'lI'Z.ffe
~,.A-~"!I5~-
me
&~;/id;()" :N.
/'Ief/tJl"f-
S;,rp,/lt!t'.PItT"s
Prrtted', /lssoc.
/Yo, '-I
:13.1/. EvereH
7JeMd!t~/on ,
6laf' c()r/Jl?r
1/171 ol7~fedo
.7#s.
7/d'/'~e 7Jep-t.
,:epfNit-
{#il? -t-o ;JUh~,
FIJI" /,7~(!O~
-#0 /~7i1
4.
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
A. D. I. Limited
Engineering services for western approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 38,
dated July 31, 1975
5.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 47,
dated September 10, 1975
6.
Little River Sewerage Scheme
Proctor & Redfern Ltd.
Engineering services for Champlain Heights system
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated September 4, 1975
Lakewood Avenue, Pauline Street & Westbrook Avenue
Ocean Westway Construction Ltd.
Sanitary sewer and watermain
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated September 18, 1975
On motion of Councillor Pye
~
$ 164,843.39
$ 4,026.68
.
$ 154,315.05
$ 6,612.88
I
$ 188,387.79
28,
$ 4,525.27
I
$ 123,687.75
53,450.55
8,017.58
12,007.78
2,
$ 33,425.19
.
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the following
construction progress certificate be paid on the following named contract for a project that is included
in "the Capital Budget:-
1.
Saint John Community Arenas
Rocca Construction Ltd.
Construction of three rinks
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 8
Retention
Payments previously approved"
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated September 9, 1975
,
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
$ 2,913,949.00
2,767,300.00
415,095.00
2,276,282.35
8, I
$ 88,547.05
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that
further to Council's resolution of September 8th last which authorized that a meeting be arranged with the
Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority for the purpose of having meaningful "discussion on the subject of the
removal of the Harbour Bridge tolls as a temporary measure, but with the aim of making such removal
permanent, a Committee of Councillors met with the Authority on September 18th, at which meeting various
matters as outlined in his letter were discussed, be received and filed and the Common Council reQuest the
Province to guarantee that tolls are lifted completely from the Saint John Harbour Bridge during such
period as the Reversing Falls Bridge is closed for repairs:
AND FURTHER that discussions beheld with the Province with respect to the long-term policy on
bridge tolls.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated September
19th, 1975, submitting the Working "Agreement 1975-1976 in respect to the Saint John Policemen's Protective
Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., which reflects the negotiated changes together with the recommendations
contained in the report of the Conciliation Board and amendments thereto, and recommending that the Mayor
and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City of Saint John, which Agree-
ment has been examined and approved by the City Solicitor as to legality and form, be received and filed
and the recommendation adopted.
I
Councillor Kipping voted "nay" to the above motion as he feels that many of the provisions in
the Agreement are in his opinion overly generous.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, with regard to the
letter from Mr. B. H. Everett regarding the demolition of the Clinton Brown building at the corner of
Union and Waterloo Streets, which is on the agenda of this Council meeting, advising that the Building
Inspector has advised that the demolition contractor is reQuired to have insurance to cover any damage to
adjoining buildings and retaining walls, and that with respect to the exterior wall on the adjoining
property, it is the responsibility of the owner of the adjoining property to repair or refinish this wall
unless a common fire wall is involved, in which case this wall would have to remain, and that these are
common conditions dealing with demolition of buildings by the City, and all reasonable precautions are
taken to protect adjoining property owners, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting for the
information of Common Council the comparative report of the Police Department for the period January to
June 19T4 and 19T5, advising that the Department has set new records for achievement in many fields and
~
"...
.
ktox/c
/lersfJl1S
~nt-;Oh
/lcr-
"T.?J verhS,
~- S-6M
1~~1t~
C'ra;iel!
~9J7e
:l3rofJ/(I//11e
/'I'l-P~, ,,(-1-.
1
,tease
15"o-/fi~
.'PI", II/m, Sf-.
s::r:TA
CO, Inc.
.
1
FetLC-~d
IV,:l3. /lJIlGe({'
'1/", P/m. S-t-.
{/tf>Q ,PBrI-/e.s
pI'e$Bi"vartIo.
.
/5/f-I'O
'Pn t{/pt, $I-
w.::JI/s
c""LI-i-Ion
'I
/l,.en.:iJs
ICe 1"'851(."-
-fat!ing ~.
-render
(!'=UJt!~I/~"
I /If/qrfmah
k'l1ier/!l"I~es
7eI1/1er "
dlcc~ellL
IIJ.. 't.eC/ail-
q; C"o,Al
erown 1155d-.
:brS8fJ:P1/
(?orp,
.
....
"'/""
,." d
the Chief, his officers and men must be commended for their efforts in maintaining law and order, be received and
filed.
Councillor MacGowan made reference to the section in the above report which states that the increase in
the number of persons detained under the Intoxicated Persons Detention Act is unbelievable, and she suggested
that this increase has been considerable since the closing of Friendship Hall and that this indicates a need in
the community for such a facility.
Regarding the use of the breathalyzer, Councillor A. Vincent stated he is opposed to parking
reQuired for establishments such as taverns, etc. in the City and he feels the City should remove such
and encourage the use of taxis by patrons of these businesses, as is done successfuly in other cities.
lots being
parking
On motion of Councillor Gould
\
\
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the invoice from Brookville Manufacturing Ltd., in the amount of $4,146.98, for the supply of roadpack
crushed stone.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the City of Saint John
enter into a lease with the Saint John Theatre Co. Inc. for rental of the Seamen's Mission building, 150-152
Prince William Street for a term of 25 years, at a nominal rental, subject to the right of the City to re-enter
and take possession of the premises on gi.ving 12 months written notice, with the said company to show proof of
adeQuate and appropriate funding satisfactory to the City within six months of signing this agreement and to
effect initial repairs of the premises at its own expense and before occupation in accordance with specifications
to be provided by the City, such repairs to be made within six months of receipt of such specifications, and that
the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the said lease on behalf of the City.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be tabled for one week.
Question being taken, the tabling motion was lost with Councillors Gould, Green, Higgins, Pye and A.
Vincent voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Gould, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt and M. Vincent voting
"nayll.
In reply to a Query from Councillor Green, Mr. Barfoot stated that he is recommending a nominal rental
which would probably be $1.00 per year. Councillor MacGowan stated she is pleased with this leasing arrangement,
as the Theatre Company would be making improvements to the building. Councillor Kipping stated he agrees with
Councillor MacGowan in this regard. . Councillor A. Vincent stated that as a committee appointed by the previous
Common Council regarding the properties in this block under discussion, he is Quite familiar with the grants
available for this area and he would like to have some guarantee that the Theatre Company will not let the
building sit idle if they are not successful in obtaining the reQuired grants. He stated he would also like to
know who would be responsible for the building adjacent to the one being leased as the parapet walls are in a
very dangerous condition.
Councillor Davis stated that in recent discussions with Federal Government representatives he was
informed that that Government has no intention of demolishing any of the properties in.this block and they are
anxious to find uses for these buildings. He stated that the New Brunswick Museum is interested in utilizing the
present Post Office building on Prince William Street for warehouse and exhibit space and that the Federal
Government representatives are aware of this and are aware that the City does not have a theatre and they seem to
very sympathetic to these plans. He stated that the Federal Government have become deeply involved in the
preservation of the buildings in this block. Councillor A. Vincent stated it is not his intention that these
buildings on this block should be demolished, however, he feels that the City should attempt to get a Federal
grant from the Department of Urban Affairs or Secretary of State in order that these buildings can be rehabili-
tated and preserved. Regarding Councillor A. Vincent's previous Question regarding responsibility for the ad-
jacent building, Mr. Rodgers stated that paragraph 13 of the proposed lease provides that the Company will
indemnify and save harmless the City from and against any and all claims and demands whether or injuries to
persons or loss of life, Or damage to property, occuring within the premises and he does not believe the City
could get any further protection than this. Councillor A. Vincent stated he is so concerned about the condition
of the walls on the adjoining building that he would like repairs undertaken and the City relieved of any further
responsibility. The Mayor stated that a report on this building will be obtained for Council's information.
Question being taken, the original motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that on July 28th
last Council authorized the purchase of three ice resurfacing machines from Wortman Enterprises Ltd. at a cost of
$3,750.00 each plus $200.00 each freight, plus sales tax, and that delivery of these units was to have been made
by September 7th, 1975; that as the machines have not arrived and the new arenas will be opening soon he has
authorized cancellation of the purchase order to Wortman Enterprises and the purchase of two identical units from
H. L. LeClair & Co. Ltd. of Montreal at the same unit price of $3,750.00 each, plus freight and sales tax, with
delivery to be made the week of September 22nd, 1975; that insofar as the third unit is concerned, an opportunity
to purchase a used Zamboni self-propelled ice resurfacer from Crown Assets Disposal Corporation at a total cost
'ncluding tax of $2,165.40 presented itself, and that this unit has been inspected by members of staff and is
~eing held for the City, subject to Council approval, be received and filed and Council confirm the cancellation
of the purchase from Wortman Enterprises Ltd. and award of the order to H. L. LeClair & Co. Ltd., and also
authorize the purchase from Crown Assets Disposal Corporation.
In explanation of the above resolution, Councillor Higgins stated that a bid for the purchase of three
resurfacing machines was received from Wortman Enterprises who were the LeClair representative; however, it
since been learned that they have not been representing this company for over a year. He further stated that
the Wortman firm could not deliver even another type of machine and thus, the order was cancelled. In reply to a
query from Councillor Green, Mr. Nicolle stated he understands there was no deposit cheQue with the above quot-
ation, although he would have to confirm this with the Purchasing Agent. Mr. Barfoot advised that deposit
cheques are required with tenders but not with quotations, and he would have to ascertain if the bid of Wortman
Enterprises was in response to a call for quotations or a tender call.
"~'I
as
-'
,
.
j
~
On motion of Councillor Hodges
/It:lrket
/Jfd;rk6!- c?dN7.
7(, ifcl /I'l<9p/eb~
Vf/;;1T-~r ~ $iN/f?
~l!' /,., ~I/
A. e.;;J5~
/lIary&n Fox'
(!; vie T"7prP~
meJrl- e? :J3 eelH
~~ ""/n.
L't'I:!1 f/Ql / /
C! I e,;uu'n5
Gca f'belffe
C'/i:j ~I/
$/~_ et?h7P1.
lI~v~l1u~ 'lJ1"t1;er-
-tiles
'P/';;Ih~, /ld v/s,
Ce>H?J'n'
7:k~n?e~ i h
(Ielt t:?t:/8hP{
~r f?u~//c
P""",Pi?Pt! /ahL
SClrgh E ~~~
,Rs#;
SaM~~1
/I1.a~K 11'6', :fr..
'Pi.-I'JI7. /1",( v/s.
l?d.qpr.
(:JJa#I'S, P-ceJ
{.( K'. fJh ~JflV6)
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Market Committee, advising that
the Committee has agreed to grant permission to Rita Maplebeck, operator of Stalls 16 and 17 of the City
Market to install water and sewerage facilities in the said stalls in order to properly conduct a sandwich
selling operation in the above mentioned premises, to comply with Board of Health regulations, be received
and filed.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Market Committee, Stall Number
1, Rack 6, Counter D-l be leased to Marylyn Fox for the purpose of operating a health food and handicraft
business, the rental to be derived from same amounting to $159.00 monthlY.
I
Read a letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee, dated September 17th,
1975, advising that at a recent meeting of the said Committee, the following resolution was adopted,
namely:- "Resolved that a letter be forwarded to the Common Council, advising of the Committee's concern
with the appearance of the hallways and entrances to the City Hall building, and that of particular
concern to the Committee is the hallway leading into the building from Chipman Hill, and the main entrance
to the building~ reQuesting that as there appears to be a very fine line drawn on whose responsibility it
is to clean certain parts of the City Hall building, and as a result some areas are not being cleaned,
that this matter be referred to the City Hall Building Committee for the appropriate action".
I
Councillor MacGowan stated that the Question of who is responsible for cleaning at the rear of
the building where garbage is stored should also be looked into. Councillor Kipping, Chairman of the City
Hall Building Committee, stated he wished to point out that the Committee has raised these matters with
'the representatives of the building owners in Halifax several times in the past and have been advised of
the difficulty in retaining satisfactory cleaning. staff. He stated that, however, his Committee will
again try to pursue the matters raised, if it is the wish of Council. In reply to a query from Councillor
Hodges, Mr. Barfoot stated that the City, through the Works Department, is responsible for administering
the parking garages. Councillor MacGowan noted she has been advised that if a certain individual was
reimbursed by the Committee this cleaning work could be undertaken. She stated it was the Committee's
feeling that this matter should be taken up with the building owners in Toronto through the Common Council.
.
Councillor M: Vincent stated he is in complete agreement with the points raised in the above
letter and he outlined other problems with the building such as improperly working air conditioning
system, etc. and he asked when the City is going to contact the company and either withhold the rent for
the building or take some other concrete action until these problems are straightened out.
Councillor Kipping stated that he has been advised that the reason the air conditioning system
is not operating satisfactorily'is due to partitions erected by the tenants. Councillor Davis stated that
he attended the meeting of the City Hall Building Committee at which this was stated and he left the
meeting as this reason was complete nonsense in his opinion, and he agrees it is time ,the City took action
on these matters. He further stated he believes the treatment given to the City Hall Building Committee I
by Revenue Properties is despicable and he can see no reason for asking the Committee to meet with them
again. Hhe suggested that Council invite the top executives of Revenue Properties to meet with the Council. '
Councillor A. Vincent stated he hoped the Legal Department was prepared to go to court and break the
City's lease for the building. Councillor MacGowan noted that the masonry in the front steps of the
building is broken in several places and she questioned who would be responsible for any accidents in-
curred on these stairs.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Council invite the top executives of Revenue
Properties to meet with the Council to discuss conditions in the City Hall building.
On motion of Councillor Green
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the
following sums of money be accepted in lieu of land for public purposes:-
from Sarah E. Hazen Estate, C-I07 - the sum of $464.00 (a 75 foot by 200 foot lot is being severed from
the Royal Trust Company property on the north side of Anglin Drive, situated about 165 feet west of Sandy
Point Road; based upon, the Real Estate Department's appraisal of $5,800.00 the said sum of $464.00 is the
amount payable in lieu of land for public purposes);
from Samuel Maguire Jr., L-114 - the sum of $464.00 (this property is situated on the westerly side of
Point Road in Lorneville and the proposal is to create two 100 foot by 206 foot lots; a 35 foot by 206
foot strip is being created for consolidation with the adjoining Samuel Maguire, Sr. property which
contains one existing dwellings; based upon the Real Estate Department's appraisal of $5,800.00 the said
sum of $464.00 is the amount payable in lieu of land for public purposes).
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
September 11th, 1975, outlining the duties, powers and responsibilities of the said Committee, be received
and filed.
I
Councillor M. Vincent stated he ha~reQuested the above information at a previous Council
meeting and he would ask that Council conslder tabling this report for one week in order that he may
obtain answers to severals Questions he wishes to ask regarding the responsibilities of the said Com-
mittee. The Mayor stated he believes the Legal Department should also have input into this report.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan .
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Rockwood Park Advisory Board,
......
,....
7(oeh-nf?Q.
. ?C1rK /ltltI/JS
:/3P(.
7flPPh-NPP.
'J?;Jrlr
.73,,;111" n
ijf?r5 e
.!J-&-OJ/I/e
I ~er.miJ7.;J
7reep',"rf ~hf
.2)(2p~
I
.
1 ~ J, ~..9'
(1U/I?m,
,,( I?t:~ .lOP/OJ?
VI//a E3~
Sr, ~/'/~e..
rent-
79
advising that the Board has been considering the matter of eQuestrian facilities in Rockwood Park since the loss
by fire of a horse barn and fourteen horses, both City and privately owned, on June 1st last; further advising
that horse riding is an ever-increasing form of redreation today, and the Board is aware that the City feels a
responsibility to help meet this need as it has done for other recreational needs of its citizens; and advising
that departmental reports and development plans have recommended that the remaining public and private eQuestrian
facilities be separated, in order to better serve the diverse interests of the two functions, and submitting the
following resolution for Council's consideration, which was adopted by the said Board, namely:-"Resolved that the
Board recommend to Council the separation of public and private sectors of the barn and its adjacent facilities
at Fisher Lakes, and the relocation of the private sector, that is, that no further leasing of horse stalls be
entered into: and be it further recommended that the Parks and Recreation Department call a meeting of all
interested equestrians and ask them for proposals, and that the Board also suggests that Council consider pro-
viding tax-free land or other incentives for facilities the above eQuestrians might wish to develop", be received
and filed and the recommendations contained therein adopted.
During discussion of the recommendations contained in the above-nsmed report, Councillor Kipping,
Chairman of the Rockwood Park Advisory Board, stated that the Board's intention is to phase out the existing
private use of facilities in the publicly-owned barn, and to do it with fully adeQuate notice to present users
and with the least possible inconvenience or hardship to them or to the public interests, and that the Board
feels that this is an opportunity both for the eQuestrian group to improve upon the facilities they require and
at the same time achieve a desirable measure of independence in their own activities, and for the City to re-
aCQuire needed facilities and make long-awaited changes in the lay-out and operation of the horse barn and animal
farm sections of Rockwood Park. Councillor Kipping stated that the above recommendations were not unanimously
agreed to by the members of the Board, and he further stated that he will keep the Council informed regarding
this matter.
Read a letter from the Saint John Housing Commission, dated September lOth, 1975, advising that the
following resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Commission held on September 8th, namely:- "WHEREAS the
Common Council received a reQuest by the residents of Building One of Loch Lomond Villa for assistance, and asked
the Commission for a report; AND WHEREAS the Commission having given preliminary consideration to the same, and
it appearing to the Commission that to make a proper report, it requires a study of the concept of the Loch
Lomond Villa, the basis on which it was constructed, and is being operated, and a number of investigations and
inQuiries; AND WHEREAS the securing of such information would normally be done by the Housing Co-Ordinator
working for the Commission; AND WHEREAS the City has not yet secured a co-ordinator to work with the Commission;
RESOLVED that the Common Council be informed that the Housing Commission feels it is unable to properly study and
report on this problem without engaging services of a person who has sufficient time to make the necessary
inQuiries and secure relevant information upon which the. Commission can come to a rational conclusion, and to
engage this person, and the preparation of a report which would be of assistance to Council: AND that Council be
reQuested to provide sufficient funds and authorize the Commission to secure the services of a suitable person to
obtain the relevant information so a report may be prepared which will be of assistance to Council in answering
the reQuest".
It was noted that the Council also referred the reQuest from the residents of Loch Lomond Villa, which
is referred to in the above letter, to the City staff for a report and recommendation.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above letter from the Saint John Housing Commission
regarding the reQuest received by Council on August 25th last from the residents of Building One of Loch Lomond
Villa for assistance, be laid on the table pending a report from City staff in this regard.
At this time the Mayor withdrew from the Council Chamber to execute the 1975-1976 Working Agreement
with the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local 61, C.D.P.E., and the Deputy Mayor assumed the
chair.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Reverend E. Lloyd Lake, rector of All Saints
Church, advising that he and citizens of Cottage Road and Old Black River Road have been offered the gift of a
parcel of land comprising 100 feet frontage on Cottage Road with a depth of 150 feet, which would be used for the
construction of a church building, and that the construction of the proposed church would depend upon a commit-
ment from Council that the lands adjacent to the Cottage Road would be utilized in accordance with proposed plan~1
now set forth in the Planning Department's schedule and that the area which is reserved for residential building
would likely develop in this manner, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommend-
ation.
Ifeu:/:-: L~
. ,(.;lKe
/1//5a/;1I-5
ChU.rc-h
elare/, /0
e I? #;;;'.ff..e ~
;P/allh. ij'd~'
/1fb~M City
1
I
/IIrs,~.
.:JJ~ V /S
. ,,(/#er of7/J
6-6-re~ S
~U ;;f-ai he.
/, '-fie,.
:z3~-~w
Cj:fy ~.....
.....
Read a letter from Mrs.L. Davis, 18 Ravenscliffe Court, regarding the lack of litter receptacles on
streets.
Mr. Barfoot advised that the City has approximately 450 litter containers in the City, of which 90% are
located within the central business district, with the remaining 10% placed in areas where the needs dictate,
such as near take-out stores, etc. He stated he would have staff ascertain if containers are reQuired in the
area referred to in the letter from Mrs.Davis, namely, Haymarket SQuare through Rockwood Court and along Mount
Pleasant Avenue, Parks Street via Wellesley Avenue to the Fairview Plaza and along Wall Street, and Rockland
Road. Discussion ensued on the enforcement of the City's anti-litter by-law and Councillor A. Vincent stated he
would like to see such by-law enforced. Councillor MacGowan stated her concern with the condition of City
streets and stated she does not believe there has been any prosecutions under the said by-law for some time and
that apparently those who are responsible for enforcing the by-law do not feel it is important. She stated she
feels there is no sense in having by-laws unless they are being enforced. Councillor Davis stated he feels one
of our main problems is with glass and that the Council should give serious consideration to preventing the
distribution or sale of non-returnable bottles. He stated that the amount of paper being strewn on City streets
is worse than epidemic proportions and that there appears to be no pride whatever in the appearance of our City. ~
Councillor MacGowan advised that the matter of non-returnable bottles was discussed Quite thoroughly at a meeting
of the Cities of New Brunswick held this past weekend.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs.L. Davis, 18 Ravenscliffe Court, re-
garding the lack of litter receptacles on City streets, and in particular the areas outlined in his letter, be
received and filed and that a report and recommendations on enforcement of the City's anti-litter by-law be
submitted to Council by the City Manager and appropriate staff, and that the Council be supplied with copies of
the said by-law.
80
1?t>bert- 5.
;])(?l7twan
Si'Lewa/ k
lYe~I71Clh 56.
.7: :zJ. Iif/ll1ff
~-tll'.
S&1in-&-5 71.e
/l'Jdr!?h OlreOl
C'(7)'7.$~rv~/().
7(7)7(f!!
??e -z.t>I'1/n!f
C/6;:1 Soltc. r
:1Ie-~ol7 /17.f1
~I'7-1Pr.tt /It
7ho~sol7 C?an.
~" A~,,(
Plah/h t?6;,
Co.."._.
~en~opt'- h
t///k~e
:Jjurd-I?h ~~e
$<<6 -r;C /v;
,f'P-lt, :g/,ck
~SS~5SP1~nr
CI'f:I ~.9/'.
'Phi/Ie/(, I!,d.
/l651?i11.?Jt1!' t:I .
/JttY$.
:JJal'l1.;lge to
d ut-'PlP.?//e
J)O/l;lld ;r
W&/t.n
t'/I-~ ..5:,//C/~6r
c,ntl7./1.l/ih~
W;hl~r S-/,.
:B. /I. k"Vert!H
:l)PP7o/',.t-!'pn
:BI ,;Iff" ~(Jrl7~r
1/1'1/"1 -t-
~,./()() ~-t-s
.:/).;Jh7#l~~ r-
a.~u.~//D ;,
C!"~y 5(J//~/-6
~orh~vll7~
~e?~e'rs
'/lS'st7~.
,{/?/7;71rv/ /k ~
~~!:f /1/ffr.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Robert S. Donovan, 34 Newman
Street, regarding the need for a sidewalk on Newman Street, between Elgin Street and Albert Street, and
proposing that Newman Street be a one-way street from Albert to Adelaide Streets, be referred to the City
staff for a report.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter Mr. J. K. Irving, President, J. D. Irving,
Limited, regarding the proposed re-zoning of the Saint's Rest Marsh area to a Conservation zone, advising
that re-zoning of this land in the manner proposed will effectively preclude its use for any future
industrial or commercial purpose and that the company purchased this land to have it available for such
industrial developments as may be reQuired in the future and conseQuently, the re-zoning proposed by
Council is eQuivalent to expropriation of the company's land without compensation and suggesting that
until such land is reQuired for development, the company will not object to naturalists and bird watchers
being on the property at their own risk for study purposes, and the company will carry on its normal use
of this land, that the City will take no further steps respecting re-zoning the area as proposed, and that
no such steps will prevent the owner from exercising its rights and if necessary applying for are-zoning
if and when reQuired, be referred to the City Solicitor for a report to Council.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the application from Manford.M. Thompson Construction
Co. Ltd. for re-zoning of the former Speedway Express property on Molson Avenue, for the purpose of
constructing 20 townhouse units, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and
that authority be granted to advertise the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Village of Renforth advising that
they have received a tentative plan for Lots 7 and 8 in Block B, and Lots 1 to 4 in Block D of the Burton
Brae Subdivision, a copy of which is submitted, and further advising that the Saint John-Kings County line
bisects these lots, and it is the intention of the developer to place the houses on Lots 7 and 8, and 2, 3
and 4, on the Renforth side of the line, however, due to the way the N.B.E.P.C. right-of-way cuts through
Lot 1, the house to be placed on that lot will be on the Saint John side of the line, and suggesting that
assessment of Lot 1, Block D of the Burton Brae Subdivision be in Renforth so that the house may be
supplied with services from this Village, be referred to the City Manager and staff for a report to
Council.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Philip K. Holland of Associated
Attorneys regarding damage sustained to an automobile owned by Mr. Donald J. Walton of 419 Bayside Drive,
which occurred on August 29th last, advising that it would appear there is liability for the damages to
Mr. Walton's automobile, and asking that the City make arrangements to pay these damages, be referred to
the Legal Department.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to know whether the work being carried out on Winter~
Street which resulted in the above damage was being done by the City or by a contractor.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. B. H. Everett regarding the
demolition of the Clinton Brown building at the corner of,Union and Waterloo Streets, advising that as
owner of the building at 219-221-223 Union Street, with a rear entrance at 6 Waterloo Street, he would
inQuire if precautionary measures be taken to (a) avoid damaging his building in any way by the removal of
the corner building, (b) protect his property retaining walls, (c) leave the exterior in finished con-
dition, and (d) leave the exterior walls waterproofed against weather, and asking for assurance that care
will be taken by the City of Saint John to ensure that no damage is caused to his building, be referred to
the Legal Department. and appropriate City staff to ensure that the necessary precautions are taken in
demolishing the building located at the corner of Union and Waterloo Streets.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Lorneville Ratepayers Assoc-
iation with regard to their previous reQuest for upgrading of the Lorneville Road which was not included
in the 1975 capital budget, requesting that action be taken this fall to correct the two worst areas,
namely, the area immediately adjoining the King William Road and which passes through the southernmost
portion of the Spruce Lake Industrial Park, and the section beginning at the old Orange Lodge hall and
terminating in front of the home of Mr. G. A. Cogswell, be received and to the City Manager and staff to
attempt to secure sufficient funds to carry out this work, and that the staff also be reQuested to prepare
a long-term plan for presentation to Council on the upgrading of other roads in the City to an acceptable
standard.
The Mayor re-entered the meeting and resumed the chair.
On motion of Councillor Gould
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
~'"'-
Seconded by Councillor Hodges //
___"RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. William Hazen, Manager, Saint
John Housing Authority, calling-the<attention of Council to the condition of side streets and courts
leading off Churchill Boulevard, particularly in the area of Hydro Place, and advi~ing that these streets .
and courts, for the most part, are full of large potholes and badly in need of repairs, be referred to the
appropriate City staff for a report.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Major Samuel Holland Branch,
....1
J"'"
(//?,I;/J?P -~
/l~~Pt5'., fP:jJ.
. S~'~/@I'1J
:tJ,,:al1~h
Sal J?t/ ~
/lJar.//a/'>e.
/lJaPffE7h.
73u.s #;>es
sr.eit-i;{~
IC'/f~TTQh$
/-ft!/.
7r.;;J1'15f1' C'DJI'I.
5'", C:/';~ebS
$erl'/ces S.
Ihe.
.<ea:u~Le/;
1 /I1a/7~ 6-
~~d-
.('~eu'r
//eRI7;:e /,
eiJ/I/lJ' C'.:rr;/Oh
~~'1.t1~
Co 'untQh7h7,
. Sm/H'f.;
~.6 ;(-t-Ff.
Pf/evnd ~17
/lJd,ls./6
t;.des,,{;.
If'ri~l?S
lI1ayor
.
I /'f7?-rf
/97c.
2JuL/fe~
olU:? -terf
mt?eil-SU/7e.
I
e7f!f~/"
.6hhl.
F/q~h~e
if'l?:.c'Ii4Y/ &
~eo. Od:~,lf1:
tP.rl, tAt's
73ot>k)
ll..
~t
,
United Empire Loyalists Association of Canada, commending the Common Council regarding the proposed re-zoning of
the Saint's Rest area, and suggesting that the proposed conservation zone be designed "Holland Park", be received
and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Mary E. Thorne on behalf of senior
itizens in the Saint John area regarding the possibility of having reduced bus fares on City Transit buses for
senior citizens, be referred to the Transportation Committee.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letters from Senior Citizens Services Saint John
Inc. reQuesting renewal of their lease for premises in the City Market building, and requesting renewal of a
grant from the City for 1976 in the amount of $5,500.00 being the eQuivalent of free rent for their premises in
the City Market building, and the letter from the Y.M.C.A. reQuesting a grant for the year 1976 in the amount of
$10,000.00, be referred to the budget committee.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the notice from the New Brunswick Liquor Control Com-
mission advising that the application of Smitty's Pub Ltd. for a Beverage Room License for premises located on
the east side of Mark Drive, Saint John, N. B. will be heard at a public hearing of the Licensing Board on the
26th day of September, 1975, commencing at 2.00 p.m. in the Hearing Room, Head Office, New Brunswick LiQuor
Control Commission, Wilsey Road, Fredericton, N. B., be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the notice from the New Brunswick LiQuor Control Com-
mission advising that the application of Wandlyn Motels Ltd. for a Lounge License for premises located at 607
Rothesay Avenue, Saint John, N. E., will be heard at a public hearing of the Licensing Board on the 26th. day of
September, 1975, commencing at 10.00 a.m. in the Hearing Room, Head Office, New Brunswick LiQuor Control Commission
Wilsey Road, Fredericton, N. B., be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the notice from the New Brunswick Liquor Control Com-
mission advising that the application of Gates Enterprises Ltd. for a Restaurant License for premises located at
644 Rothesay Avenue, Saint John, N. E., will be heard at a public hearing of the Licensing Board on the 26th day
of September, 1975, commencing at 10.00 a.m. in the Hearing Room, Head Office, New Brunswick LiQuor Control
Commission, Wilsey Road, Fredericton, N. B., be received and filed.
Councillor MacGowan expressed her concern with the number of licensed premises on Rothesay Avenue and
stated she would have preferred if the last two applications referred to above could have been referred to the
Planning Advisory Committee for their comments.
The Mayor stated he had two items which he would request that Council consider at this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the two items submitted by the Mayor be added to the agenda
of this meeting.
The Mayor stated he wished to submit the following resolution for Council's consideration, namely:-
"WHEREAS the City budget for 1975 made provision for an increase in salaries in 1975;
AND WHEREAS in fact the salaries which have been negotiated for civic employees substantially exceed
the provisions made in the budget;
AND WHEREAS such increased salaries could cost the City in the vicinity of $1,000,000;
AND WHEREAS in addition the City has proposed a number of new job positions and that such job positions
have not been included in the City budget;
.AND WHEREAS such new job positions if implemented in 1975 could cost the City up to approximately
$700,000.00;
AND WHEREAS the extra costs to the City, if no steps are taken to offset the increase, will be reflected
in substantial additional budget requirements for 1976;
AND WHEREAS the Council must endeavour to ensure that no undue burden is placed upon the taxpayers, and
that the tax rate of the City is maintained at a reasonable rate;
AND WHEREAS any increase in civic tax rates in effect causes a double tax increase for many businesses
and commercial tenancies, and any such tax increase for commercial tenancies could be reflected in increased
residential rents;
AND WHEREAS it appears that Civic, Provincial and National circumstances are such that every effort
must be made to keep costs within reason:
RESOLVED that the City Manager and Commissioner of Finance be instructed to prepare a detailed appraisal
projection of the costs to the City of:
(a) Filling existing vacancies:
(b) Filling approved proposed additions to staff;
(c) Anticipated attendances at conferences and business trips already
approved in budget;
(d) Purchasing of new eQuipment, supplies and materials, which have not
been purchased;
82
19,/~q /f7~y
~<<L9~t-
.:1/1( :7E~1" 1'-e-::;
nJ t?.f#~U /,e S
( /Ild/pn
C/h7(? h/,gL
*)
~J?e$(!/~d"ed & cetJ.
Oai-. (;,,/175"
(? '1/, -fhl$ Zt7A-)
",
AND FURTHER that no action be taken in the above listed items as of this date, until the City
Manager's report has been presented and considered by Council."
.
Considerable d~scussion ensued on the proposed resolution and Councillor A. Vincent asked when
the City would be going to Fredericton to demand a further budget. In reply to a Query of Councillor
MacGowan, Mr. Barfoot stated he would expect the report reQuested in the resolution could be supplied to
Council in two weeks time. Councillor Gould stated he would rather see the City go into debt than cut
programmes as suggested. Councillor Davis stated that if this resolution is adopted the City would come
to a standstill and that if the Council was doing its job it would be on top of all these things. He
stated he fails to see the necessity for such action. Councillor Kipping stated he feels the above
action is only good management and he would suggest that an additional item be added to the list, namely,
that no action be taken on projects not started. Councillor MacGowan pointed out that the City is short
staff at the present time and this would mean that many of the capital works projects will not be com-
pleted. In reply to a Query of Councillor Higgins, Mr. Barfoot stated that his report to Council in this
regard would be~on the items which are controllable, and that no further maintenance work would be
started until this report is received. He pointed out that the City will not be able to expend the full
amount of the capital budget for this year, and that City staff has already taken several steps to
control the operating budget of the City. Councillor Green suggested that the Council should be COn-
sidering making a firm demand to the Provincial Government to arrange a meeting of the Cabinet with
Council. Councillor M. Vincent observed that the action proposed will not be stopping all work of the
City, but will be a time 'to appraise the present situation.
1
1
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above resolution submitted by the Mayor be
*~ adopted with the following clause to be 'added, namely:-,"(e) Projects not started".
IY/.a (l'pr
:PeQ/,,;;1f/Qn
:l}1 Kff" (?p/?
(/;, ip J? ~ :7J~
515.
fr,.a#}~ 0.5/1'
1'i? le:1 Mmpl/Dl
f?" a;;;/e I-~
i>/anA!
j'rf?f/":;.a! )
Councillor MacGowan voted "nay" to the above resolution.
The Mayor submitted the following proposed resolution for Council's consideration, namely:-
"WHEREAS the City of Saint John has aCQuired the property at the corner of Union and Dock
Streets for the purpose of facilitating the traffic flow in that area;
.
AND WHEREAS the building on this land is now and has been empty for several months, and is
liable to vandalism and possible fire and presents a potential danger to the area:
RESOLVED that the City Manager be instructed to cause the necessary steps be taken to have the
building demolished at the earliest opportunity;
AND WHEREAS the various plans for use of the area for traffic flow could mean either the re-
location of existing power poles at considerable expense, or provision for use without relocating such
poles:
RESOLVED that the City Manager 'be instructed to present to Common Council alternative plans
showing, (a) traffic design layout with removal of the existing hydro poles utilizing the land in Question,
and (b) traffic design layout without the removal of such poles creating a safety island, with projections
of cost estimates for implementation of either design, and that such plans be submitted by October 30th
next, so that the route may be prepared and paved prior to the closure of the asphalt plant in the fall."
I
, Councillor MacGowan suggested that in view of the Council resolution adopted at this meeting
regarding a "freeze" on new projects, that this item should not be considered at this time. Councillor
A. Vincent stated it is his belief that staff had previously been instructed to have this building
demolished when it was vacated. Councillor Davis replied that he is not certain whether such a recom=
mendation had been presented to the Common Council from the Land Committee for demolition of this pro-
perty, although it had been approved by the Committee.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
.
/ J /} mi ttee for a report.
/tahK. (..omh1.
RESOLVED that the above matter be referred to the Land Com-
~Q~/n./f'Jf?/e
LEG A L
C!/t!f lI1!Jr.
3 6(l2J~"e,,0,P-
menf- ~~a.
SUb-III/v,
a!?/"'ert'/?7ed
~t"~ 6/.5&0
~rk S4'b-d/V.
serv/ce5 ~
/t-n d~tJ.f
I/~R-.
~~ Jotc/lt:>r
Councillors Green and A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed the
Chair in legal session of Council, when there were present the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Green,
Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent.
Read a letter from the City Manager, dated September 19th, 1975, advising that on February
13th, 1974, 360 Development Limited entered into a subdivision agreement with the City of Saint John to
develop certain lands on the Gault Road, being a portion of Monte Cristo Park Subdivision; that on
October 1st, 1974, the developer notified the City that they were unable to complete the work involved in
the subdivision agreement and reQuested the City to complete the work and deduct the cost of same from
the rebate due 360 Development Ltd. from the City for their providing the sewer, water and storm mater-
ials; that the amount authorized for materials in the original subdivision agreement was $34,000. but
materials to the value of $16,000 only have been installed, as a portion of the subdivision was not
started and that since October 1974, additional work to the value of $10,500. has been done' by the City
and it is estimated that work to the value of $8,000. remains to be done in order to complete the ser-
vices as specified in the subdivision agreement. The letter further advises that in addition to these
costs which involve road repairs, pumping station hook-up, paving, etc., there is the matter of a sewage
lift station installed by Heat Craft Ltd. for 360 Development Ltd. to service this subdivision - Heat
Craft Ltd. are owed the balance of $6,511.74 for the pumping station and eQuipment therein and have made
several representations to the City to be paid for this installation; Heat Craft Ltd. notified 360
Development Ltd. in May 1975 that unless their invoice was paid, that they would remove the pumps, piping
and valves, etc. from the site and as 360 Development Ltd. has not been able to pay this invoice, Heat
Craft Ltd. have reQuested the City to pay the amount, as the City reQuires the pumping station oper-
ational in order to service the subdivision. The letter states that on the advice of the City Solicitor
affidavits were submitted by Barry MacGregor of 360 Development Ltd. and Gerald Webster of Heat Craft
Ltd. concerning their interest and responsibility, however, the City Solicitor also advises that the City
is under no legal obligation to pay money to any person with respect to the sewage lift pumping station
and its installation but having regard to the circumstances of the situation, it would seem advisable for
the City to be assured that the pumping station eQuipment remain in place so that the subdivision can be
serviced, and therefore, that some accommodation should be reached with Heat Craft Ltd. concerning the
outstanding invoice. Mr. Barfoot advised that he has discussed this matter with Mr. Webster and has
I
I
I
.
~
,...
8~)
suggested that a 50/50 split might be acceptable and he has, in turn, indicated that he would be willing to drop
his price to $5,000.00. The letter advised that if the City approved a payment to Heat Craft Ltd. this would
mean that the total City contribution in this development would be approximately $18,000.00 plus the payment to
Heat Craft Ltd. and had the developer not run into financial difficulties, the City's contribution for the same
portion of the subdivision would only have been approximately $16,000.00, and before proceeding further in this
matter, the City Manager would appreciate Council's direction.
1
.
I
.1( e. :LPV/h
I
6!,~ /QWe
ve~57a;r;
-n' .t-t:tI. ,
J/f S (//"5
fee
I 7fs1?1J.,/I/~'
C"Ph7/7)'.
../l-
eft'ty sot
'P/.;J I'm,
. /ldt//s. eCIM
'Rtl-;?p/Ji17!
.....
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above matter be referred to the City Manager, the City
and the Land Committee to negotiate the best deal for the City in this regard.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~~~I'.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-ninth day
of September, A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
Church.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
MacGowan, Pye, Parfitt, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, C. Nicolle, Director of Recreation, E. Ferguson,
Chief of Police, P. Clark, Fire Chief, D. French, Director of Personnel
and Training, and I. Bruhier, Chief Development Control and Assistant
Development Officer
Reverend E. Lloyd Lake, rector of All Saints Church, offered a prayer which opened the meeting.
The Mayor welcomed to the meeting a group of Girl Guides as well as a boys' group from All Saints
The Mayor advised that he received a letter from Mr. K. C. Irving, dated September 25th, 1975, ex-
pressing his appreciation to the Mayor and members of the Common Council for the message of congratulations
extended to him while he waS in St. Andrews to receive the Development Award from the Canadian Trade and In-
dustry Council.
filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above letter from Mr. K. C. Irving be received and
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. G. E. Lowe, on behalf of Vet's Taxi
Ltd., dated September 29th, 1975, regarding a decision of the Planning Advisory Committee concerning the reQuest
of the said firm to establish a Kent home for permanent use as a dispatcher's office, be added to the agenda of
this meeting.
Councillor Parfitt voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. G. E. Lowe, on behalf of Vet's Taxi Ltd.,
dated September 29th, 1975, regarding a decision of the Planning Advisory Committee concerning the reQuest of
the said firm to establish a Kent home for permanent use as a dispatcher's office, be referred to the City
Solicitor for a report, and that, in the meantime, the said firm be reQuested to contact the Planning Advisory
Committee with reference to having a hearing before the Committee concerning their reQuest.
Councillor M. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
The Common Clerk stated that advertising was completed regarding the proposed re-zoning of property on
the westerly side of St. Anne Street, immediately to the north of the corner lot at MacLeod Street, from "R-2"
One and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" up to three-storey multiple residential classification, with not more
84
",
1/ /.>/I7/'J. 40{ ~;s.
c: QVrJ >>I,
J(e- Z()J7i~
.:z>. 2ou.1? t-.;JI.:1S
J? e- 7..(/ l7;n~
kfd42h~
C.>/ J'I~
Pe-c-/r-/Oh I'-e
~ e/h7()/?r ~
~~in5
,{~ui$ Sf~e,
1/.;J17~D/7t5 /71
,?()/It:~ CAi~
~.uu,{ Cbh7nr,
'fJet-i-l-ign r~
S<<.mW7/=t- ..7),..;
'Power //)?(?$
A~I7I7IY,;j.sf?n
/yawtPOmers "17
I #"59' CO-oF"
than six families, to permit the construction of a six-unit apartment building by Mr. D. Bountalas, and
that no written objections were received in this matter. No person was present to offer comment on the .
proposed re-zoning.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated September
16th, 1975 concerning the said re-zoning which recommends that the area indicated on the submitted print
be re-zoned as shown, subject to a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act limiting the
development on this property to a six family dwelling. The letter states that the area north of this
property and the lots across St. Anne Street have been previously zoned by Council to multiple family
classification with a limit of six families per building and Mr. Bountalas' lot is adeQuate to accom~
modate five 2-bedroom and one bachelor apartment which he is proposing and that eight off-street parking
spaces will be 'provided and the development would meet the Zoning By-law requirements in other ways.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the
westerly side of St. Anne Street, immediately to the north of the corner lot at MacLeod Street, from "R-
2" One and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" up to three-storey multiple residential classification, with
not more than six families, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The' Zoning
By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the
westerly side of St. Anne Street, immediately to the north of the corner lot at MacLeod Street, from "R-
2" One and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" up to three-storey multiple residential classification, with
not more than six families, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED
Committee, recommending the re-zoning reQuested
received and filed.
that the above mentioned letter ~om the Planning Advisory
by Mr. D. Bountalas, as shown onlthe submitted print, be
Mr. Eldon L. Card was present at the meeting on behalf of residents of the Belmont area re-
questing resurfacing of the Belmont Road. Mr. Card advised that the said residents forwarded a petition
to the Common Council on March 24th, 1975, and that a letter was received from the Common Clerk, dated
May 22nd, 1975, advising that the petition was referred to the capital budget. Mr. Card stated that the
residents have had no reply concerning the results of the referral of the petition to the capital budget
and therefore, reQuest verbal reply from the Council as to the reason the said petition has not been
acted upon. Mr. Card stated that the residents of Belmont would like to have some understanding as to
when the Belmont Road is to be resurfaced and what action will be taken before the winter on this Road.
Mr. MacKinnon advised Council that this item was not approved in the capital budget programme for this
year nor was it approved as a maintenance project. He outlined the problems in this area, including
narrow rights-of-way, improper drainage, etc. and stated that an approximate estimate for the resurfacing
of the Belmont Road would be $15,000.00 or $16,000.00, but that to do a proper job of bringing this road
up to an acceptable standard would be mOre costly. Mr. MacKinnon outlined in detail the problems the
City has with maintaining roadways such as those running off the Belmont Road, the ownership of which
roads are Questionable. He also outlined the procedure for having such roads taken over by the City.
Mr. MacKinnon stated that although no major work will be undertaken on the Belmont Road this year, his
department plans to do patching work on several sections of the Road. Considerable discussion ensued on
this matter. Mr. Stuart McFarlane, a resident of Belmont, stated that the residents are not interested
in having the Belmont Road brought up to the standard of a central City street, but only wish the neces-
sary repairs to be undertaken to bring it up to the standard it enjoyed before amalgamation, and that the
side roads off the Belmont Road are not being Questioned by the petitioners.
The Mayor thanked the residents for their presentation and advised that the Council would
render a decision, later in the meeting.
The Common Clerk advised that Mr. Louis Stephen was to have appeared at this meeting of Council
on behalf of property owners on Brunswick Drive regarding vandalism of their properties, however, he
received a letter from Mr. Stephen this date, and has been advised by Mr. Stephen that he does not wish
to appear personally at this time. The said letter from Mr. Stephen advised that he is the owner of a
property situate at the corner of Exmouth Street and Brunswick Drive, just opposite the 96-unit apartment
building built under an urban renewal scheme for the area; that the property owners have been experiencing
a"great deal of unchecked vandalism and he now finds it is a fulltime job to board up windows and make
repairs to the property solely as the result of vandalism. The letter advised that his property was
rented and the man who operated a business had to give up his business as the result of a physical
beating given to him, and that the store is now vacant and is the subject of continual vandalism. Mr.
Stephen feels that the City should either provide adeQuate protection for the property rights for the
people of the area or buy the properties at a fair marketable. value.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above letter from Mr. Louis Stephen be referred
to the Chief of Police and to the Land Committee for a report to Council.
At this time Mr. Lynn Nason, Barrister, appeared before the meeting on behalf of the Newcomers
1975 Housing Co-Operative who reQuest that the City continue the present overhead electrical lines along
the continuation of Summit Drive to help defer costs to individuals who are now building in this area.
Mr. Nason stated that Summit Drive is located in the Lakewood Heights Subdivision and that in speaking
with the City Solicitor prior to the Council meeting, he has learned there will be some legal points
regarding this request and he therefore felt that the petition from this group should be referred to the
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"...
8:;,
. Sr.u,hJii-
:0 rive
!/!jd'rp
line.s
/!/tZwet7h?el'.
/?7~/lS!J'
c::,-() J7'
I
1
.
I
.
I
c'~:.t. fl".
.;} VciiJ 0
1T/ )(. 0
I ~.:l, ofJP. 1>/9 i
TJ"dye/+
b~.5 ;"e$"s
e X",oeJ?st!"s;
7/ureh. /l~.
/I/~ rn~.
b!ovmi/. ~4(.
( /YJ~iOJ1
/o~)
. C onl'el'enl!eS
e/V/'~
ePlpl,ye'CS
ll..
City Solicitor and the matter considered at the next Council meeting. He advised that the City's Subdivision By-
Law reQuires that all services to new subdivisions be placed underground and that as his clients' are on very
limited budgets he would request that the City agree to have the present overhead lines on Summit Drive continued
to service his clients. He stated that if underground services are reQuired, this will add approximately $971.00
to the cost of each lot and he further stated that the civic hydro have asked that a certain type of underground
wiring be used, which wiring is not available at the present time from his clients' source in the City, and will
not be available for at least two months. He further stated that N. B. Tel has a cut-off date of November 1st
for the laying of underground wiring and that in order to have the project started this year, he would reQuest
approval for the overhead services. Discussion ensued on who is responsible for paying the costs of these
services, the developer or the individual purchaser, and Mr. Bruhier advised that the Subdivision By-Law provides
that the Power Commission shall install these services, with the exception of the service loop, although he is
not aware how the Power Commission charges for these services. He further advised that the said By-Law requires
underground servicing and that in the past the utilities concerned would recommend what services should be
installed and that there is record of the Planning Advisory Committee granting variances to permit the overhead
services instead of underground services. Discussion ensued on whether this area is a continuation of the
present subdivision or is a new subdivision. Councillor Gould suggested that the co-operative group might
approach the Power Commission to ascertain if these service costs could be paid over a number of years. In reply
to a Query from Councillor Higgins, Mr. Nason stated that the said group has not approached the Planning Advisory
Committee for a variance in this regard.
The Mayor thanked Mr. Nason for his presentation and advised that the Council would render a decision,
later in the meeting.
Read a letter from Mr. R. Park, Acting City Manager, dated September 26th, 1975, advising that the City
Manager reQuests clarification of Council's resolution of September 22nd, 1975, which, among other things,
ordered that no action be taken with respect to anticipated attendance at conferences and business trips, or with
respect to the purchase of new equipment, supplies and materials, and that as an immediate enforcement of the
resolution would entail a suspension of normal processing of regular expenditures and an interruption of ser-
vices, the City Manager reQuests Council (a) to re-affirm the standing authority for the City Manager to approve
expenditures for day to day operations up to $2,000.00, (b) to approve travelling to courses and business trips,
and (c) to ratify the City Manager's approval for attendance of the Purchasing Agent at the National Institute of
Governmental Purchasing on the grounds of arrangements having been already completed. The letter states that the
policy laid down by the resolution is being immediately applied, and all expenditures are being scrutinized in
this light - uncommitted vacancies are not being filled, travel to courses and conferences not already started is
being suspended, and all projects are being carefully examined. The letter concludes by advising that a full
report is being prepared for Council's consideration at their next regular meeting.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that the Council resolution of September 22nd put a temporary "freeze" on
certain matters for two weeks and he stated he would like to see all reQuests for travel outside of the Province
approved by the Council, as was previously the policy of Council. In reply to a Query, Mr. Park advised Councillor
A. Vincent that he approved the attendance of the Purchasing Agent to the convention referred to in his letter,
on the grounds that prior arrangements had been made before the Council's resolution of September 22nd, and that
it is not staff's intention to try to evade Council's resolution as far as any future cases are concerned, prior
to the reQuested report being presented to Council. Councillor A. Vincent stated it is his opinion that the
Acting City Manager did not have the right to approve such attendance. Discussion ensued on the attendance of
City staff at conventions and conferences. Councillor M. Vincent stated he did not anticipate that the, Council
resolution referred to would draw as much feeling from staff and the media as it has, as he understood that it
would be a two-week period for staff to prepare a report and assess the budget situation, and he does not believe
it was Council's intention in adopting the said resolution to stop the operations of the City completely. The
Mayor confirmed that this was not his intention when he submitted the said resolution for consideration by
Council on September 22nd. Councillor Higgins stated he believes the misunderstanding on the interpretation of
the resolution was through a lack of understanding by the City staff and that at no time was it felt that the day
to day operations of the City would be affected.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she objected to the resolution on September 22nd at the time it was
passed and that the wording of the said resolution is very clear in stating that many of the City's operations
will be halted for a two-week period. Councillor Davis stated that at the last Council meeting he felt very
strongly that the resolution was ill-conceived and ill-timed and one of the reasons for his opposition was that
the Council was taking away the authority of the City Manager. He stated that now the Council is saying that the
wording of the resolution is not what was meant by Council. Councillor Kipping stated that he agrees with the
resolution referred to and that common sense has to be applied when drastic action like this is taken and that
the standing authority of the City Manager was not rescinded by Council at any time. Councillor Green stated he
understood that the resolution would be in effect for a two-week period only and it was his opinion that the City
Manager would use common sense in administering the City. Councillor Hodges stated that the motion passed by
Council on September 22nd was for a two-week period only and if the reQuested report is not received at the next
Council meeting he will personally mOve that the said resolution of September 22nd be rescinded. Mr. Park stated
that the matter of budget control was discussed by the City Manager with all department heads following Council's
September 22nd meeting, and that he believes it is being applied in a common sense way by the City staff. He
further stated that the reQuested report is presently being prepared on the basis of information already supplied
by the department heads and it is expected that such report will be prepared for the next Council meeting.
Regarding the interpretation of the said Council resolution, Councillor M. Vincent asked if there was a paving or
patching job to be done which reQuired additional staff would they be hired, and the Mayor replied in the af-
firmative.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above letter from the Acting City Manager be re-
ceived and filed and the Council (a) reaffirm the standing authority for the City Manager to approve expenditures
for day to day operations up to $2,000.00; (b) approve travelling to courses and business trips; and (c) ratify
the City Manager's approval for attendance of the Purchasing Agent at the National Institute of Governmental
Purchasing on the grounds of arrangements having been already completed.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that an item regarding City employees travelling to conferences
outside the Province to be reQuired to obtain the prior approval of Council, be added to the agenda of this
meeting.
Several, Council members noted that the Council deals with the matter of travel expenditures for staff
members when the various departmental budgets are considered each year.
Question being taken, the motion was lost as the majority vote reQuired to have an item placed on the
agenda was not received.
4
86
",
FI,. e .5-1.:;:rf i 0-
K/n~ ~,.E
1?e?~e.;;J ~hS~""t:'
-t/on A-e-
r/Jf'~/on )
-E~b/~ff
1h~5~ ~14
,Up('.
f(-/J1<<d
J'/a~QI
Cou/Jcll
f7e5t7/ lit ion
V.;;j/"leL
e,mM/#~e
. tf/hp/e
. 1<. 'Park
/Jet';n ff C/I!f
P1~/JaJ:er
t/'-Cy 7Ilff!,.
I;,-l-nt /. c'/!I
/Jf,,;u73ffer s
/lssoe.
t?un-rel"ence
AD/;h~ t::'oP?P7.
"ceflSem ehr
0/1 ?ir//ne
L I"vlnff 0,1 L-.
'1bI/lidh ;.e
~VFhff
:lJe/I17QRt'- ~d.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the City of Saint
John approve the construction of a new fire station on the King Street East site by Rocca Construction
with the foundation to be of a capacity to enable the construction of apartment units or office space over
the fire station at some future date, and the staff to enter into further negotiations concerning design
costs and financial arrangements.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above matter be tabled for one week.
Question being taken, the tabling motion was carried with Councillors Green, Gould, Pye, A.
Vincent and M. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Municipal Planning Director,
regarding the application of House of Hay Limited to Common Council for a change in the K-Mart Plaza
original site plan to permit construction of a Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet on the K-Mart Plaza next to
the McDonald Restaurant as indicated on plans submitted to Council with their application, advising that
the Planning Advisory Committee reviewed these plans and reQuested 'a revised site plan to solve the
problems created by vehicular and pedestrian movements at the liQuor store, McDonald Restaurant and, when
completed, the proposed Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet and the Committee has now accepted an amended site
plan showing location of a proposed three foot high berm with planting located near the proposed site of
the new outlet, which would prevent vehicles from speeding past the Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet, and
that the revised site plan will be filed with the Common Clerk to replace the original submitted with the
application; further advising that when the K-Mart Shopping Centre proposal was before the Council of the
City of Lancaster, the plans included the possibility of a motel and apartment buildings in addition to
the stores and the inter-mixing of the uses, the proposed locations on the site and other considerations
dictated that a new approach be found to permit these various uses in one location which was accomplished
by the establishment of planned unit district regulations in the Lancaster Zoning By-law and the zoning of
the K-Mart site to that zoning category, and that later on, the same kind of zoning was provided through-
out the metropolitan area and is contained in the present Zoning By-law as Planned Development zones - the
main basis for this kind of zone being the approval by the civic administration of the plans for the
proposed development; further advising that the Zoning By-law text and map changes which made it possible
for the City of Lancaster to permit the K-Mart development were enacted on October 15th, 1963, and that in
February 1973, the Common Council, by resolution, varied the original Lancaster City resolution to allow
the erection of the McDonald Restaurant, and that the Planning Advisory Committee believes that the now
proposed Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet should be permitted the same way and recommends that Common Council
vary the original Lancaster resolution of October 15th, 1963 so as to permit the House of Hay Limited to
construct a Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet in accordance with plans filed with the Common Clerk, be re- .
ceived and filed and the recommendation contained therein adopted.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs to report that it sat on Monday, September 22nd, 1975, when there were
present Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Davis, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A.
Vincent and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
1. That Mr. R. Park be appointed Acting City Manager during the absence from the City of the City
Manager, who is attending the International City Manager's Association conference in Seattle, Washington,
for the period September 26th to October 5th, 1975.
Saint John, N. B.,
29th September, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recom-
mendation contained therein adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that
Irving Oil Limited has reQuested that the City grant an easement over a small parcel of land now con-
sidered to be in the City's ownership in the Courtenay Bay area, at the rear of Downey's Ltd. property,
for the construction of their pipeline, be received and filed and permission be given to Irving Oil
Limited to enter upon the land owned by the City to build a pipeline, on the understanding that a formal
. arrangement will be entered into between the City and the Company to provide title.
In reply to a Query from Councillor M. Vincent, the Mayor stated that the above resolution is
not in contravention with any present agreements or any agreements presently being negotiated.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the petition from residents of Belmont regarding
resurfacing of the Belmont Road, be received and filed and the said residents advised that no capital or
maintenance funds will be expended for repairs to the said Road this year, although patching work will be
undertaken.
Councillor Hodges stated he hopes the Works Department will prepare a design plan for resurfacing
of the Belmont Road, as it is doing with other roads in the outlying areas of the City.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
1
.
.....
,..
w....
o,l
The petition presented to Council at this meeting on behalf of the Newcomers 1975 Housing Co-Operative
requesting that the City continue the present overhead electrical lines along the continuation of Summit Drive,
was considered. In reply to a Query from Councillor M. Vincent, Mr. Rodgers stated that under the existing
subdivision agreement all services are to be placed underground and that the Subdivision By-Law states that if in
~~,~/'",~po the opinion of the Council overhead services are feasible it can be granted, and that.it is the Question of it
/. being feasible in this case which the Council will need direction before making a deC1Slon.
powel'7 //I1f?
SUh/P$7/E.2J.
!VeH/e"mepo
/97!7 ffi-~
/? report and recommendation to Council.
I c..'(hP'p'
~2f~
. 1 Su7/e/~pr
.
I
.
I
.
I
s r:J},.!/
lJ)p~
. fluskies
7eam
T~ o.,c
I14Jr
~1?I1'/0/7-
~hF~S
Gn;lJ?-r-
. C',"-I-y /l!~,n.
....
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the said petition be referred to the Legal Department for a
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
IfFl! #(1;
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the sixth day of
October, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief
Engineer of Operations of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, A. Ellis, Building Inspector,
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, C. E. Nicolle, Director of
Recreation and Parks, P. Clark, Fire Chief, and E. Ferguson, Chief\of Police,
and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply of the
Engineering and Works Department
The meeting opened with a prayer which was offered by the Mayor.
Members of the Saint John Dry Dock Huskies Team, who won the Canadian Tug-of-War Championship re-
cently, were presented by the Mayor at this time with tokens of appreciation of the City of Saint John and
Common Council for this achievement, which has brought recognition to our city. Mr. J. McLeod, manager of the
team, advised that this Team had made application to the City for financial assistance under the City's grants
procedure, but had been unsuccessful and was told it did not qualify for a grant. He advised that in this
regard, the Team needed $1,500.00 to travel to Ottawa to compete in the National Highland Games (Which was the
competition in which the Team won the said Championship) and raised $1,144.00 of this amount themselves for the
air fare and paid for their meais themselves.. He also advised that this Team successfully defended their New
Brunswick Highland title and the Mark Ten Provincial Atlantic National Exhibition title for the year 1975, and
is now looking ahead to competing next March in the North American Highland Games Championships to be held in
Dunedin, Florida, United States of America and the Team members are hoping to raise as much money on their own
as possible for this event. He stated that to commence its fund-raising programme, the Team is going to attempt
to row from Digby, N. S. to Saint John, weather and tides permitting, on October 25th, 1975, and that anyone
wishing to donate money to the Team can send it to the Manager of the Bank of Commerce at Bayside Drive, Saint
John East, N. B.
The Mayor made note that the trophies and medals that have been won by this Team were on display in
the Council Chamber at this time.
,
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the appeal of the Saint John Dry Dock Huskies Team for financial
assistance in their campaign to raise funds to cover the cost of competing in March, 1976 in the North American
Highland Games Championships (tug-of-war competition) to be held in Dunedin, Florida, United States of America,
be referred to the City Manager and City staff for consideration wi~h regard to a grant from the City.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on September
22nd last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on September
29th last, be cOnfirmed.
88
/l II" Can86
cro~hul"t!
(?117/S.s/0h of
SOIin-r :lOhn
/I~-/':fC'/I'y ~
,q~u.p.m:;z.-c-/
Pi? <3
2JJ4c--P e,&(
~-c-,c.
.2), IkMt1'ht' ..(-6
,(0.;1/7/ . /.
~ /!'''<01S.h-jt'r.t.
(/-Q/..,e apUl"se
f)~ol-c'l~'.~>>
~ca~e"
Sewer
Clrest:.el1r /lve.
$ul7~/.5e
CPI7$;.uc-clp>>
Ct?_ ./.~d.
c.,,..P!~~ / r
JJud5e
~.;1~imeJn-4ke 1.
tJ~/dl"ind/ Oh
'p/anr-
.:7Phh r/op"L
S'h~ ,t'~'L.
:J) ,7<. E E.
Lt?l"l7evl/1e /tin. l.
7h~IL~ W~~
.s '" P.P
~od'-/;.e~
/l .s504i.GJ=tl!"S
o<-I-/.
/alYd <9C5$~
JfI; :9_. #f5'y- a..n
Ca<<;>~~~ff
t9.:lJ.I L-t'd..
~
.' The Mayor advised that the new air schedule of Air Canada regarding one-way youth stand-by
fares concerning various centres in Canada, does not mention any centre in the Province of New Brunswick; .
.this folder mentions every other province except New Brunswick.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that a letter be sent from this Common Council to the
appropriate bodies asking why the Province of New Brunswick and the City of Saint John were not included
on the Air Canada brochure which lists various centres in Canada in regard to one-way youth stand-by
fares.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
1
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Acting
City Manager, approval be granted for payment of the invoice from D. Hatfield, Ltd., in the amount of
$39,572.55, dated September 4th, 1975, for eQuipment rented to the Works Department during the period
August 16th to 31st, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority be
given for payment of the invoice, dated September 4th, 1975, from D. Hatfield, Ltd., in the amount of
$12,712.65, for the rental of eQuipment to the Works Department during the period August 16th to 31st,
1975.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority
be granted for payment of the invoice, dated September 2nd, 1975, in the amount of $2,997.00, from R. H.
Laskey Ltd., for the purchase of loam for the Rockwood Park golf course, this being a Recreation capital
construction project.
.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising
that Common Council's ~pproval on July 21st, 1975 of the Capital Programme included the construction of
sanitary sewer on Crescent Avenue and that the estimate for same included a right-of-way reQuired from
the property owners which was obtained by the Real Estate Department during the middle of September 1975,
following which quotations were receved for the construction of the said 8-inch sanitary sewer, the
lowest Quotation being that of Sunrise Construction Co. Ltd. which was six per cent above the engineer's
estimate, and this contractor has met all the reQuirements for the performance bond and insurances, and
advising that the Works Department has recommended that the contract be awarded to the said contractor -
and recommending that this contract be awarded to the low bidder, Sunrise Construction Co. Ltd. in the
amount of $25,200.00 -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, the
following construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engineering services, in connection
with a capital project, be approved for payment:-
Latimer Lake Chlorination
John Flood & Sons Ltd.
Extension of Building
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate
Retention
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
Plant
Number 1
$ 17,810.00 .
9,342.72
1,401.40
Nil
$ 7,941. 32
approved
payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated September 26, 1975
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority
be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for
engineering services, regarding projects that have been undertaken in connection with the Department of
Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
I
Lorneville Western Industrial
Godfrey Associates Ltd.
Engineering services ,
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment,
Water Supply
$ 133,883.74
$ 163.30
I:
Progress Estimate Number 20,
dated August 29, 1975
2.
Saint John East Development - External Services
New Brunswick Housing Corporation
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 10
Retention
" ,i:JJ.3~.... Pa~eiltsl'previously approved
sum':;-ecom.nended for payment, Progress Estimate
dated August 31, 1975
$ 118,142.00
118,729.00
5,936.45 . .'
llI,934.70 '-('1 0
$ 857.85 .
...
$ 168,870.07
Number 10,
3.
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
A.D.L Limited
Engineering services for western approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimates Numbers 39,
~
,....
l>..1?~,k
t%iJ?lf'/.;lIn'1
e"5iiJJ<ew /?Da
ni"$. a// 4.
5e~r
E(T'od~he
X-t-,(
I :liJ!fS/It" t? 7JJ. 5.
~C/n.$-c r. ~
edt?h.
~//eg'hDlI?
C'C>~/11
At-.
I
~p~~,..
7(;Jvl hf A-/.
{bUh. CI"A!?I?
e..( c>,.,hevi/k
W 'n. 2/",r( Ie.
Pf/.;;/erS<<.~
S~/I/.
-l<jre. ~h7en
tf7e~pr~
(J~ve S",,J-
ut/I>'.
I if~QC~u
'<td.
Se~/e-r
e.I!/Ct';rel7s
~ ~ch ,{(7""'''
t/I'/4 re
I"el'7r
inc~ses
"R, I/.
vt/O"1:.,tte
I (ffi,/e)
I
t!/-c'j
;1f.nh~er
. PrflV,
G-tf? ,d-.
.....
,89
40 and 41, dated February 28, March 31, and
August 31, 1975
$ 12,221. 09
Champlain & Lakewood Heights Collector Sewer
Ecodyne Limited
Supply two pumping stations
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated September 18, 1975
$ 34,210.00
36,890.80
5,533.62
Nil
1,
$ 31,357.18
Phase II - Bayside Drive Reconstruction & Extension
Callaghan Contracting Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 11
Retention 15%
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate
dated July 1975
$ 247,404.00
272,529.17
40,879.38
223,230.54
Number 11,
$ 8,419.25
6.
Phase III - Bayside Drive
Goodyear Paving Limited
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate
Retention 15%
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
Reconstruction & Extension
Number 8
$ 312,032.00
273,580.40
41,037.06
226,626.36
$ 1,816.98
approved
payment, Progress Estimate
dated July 1975
Number 8,
regarding
requested
Councillor Green asked for a progress report, including comparison between actual cost and estimates,
the Lorneville Western Industrial Water Supply project. Mr. Barfoot replied that he will submit this
report.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent _-
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, stating that
the Rocca Group Limited is developing a parcel of land on the south side of the Golden Grove Road jus~ east of
the Westmorland Road intersection, known as Westmorland Grove Sub-division, Stage I, which will involve approxi-
mately 3,000 feet of street and services and make land available for the construction of fifteen 12-unit apart-
ment buildings and one 96-unit apartment building, and that servicing plans were submitted by the developer,
which met with the approval of the Engineering and Works Department, and further advising that, according to the
City's sub-division policy, the City will be responsible for the following costs:- (1) water materials (watermains,
gate valves, et cetera) $41,100.00, (2) sanitary sewr materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $14,700.00, (3) storm
sewer materials (pipe, manholes, catch basins, et cetera) $31,200.00 - totalling $87,000.00 - and recommending
that the above expenditures be approved for water and sewerage materials to be charged to the 1975 capital
budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in due course
be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Pye voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr H. L, Ellis, Administrative Assistant to
the City Manager, with reference to the letter of protest from the Senior Citizens of High Rise Building Number
1, Loch Lomond Villa, regarding recent rental increases in that building, which letter reQuests that government
nd elected representatives come to the assistance of these tenants, and which suggests the implementation of
ental controls, advising that further to Council resolution of September 22nd last which referred this matter to
City staff for a report, the staff has checked with the Consumer Bureau of the Province and discussed the problem
with the City Solicitor, and has concluded that there is no legislation in the present Landlords-Tenants Act that
will present Common Council with any scope to offer assistance - and pointing out that although the Common
Council may be most sympathetic with senior citizens and those on fixed incomes in this time of rapid inflation,
there is legally no avenue open to local government to offer assistance, and recommending that Mr. Woodroffe be
so informed -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Councillor Parfitt stated she has been in touch with the two officials who are in direct contact with
the above noted people, and she understands that, to their knowledge, only one person was affected by the $145.00
rent. She added that Mr. MacDonald of Social Assistance has said that if anyone does need assistance that person
will get it. During ensuing discussion, Councillor M. Vincent asked if the Council of the day has the authority
to create rent controls, to which Mr. Rodgers replied that he is not aWare of any legislative authority to
Council for that subject. Councillor M. Vincent enQuired if there is any preventative. Mr. Rodgers replied that
on that matter, he would have to say it is a Provincial jurisdiction and the Landlord and Tenant Act governs it;
he is not saying that the said Act has provisions on the matter, either. Councillor Parfitt stated she feels
there is a semi form of rent control to those developers who built under the particular Section of the National
Housing Act and who obtained a loan repayable in fifty years at a lower rate of interest; she feels there is a
certain amount of control of the amount of rent that can be charged.
Councillor Cave stated he realizes that this Council can do nothing about the said rental situation,
but he wonders if this Council could exert some pre.ssure on the Provincial Government or on the Central Mortgage
and Housing Corporation which would help in some way.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table and that the City
Manager be asked to consult with the Provincial Government to see what can be done regarding the above noted
problem.
90
1l$~"SPMt!!.
:l3."il'm :$,...;je
SHb-~iv. .I of- t
:B/ockJJ
1?eh/bd-h
1//1/.51~e
F/re ~i"l7,
/(j'hff 51-. J;d .
11C7C~ C1~-
:;-tl'~-/-i on
'(-t-L.
/I'l/Jntbq reppl'<
hn~nd~1
$#dI-c-e",PA~
('(lee-h. /l. Vi~
au.n~11 ~~/'P!I
il1~r(!NSe
('f/Uh, I/od~es
'P/O"J'hl n~
.7J"'J'ls~16t'1 0/
9' t'oYep/n~)
:iJu/L~d /f7:
~r..;1i nl:s
t/nC'o"tC;..tl4:J~ (
'11iI"~ %J'I<<da
(#),t-iol7 /od
~6e P. 'Y/)
~
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. H. L. Ellis, Administrative
Assistant to the City Manager, with reference to the suggestion made to Council that the assessment on
Lot 1, Block "D" of the Burton Brae Sub-division (which will, because of restrictions to the building lot
caused by the New Brunswick Electric Power Commission right-of-way, have to be constructed on the Saint
John side of the boundary line between the Village of Renforth and the City of Saint John) be in the
Village of Renforth so that the house to be constructed on this lot may be supplied with services from
that Village -- recommending that in light of the Common Council's recent stand on other boundary decisions,
and because this house can under authority of Section 7 (4) of the Municipalities Act still reQuest
services from the said Village even if located in Saint John, and since other sections of this sub-
division will subseQuently have to be constructed well inside the Saint John boundary, the Village Clerk
of Renforth be informed that the Common Council does not agree with the suggestion of the Village of
Renforth Council that the assessment be in Renforth -- be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
.
I
On motion of Councillor k. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, dated September I
25th, 1975, regarding the building of a new fire station in the King Street East area, which was laid on
the table on September 29th, 1975 for one week, be laid on the table for another week.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with a majority of the Council members casting
negative votes.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report, dated September 25th, 1975, from the City
Manager, with reference to the proposal to build a new fire station in the King Street East area which
would replace the existing fire stations on King Street East and Union Streets, and would provide, as
well, the new headQuarters building for the Fire Department, advising that funds were included in the
1974 capital budget for design, and $100,000.00 was included in the 1975 capital budget for the start of
construction; that because of the prime location of this site and the amount of City-owned land which
would be available surplus to the reQuirements of the fire station, Council authorized a call for ex-
pressions of development interest for this site, which is approximately one acre in extent and this call,
which closed on July 11th, 1975, required that part of the site be developed for a fire station, and
identified the remainder of the site as being suitable for residential development in the form of medium-
rise apartment buildings; that two responses were received to the call (from Argo Construction, Montreal,
and from-Rocca Construction, Saint John) and were examined thoroughly; that, however, as there are still
some unresolved matters concerning the development of the balance of the site, and as there is a very
great urgency to start construction of the fire station because of the impending delivery of the new
aerialscope unit ordered by the City in October 1974, it is logical at this time to proceed with the fire
station only, constructing the station so as to give maximum flexibility in the use of the total site,
with the work to be carried out by Rocca Construction; that there are further details as to the design,
construction cost, and financing arrangements which can be finalized.as soon as the developer is ap-
proved --and recommending that the City of Saint John approve the construction of a new fire station on
the King Street East site by Rocca Construction with the foundation to be of a capacity to enable the
construction of apartment units or office space over the fire station at some future date, and the staff
to enter into further negotiations concerning design, costs and financial arrangements -- be received and
filed and the City of Saint John approve in principle the construction of a new fire station on the King
Street East site by Rocca Construction with the foundation to be of a capacity to enable the construction
of apartment units or office space over the fire station at some future date, and the City staff to enter
into further negotiations concerning design, costs and financial arrangements.
.
I
Mr. Barfoot explained that the intent of the recommendation contained in his report referred to
above is to approve basically the developer, and for the City staff to bring back a further report to
Council on the costs.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the reports for August of the Water .and Sewerage
Division of the Works Department, and of the Division of Technical and Inspection Services, including
Plumbing - be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
and filed.
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for August last, be received
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked that Mr. Park prepare a report for the montbs of July and August,
975, commencing from July 1st, for Councillors who have not cashed their cheQue, or cheques, regarding
Council salary payments, his purpose in making this reQuest being to ask the City Comptroller to produce
a cheQue or cheQues that were cashed by Councillor A. Vincent since the increase in Council salaries took
effect. He asked that this report be provided for the next meeting of Council.
I
In reply to Councillor Hodges' reQuest for an explanation regarding the sums of $42.00 for
ploughing and $120.00 for padding and covering four doors with black vinyl (on pages 2 and 5 of the above
named Financial Statements) Mr. Barfoot advised that this information will be provided.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as reQuested in the report, dated October 1st,
1975, from the Acting City Manager (Which report, in compliance with Common Council resolution of Sept-
ember 22nd, 1975, gives the detailed appraisal projection of costs, and advises of the action taken by
the City Manager on the general intent of the said resolution which relates to budgetary expenditures for
1975), the Common Council continue its efforts made over the past year to improve the unconditional grant
structure, and at the same time authorize the City Manager and Commissioner of Finance to review and
prepare a reasonable and adequate personnel establishment for the 1976 budget now being assembled (through
these two approaches the 1976 tax rate might be made acceptable).
.
~
"..
'91
.
I
I
.
I
lre!Se/ nd'; n
. md-/pl1
lef7!F-7'-
~f<4d-
rt>?6-'J/IJ&.
I
I
.
....
Councillor MacGowan confirmed that the above motion anticipates a report back to Council from the City
Manager and the Commissioner of Finance on what steps they are going to put into effect, and that the decision of
the said City Manager and Commissioner of Finance would have to be ratified by Council in this regard.
The various sections of the above named report were discussed in detail by the Council members with the
City Manager.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above report be laid on the table for one week so that the
Common Council can meet with the City Manager to study the matter.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with a majority of Council members casting negative
votes.
During further discussion, Mr. Barfoot advised that the City staff did not prepare the above named
report only because the Council has reQuested this submission - the financial position of the City has been a
concern of City staff for some time -'he has recently learned that it is a position that is common to every
municipality in North America and many of these curtailment of programmes are going on everywhere else. He
stated he thinks that the City of Saint John in the near future will have to face this sort of action, to be able
to get more production out of present employees, to curtail optional programmes, and to seek for further source
of revenues, which means that there are really three actions that have to be taken. Councillor Davis felt that
the procedure to follow in the matter is for the Committees of Councillors to meet with the respective Commissioner
forthwith and look over the budget, see what extra help is needed next year, and what help is not needed this
year; in this way the matter can be done properly, minutely and accurately. He felt that if there is a deficit
of $500,000.00 this year, it is not at all the end of the City. Councillor MacGowan at this time read, for the
information of the Council members, a letter dated September 15th, 1975 written by the Commissioner of Engineering
and Works to the City Manager about manpower distribution, stating she feels that the Council members should be
aware of the facts contained in the said letter. She confirmed that this information is available for all Coun-
cillors. Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Council members be provided with a copy of the said letter. The
Mayor noted that the said letter is available to any Council members who wish to go for it. Councillor MacGowan
called attention to the number of personnel listed in the said letter that we were short in the various Depart-
ments as of September 15th last, and this is why Councillor MacGowan was terribly concerned when the Council had
this "freeze" because it meant the City could not get certain jobs done; she noted that we have lost even more
personnel since August 15th last as referred to in the said letter, which means we are back even further than
that now, and we cannot do the jobs that have to be done. She noted that the letter states that our programmes
are lagging very seriously with limited time to complete some of them which reQuire asphalting and sodding - that
some of these programmes have Provincial funding and it is absolutely necessary that we complete the programmes
as soon as possible - however, each year we attempt to save money with a loss of services to the public and the
result is showing on the city streets. She stated that this letter relates to the subject under discussion to the
effect that we ,are already short approximately 42 people, but that Mr. MacKinnon reported at the Beautification
Committee meeting that we are short approximately 87 people. She stated she does not want to see the City
curtail this type of work because we cannot afford to, and this is what she is trying to bring to the City
Manager's attention, also, when he says we are trying to cut back. She agreed that there are some things we can
cut back, but added there are also some things we cannot cut back. In reply to the points made by Councillor
MacGowan in reading the said letter to Council, Mr. Barfoot stated that he thinks we have to know the context of
these matters when looking at interdepartmental correspondence. He stated he seeks to bring to Council the
general picture for Council's action on policy matters; the manpower in the Works Department, of course, is
related to many other things besides budgets - it is related to capital programmes in the summertime and many
other operations such as that; the direct relationship with cutting numbers of positions is not there. He stated
another aspect is that we must emphasize more on supervision and productivity in all our operations.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors MacGowan, Kipping, Cave, Gould and Parfitt
voting "yea" and Councillors A. Vincent, M. Vincent, Green, Pye, Davis and Hodges. voting IInay".
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the following motion which was adopted by Common Council on
September 22nd, 1975, be rescinded:-
"WHEREAS the City budget for 1975 made provision for an increase in salaries in 1975;
AND WHEREAS in fact the salaries which have been negotiated for civic employees substantially exceed
the provisions made in the budget;
AND WHEREAS such increased salaries could cost the City in the vicinity of $1,000,000.00;
AND WHEREAS in addition the City has proposed a number of new job positions and that such job positions
have not been included in the City budget;
AND WHEREAS such new job positions if implemented in 1975 could cost the City up to approximately
$700,000.00;
AND WHEREAS the extra costs to the City, if no steps are taken to offset the increase, will be reflected
in substantial additional budget reQuirements for 1976;
AND WHEREAS the Council must endeavour to ensure that no undue burden is placed upon the taxpayers, and
that the tax rate of the City is maintained at a reasonable rate;
AND WHEREAS any increase in civic tax rates in effect causes a double tax increase for many businesses
and commercial tenancies, and any such tax increase for commercial tenancies could be reflected in increased
residential rents;
AND WHEREAS it appears that Civic, Provincial and National circumstances are such that every effort
must be made to keep costs within reason:
RESOLVED that the City Manager and Commissioner of Finance be instructed to prepare a detailed ap-
praisal projection of the costs to the City of:
(a) Filling existing vacancies;
(b) Filling approved proposed additions to staff;
(c) Anticipated attendances at conferences and business trips already approved in
budget;
(d) Purchasing of new equipment, supplies and materials, which have not been purchased;
(e) Projects not started.: AND FURTHER that no action be taken in the above listed items, as of this
date, until the City Manager's report has been presented and considered by Council."
Councillor Gould stated he does not see any need to take an assessment now of the City's present
position. He noted that this Council set a budget and could not live within it - it. did not deliberately over-
expend the budget. He sees no reason why, if this is a deficit, that we cannot carry it over into 1977, so
therefore we do not really need this "freeze" and so on. Councillor M. Vincent stated he went along with the
said September 22nd resolution because he saw nothing wrong with the elected representatives of this city and the
senior staff doing an assessment on the costing, spending and programming that the City was carrying out. He
felt it might be wise (because from the said September 22nd resolution he considers there has stemmed a tremend-
92
~
II'/pdh~ MpJ'.
Efu/P~$/
:JJ.1I~e/t/ A'fi
/l5f/1~/~
~neh l..f?I1.
:c lOll (;:'e,_ ~-at.
?e~I'$ wJ
~//ed 4f.:7/n
~.;Jhcqs-le r
,<~P;J7 5~lVd!fl
hl-"~ 7f.;J-r/on
1'17~-7b
Pf/p,nh'hf J}~.
menr
s::ra:Fy //211/1'
..Fmfl/~s ffiJJIJH.
/to, #'tb
ous number of misinterpretations by perhaps senior staff, by department heads, and certainly by some
members of the Council) to support the above motion of Councillor A. Vincent to clear the books and make
a fresh start; however, he still thinks that the Council has to have a look at what perhaps the City
Manager has brought forward in his recommendation in his October 1st report to Council, except that he
wonders if that recommendation had passed, if the Questions that have to be answered could be answered by
the approval of that recommendation. He stated he does not think that the Council is any further ahead
with that recommendation had it passed, than with it not passed, because he knows that staff have Quest-
ions that would not be covered within the scope of that recommendation - he as a Councillor has questions
he could ask that are not covered by the said recommendation - therefore, he feels that the idea of
having a close look at what we are doing is viable but he does not think that the manner in which the
Council set out to do it was the proper way to achieve the end that was desired.
Councillor Davis referred to the final paragraph of the September 22nd resolution, namely,
"That no action be taken in the above listed items as of this date, until the City Manager's report has
been presented and considered by Council." and noted that the City Manager's report has been presented
and considered by Council and, therefore, he does not feel that anything has to be done - no motion is
therefore necessary, in his opinion.
Councillor Green felt that the present situation regarding budgetary position is not the fault
of the City because it had been necessary to cut the budget drastically when it was prepared for 1975 and
when it was approved by the Province, and he urged that the City demand from the Provincial Cabinet the
proper amount of money that is needed to keep this city operating in the proper way.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Davis, Kipping, and Parfitt and
the Mayor voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report for August of the Fire Department, be
received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority
be granted for payment of the invoice, dated February 19th, 1975, from D. Hatfield Ltd., in the amount of
$2,260.95, for eQuipment rental to the Water Department for the period February 1st to 15th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Acting
City Manager, authority be granted for payment of the invoice, dated October 1st, 1975, from Stephen
Construction Company Limited in the amount of $38,280.12, for supplying asphalt to the Works Department
during the period September 16th to 30th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that
the Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station, when completed, will be pumping the surcharged sewers from the Spruce
Lake Industrial Area, South Bay, Milford, Randolph, Greendale and the Fairville Boulevard valley up to
the treatment plant, and that the construction of the project was approved by Common Council on July
22nd, 1975 and tenders, which were advertised on August 15th, 1975, were publicly opened on September
lOth, 1975; that the estimate of the City's consultants of the cost of construction was $488,000.00 and
the only tender submitted, that of Frecon Ltd. of Fredericton, New Brunswick, was in the amount of
$678,130.00; that the consultants reviewed their estimate according to the market value and revised it to
$527,800.00; that the said bidder reviewed its bid again and informed the City's consultants that its
revised price be considered as $628,880.00 with certain conditions of payments, which was still twenty
per cent higher than the engineer's revised estimate - as a result, the City's consultants recommend that
the tender of Frecon Ltd. be not accepted and the contract be retendered, and the Engineering Division of
the Works Department recommends that the bid not be accepted, which in the said Division's opinion is
considerably inflated when considered at today's market prices, and that the contract be retendered --
and recommending that the tender of Frecon Ltd. of Fredericton, in the amount of $678,120.00, be not
accepted and the project be retendered immediately -- be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that
at the Common Council meeting of September 15th, 1975 approval was given for the preparation of the
Working Agreement between the City of Saint John and Saint John City Hall Employees' Union, Local No.
486, C.L.C. on the basis of conditions negotiated up to that point, and that the Agreement has now been
prepared and has been examined and approved by the City Solicitor as to the legality and form - and
recommending that the submitted Working Agreement be adopted. by Common Council and that the Mayor and
Common Clerk be authorized to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City of Saint John -- be received
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Kipping stated that the Council is being asked once again to adopt and authorize
signing of yet another collective agreement~which is not only overly-generous but, in this particular
-~'"
case, because of the comparability~of'-large numbers of local jobs, will be found, he believes, to be
greatly disruptive of local organizations of all descriptions - charitable, fraternal, social and com~
mercial. He stated, that this kind of Agreement could be arrived at having no apparent regard for
existing economic circumstances or salary levels in the community or the region, has to be the final
proof that the collective bargaining system, including the use of conciliation boards, does not work in a
way that produces a fair and equitable contract between employer and employee, especially where a public
service is provided. He stated he is not putting all the blame for this failure on the Union - their
negotiators employ a strategy designed to win regardless of anything else - and though he does blame them
for that kind of motivation, nevertheless a great measure of fault lies in the adversary system of
collective bargaining itself, and that he thinks the time is now overdue when the system must be changed.
He advised that he will have more to say about that, at another time. He stated that, meanwhile, back at
City Hall, we now find ourselves with another contract which, in his opinion, wreaks a degree o~ financial
havoc which is, or should be, unacceptable to us as policy makers. He advised that the City's financial
position will suffer long from our ill-advised and unrealistic action in accepting such collective
.
1
I
.
I
.
1
I
.
~
,....
9.~3
Consideration was given to tenders for demolition of buildings, referred to in a report from the
Building Inspector, dated October 3rd, 1975. In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's Question as to whether a
proper certified cheQue has been deposited by the demolition contractors involved, in lieu of damage to the city
streets, clean up of the sites, et cetera, the Building Inspector advised that thirty per cent in this regard is
now in effect in the by-law, up to the sum of $5,000.00 - if the bid is over that sum the deposit is twenty per
cent, and over and above $10,000.00 it is ten per cent. He advised that the bids in Question have been covered
by a thirty per cent deposit.
. lPm-Ler t.'_J
.:J~~ 8R'
~1J7<Y"t~/"n
/9' Jkj.4- 565
~"ove an-
9f"gdion ./
,,( ~<<- .
.
I
I
I ~ .Pock ..51:
('uP. ~/OI1 <r
Vf/.:Jier!uo..).
'P.;1UIJ~/
.". .7JemP/7t-li-A
LJ.e:>, A"-t/.
.
Sk,..,/'tJt:K
'7>.o;J"A-
clab~I?Hse
I
I
/~t?- /~t?
p,. /"ee
{t//lli~/17
. fv?pi1/J?$ ;
5t'tUfI/.9/k
S.il.fe~1{ .
pf'B!!ad;Fi elf
A.5lhL a",m.
Nay.z'~
~
agreements this year. He noted that the City's appointee to tpe Conciliation Board submitted a minority report
which he believes supports the statements he has made, put which, unfortunately, was ignored both by the Concili~
ati6n Board and by' this Council; He stated that ,he.-YQteiJ. against acceptance of this contract and attempted in
private sessions to have it modified, and he will vote against it in public, now.
Councillor Parfitt stated that she agrees with the minority report regarding the Local 486 inside
workers, when the City's appointee points to the fact that they were comparing salaries in other fields but the
work hours were different. She noted that the said inside workers work only a thirty-two and one-half hour week
minus coffee breaks, which bring it down to twenty-nine hours, and stated she feels that until the time that
these workers can work, say, thirty-six and one-half hours, the same as the others, that the rises in pay are
too generous, in that area.
Councillor Hodges noted that he does not agree to the adversary method of collective bargaining - the
person with the clout gets the largest share, which is too bad, but he thinks that this is one time where the
people who are getting the increase in wages are deserving of it. He pointed out that you get what you pay for,
and we want good employees, which means we must pay them for good services - and this is what the City of Saint
John wants. With reference to the opinion of some of the Council members that we are being over-generous in
this matter, Councillor Hodges maintained that an attitude such as this would relegate the City of Saint John to
a second-class condition, whereas it is his own view that Saint John is not going to remain in such a condition
any longer, but will be a first-class city.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Kipping, Parfitt and MacGowan voting
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Building
received, namely, that of Grove Construction Ltd. in the amount of
19 Park Street Extension.
Inspector and City staff,
$1,768.00, be accepted for
the lowest tender
the demolition of
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Building
Inspector and City staff, the lowest tender received, namely, that of Paul's Trucking & Demolition Co. Ltd. in
the amount of $6,000.00, be accepted for the demolition of 2 Dock Street (Which is the former Huggard's Coffee
Bar building).
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the Building Inspector and
City staff, the lowest tender received, namely, that of Paul's Trucking & Demolition Co. Ltd. in the amount of
$9,000.00, be accepted for the demolition of the City-owned building at the corner of Waterloo and Union Streets
(the former Clinton Brown building).
Councillor Kipping asked if Paul's Trucking & Demolition Co. Ltd. has done demolition work previously
for the City. In making negative reply, Mr. Ellis advised that this company has done various demolition jobs in
the city for other companies.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the report, dated October 3rd, 1975, from the Acting City
Manager, advising that the Shamrock Park Building, Phase I (Recreation Capital Job Number 610.2) project was
tendered September 6th, 1975 and tenders closed on September 25th; that the original and budgeted estimate was
$145,000.00 which, however, was revised to $185,000.00 by the consultants due to the rapid rise of costs; that
three bids were received, in the amounts of $360,000.00, $362,000.00 and $406,750.00 respectively -- and recom-
mending that (1) all the said three tenders (received from W. E. Kelly, Saint John, N. B., John Flood & Sons
Limited, Saint John, N. B. and Simpson Construction Ltd., Fredericton, N. B., respectively) be rejected and
that, (2) due to the urgency of replacing the existing service building which must be replaced, the City staff
investigate other alternatives and report back to Council as soon as possible -- be received and filed and the
recommendations adopted.
Councillor Cave called attention to the fact that the City's consultants in the above matter raised
the estimate by $40,000.00 which is approximately thirty per cent. Councillor M. Vincent raised the Question as
to whether the City is sure that its consultants have accurately estimated on this project. Councillor Davis
stated he understands that the above named bidders submitted figures of about $70.00 per sQuare feet, and
advised that that is higher than any figures he has heard of.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion, stating he feels that when tenders are called
again for the above named job the cost will be up another thirty per cent.
Read the following report from the Acting City Manager: regarding the City-owned former Seamen's
Mission apartment and office building (formerly owned by Mr. Raymond Murphy), on receipt of the submitted report
from the Building Inspector concerning this building, arrangements were made to have the Prince William Street
sidewalk section roped off for the protection of the public and to have parking removed from the curb side; that
in addition, estimates are being obtained for the repair work that is necessary, and these will be submitted to
the Land Committee who have been dealing with the matter, and the Land Committee will later be reporting to
Common Council with the Committee's recommendations. The said report from the Building Inspector to the City
Manager in this matter advises that an inspection of this property was carried out on September 30th, 1975 by
him, accompanied by Councillor A. Vincent, Councillor H. Green, Fire Prevention Officer Norman Stanton and
Assistant Building Inspector Douglas S. Allan; that the cornice on the roof edge, at the front of the said
94
~
I~o- /kJ ~,/{/,."
.
fre~ / JooS
kL Cod,
Pr. /tI;~
'Pl'e$ert/a-C/ on
ot: pld~5.
S. T 7h ~"'~
-<.RhL Comp?
.7JPP&-- ~ub,/fIb"k
:Plq.z;,5~
S.;nf'o-k ~,
<7~uP//c
Repiil/J7s
Seamen's Mission building, is badly deteriorated, and the bricks, which are known as soft bricks, are
starting to deteriorate - also, strength is leaving the mortar which has been exposed by the deterioration
of the metal cornice; that the west corner and face of the apartment building, which extends approximately
12 feet above the said Seamen's Mission building, has separated and bulged from the side wall approximately
one inch, caused by deterioration of the metal cornice exposing the brick, which is also soft brick - the
mortar is also losing strength, the bricks are quite loose and can be moved by hand - this extends back
from the corner on the side walk, approximately two feet and is showing the separation as indicated
above; that deterioration of the cornice is occurring all around the roof edge and across to the south
corner, which is exposing brick and has caused deterioration approximately five feet up the south corner
from the roof of the Elks building, where bricks are also loose and could fall; that both these corners
are in danger of falling; that mainly the west corner, as stated above, is bulging and if more water
should get behind and freeze, or should it have a sudden jar, it could collapse; that the top edge of
both sides, and particularly the full rear wall of this building, including the flues, are in a deter-
iorating condition,.with deteriorated mortar.and loose bricks; that deterioration of top of the Elks
building is also occurring, and they will be notified of existing conditions. The Building Inspector's
report recommends that if no action is anticipated at the present time to completely renovate these
buildings, or that they are to be held, as is, until such time as future renovations are planned, that
immediate steps be taken to repair the corners and loose bricks on the face of the building, along with
the cornices and flashings, as well as installing a hoarding and covered way for the protection of the
pedestrians on the street while repairs are being considered and/or carried out; and states that if the
above is not considered, then it is requested that steps be taken to demolish the apartment building and
immediate renovations to the Seamen's Mission building.
.
1
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above noted report from the Acting City Manager
and from the Building Inspector, be received and filed.
Councillor Hodges advised that this section of Prince William Street, with relation to the
above noted buildings, has been roped off and barricades have been erected, but he felt that if the
building is in the poor condition as described the barricades are not going to protect passers-by from
being ~jureaby falling bricks. He therefore asked what action the Council is going to take regarding .
the said buildings. Councillor A. Vincent made the suggestion that the Council members who wish to view
the building in Question, do so from the top floor of the Post Office on. Prince William Street and he
will be there to show the Council members that the bricks are ready to fall on the street from the said
building. He stated that the corner wall in Question is going to fallout on the street, and he does not
want to have such a situation on his conscience, in the event it would injure or kill someone. He stated
that the apartment building has been deteriorating for many years through water getting into the briCkwork
because the metal has gone on the top, and that this building is in worse condition than the Seamen's
Mission building. He stated that all that cornice is ready to come down on the street, and he would be
remiss in his duty if he did not bring the situation to this Council. He added that the Building In-
spector took 'pictures showing the condition of the buildings. He stated that the City owns the building
and should fix it, one way or the other.
Councillor Cave felt that the Council should obtain an estimate of the cost before the Council I
deals with the matter, and if it is necessary to repair the building, we should repair it, before someone
gets hurt.
Councillor Davis advised that there is a report due from the Department of Public Works in
Ottawa on November 1st, 1975, from Mr. Robert Lingwood and his staff, on that block of Saint John. He
noted that we have a problem, and, unfortunately, the timing is bad; the Federal and Provincial Govern-
ments and the City staff have been told that this is probably the oldest intact block in New Brunswick -
that the corner of Princess and Prince William Streets is the only corner in New Brunswick with four
historic buildings on the corners, of which three are owned by the City of Saint John which means we do
not have to aCQuire them - Mr. Bruce Angus and others, of the Federal Government, want to get a report
together, and if they do not hurry; Councillor Davis agrees those buildings are going to be beyond repair
and will be destroyed, which will finish an intact block. He stated that effort is being made to try to
retain that block in close proximity to a new group of buildings that are going to exist one block away
in Market Square; this is a decision that calls for considerable wisdom. He noted that we have buildings
in the Prince William Street block in question that have been weather-beaten for so many years that it is
Questionable if the same bricks can be used again, and the mortar is gone - so, we have a safety problem
and a time problem because if the Theatre people cannot get the funds to fix the Seamen's Mission that
building is gone, and if the Federal Government is not going to assist on retaining and warehousing and
restoring the other buildings, that block is gone, and that is the last block in New Brunswick. He felt
the obvious' thing to do is to find out what it is going to cost to retain these buildings for one season,
at least, and then if we cannot handle that situation, they go the way of all other buildings, and we
have another parking lot. He noted that the Council members all received copies of the minutes of the
September 4th, 1975 meeting of the tri-level Committee which minutes say that the target completion date
of the study will be November 1st, 1975. He stated he feels that the Council should be responsible and
go ahead and see what it is going to cost to make the said brickwork on these buildings safe, and to
tighten up the building. Councillor Kipping asked when the Land Committee expects to be reporting to
Council in this very urgent matter. Councillor Davis, Chairman of the Land Committee, replied that the
Committee will be reporting as soon as it receives a report from the Department of Public Works.
.
1
The Building Inspector was asked what action he is going to take in the interests of public
safety regarding the buildings in Question. He replied that the closing portion of his report to the
City Manager, which includes his recommendation, answers that Question, namely, a covered hoarding to be
erected on the street that would remain there, which he does not feel would be very expensive, for the
protection of the pedestrians. Councillor A. Vincent felt that the only hoarding that would be strong
enough for this purpose is material 8 by 8 standing upright with 10 by 10 planks across. I~. Ellis
replied that he felt a 4-foot covered way on the outside of the sidewalk would be satisfactory - there
could be about 3 or 4 feet of the sidewalk inside left inside of the covered way which could be roped off
at the end of the covered way - therefore, if any bricks should fall they would fall straight down and
probably would not fall on the covered way. He stated he does know that bricks are loose, as stated in
his report, and that they are dangerous at the present time. Councillor A. Vincent stated he is ad-
vocating that the cost of putting up a pipe scaffolding there and making a temporary waterproofing to
prevent the water from getting in and pushing the brickwork out further, will be cheaper than the hoarding,
and it will be much safer.
I
In summing up the matter, the-Mayor advised that the Council will call upon the Works Department
to look the matter over and give us an estimate of cost regarding the above mentioned repairs.
.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED
that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
~
,....
1?P-~t>I7;n1'
..1), .P'.?ul7ta 7a
I t'il'f5P/lei-
.-&dr
J.QMa9'es
-to cal"
:JJI?~/tl T
If/.;;/i-I?n
'PI; 11ie /(,
.11/o/ial1d
.
I
7W11-/~11 ,.
Overh&2d
WIJ'7/h.$
~~P;h'J'/~
'/Y~'.'~p;d/'S/
.". f//I/C/"&
f/r:/l~.:;/ 17/1
. (1i?-O,P-
tflb
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the westerly
side of St. Anne Street, immediately to the north of the corner lot at MacLeod Street, from "R-2" One and Two-
Family Residential to "RM-l" up to three-storey multiple residential classification, with not more than six
families, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto",
was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, to whom had been referred
the letter from Mr. Philip K. Holland of Associated Attorneys regarding damage sustained to an automobile owned
by Mr. Donald J. Walton of 419 Bayside Drive, which occurred on August 29th last, and the reQuest that the City
make arrangements to pay damages sustained by the said automobile when it came in contact with an unmarked,
protruding manhole cover, advising that he has looked into this matter and as a result of a conversation with the
City's insurance company, he wishes to advise that in the opinion of the said insurance company, the City is not
liable in this matter, and that he concurs in this opinion - and further advising that he is informed that the
incident occurred in an area where construction work was taking place through an arrangement by a contractor and
the Provincial Government for throughway construction -- be received and. filed.
Read a report from the City Solicitor to whom had been referred the petition from members of the
Newcomers 1975 Housing Co-Operative which reQuests that the City continue the present overhead electrical lines
along the continuation of Summit Drive, to help defer costs to individuals who are now building in the sub-
division, advising that the area in Question is presently covered by a sub-division agreement entered into
between the City of Saint John and Edward J. McNamara dated August 28th, 1975, paragraph 6 of which states, "with
respect to the installation of electrical power lines and telephone lines, the provisions of Section 26 of the
Saint John Subdivision By-Law shall apply"; that the said Section 26 reads, "In every subdivision, electrical
power lines shall be placed underground, unless, in the opinion of the City, the installation of power lines
underground is not feasible, in which case, such lines shall be installed overhead at the rear of the lots to be
serviced."; that the present reQuest to Council from the said Summit Drive delegation, in his opinion, is an
issue that is within Council's jurisdiction and it is not within the authority of the Planning Advisory Committee
to grant variances on this subject; that while Section 46 of the Community Planning Act gives the said Advisory
Committee the power to "permit such reasonable variances from the reQuirements of the Subdivision By-Law as, in
its opinion,'is desirable for the development of land in accord with the general intent of the by-law", the
reQuest presently before Council, in the City Solicitor's opinion, is not a matter to which the Question of
variance applies - subject to the discretion of Council, the Subdivision By-Law makes it mandatory that electrical
power lines, telephone lines and cable television lines be placed underground - for the Planning Advisory Com-
mittee to permit electrical power lines to be installed overhead at the rear of lots, is not a variance but a
complete nullification of the general intent of the by-law; that with regard to the public statement that the
Planning Advisory Committee has already granted variances to Section 26 of the Subdivision .By-Law, it is im-
portant (in view of the fact that some individuals or corporations may believe that they are complying with the
by-law because of approval by the Planning Advisory Committee) that Council reQuest the City Manager to determine
what variances have been granted under this section - each case with its individual request can then be reviewed
by Council so that Council may examine the feasibility of the reQuest for overhead installation in order to
determine what, if any, reQuests are justifiable and thereby establish that it is not feasible to have such
installation placed underground. The report further states that as the matter is within the exclusive juris-
diction of Council in allowing electrical power lines to be erected above ground, Council must direct its mind to
the wording of Section 26 as it relates to feasibility, and that the City Solicitor does not wish to impose on
Council what might or might not be feasible - this is the Question in the discretion of Council; however, the
City Solicitor suggests in dealing with these cases, including the present reQuest to have electrical power lines
placed above ground, that Council deal with each case on its own merits and avoid granting permission to one and
refusing it to another when circumstances are similar.
On motion of Councillor Cave
I
I
.
.....
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that with regard to the reQuest made by members of Newcomers 1975
Hillcrest Housing Co-Operative that the present overhead electrical lines along the continuation of Summit
Drive, (to help defer costs to individuals who are now building there and who all reside or will shortly reside
on the said Summit Drive in Lakewood Heights), be continued, permission be granted for an overhead electrical
ine in the said sub-division, rather than underground as required in the sub-division agreement.
The Mayor prior to the moving of the above resolution, advised that he has been told by the petitioners
mentioned above that the copper wire that is reQuired for underground wiring is not available, and if it is
available it is worth $1,141.00 per 1,000 feet; another factor is that the cut-off date for putting in wires for
underground telephone services is November 1st; these petitioners want lights in order to continue to work in
their houses, and they want telephones - they can do the overhead wiring anytime.
Mr. Barfoot felt it was important that before the Council would make a decision on this particular
reQuest which would mean varying from a procedure that has been followed up until now in dealing with this matter
of overhead wiring. He stated he would like to report to Council on what decisions have been made until now,
because every developer, naturally, does not wish to put in underground wiring. He felt that the Council should
carefully examine this aspect of going aside from what has been the policy to date, in dealing with the applic-
ations for wiring for sub-divisions. Councillor Kipping suggested that the matter be tabled until the Council
obtains that information from the City Manager. Mr. Rodgers pointed out that there are two aspects of the
matter: there is a general policy, about which he believes the City Manager is speaking; and there is the in-
dividual reQuest that the Council is dealing with as a result of the delegation's presentation at the Council's
last meeting - the delegation at that meeting was making a specific request and he believes that the Council has
to deal with it on the basis of what the petitioners are presenting to the Council and why they are reQuesting
they be permitted to have electrical wiring about ground - if the Council believes that is a reasonable reQuest
and it is not feasible for the wiring to go underground the Council can grant their reQuest and permit the wiring
overhead. Councillor Green stated he believes that the section of street involved leads into a dead-end street
and, therefore, he cannot see that there would be any objection regarding the requested overhead wiring, and he
is in agreement that the Council try to assist these people who are trying to complete their homes before winter.
Councillor Gould asked if the Council has agreed to permit above ground wiring in any other cases, when wiring
should have been underground. Mr. Barfoot replied that there have been some sub-divisions which have been
approved with above ground wiring but these have been what you might call remnants where the adjacent wiring has
all been overhead as an interior street with a sub-division authority all overhead; he felt that the intent of
the by-law was to allow overhead wiring in cases in the country where the lots are so large and the cost of
overhead wiring was so prohibitive. He pointed out that the sub-division under discussion is really a regular
sub-division, except that the builders in this instance is a co-operative group and the group maybe has fewer
resources. The Mayor pointed out that the petitioners were told by the Power Commission that the reQuired type
of wire for underground wiring is not available at the present time, and he also pointed out that these people
cannot get their electric lighting to work on their buildings if they cannot get overhead wiring. Councillor
96
~
Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Zides if he feels that the Council can grant the variance that
it granted, regarding the overhead wiring in the sub-division on Summit Drive that is being developed by
Newcomers 1975 and Hillcrest Housing Co-Operative. Mr. Zides replied that he has not given the matter that
much thought, but he would make two comments: the word "variance" has a specific meaning to him and he
finds it not applicable that Council does in that term of the Planning Act; the second thing that bothers
him is the fact that when the Subdivision By-Law was written in 1969 the provision was put in it regarding
underground lines for power and telephone and that when these were not feasible overhead wiring would go
at the rear of the lots and, finally, if you had no choice, if necessary, you would go to the street
overhead. He stated that at that time - and he cannot be specific as to how this happened - the delegation
for making the decision was given to the City Manager - the City Manager did not make this decision of his
own volition - he would consult with the New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited and the City Power
Commission. He stated that what happened was, that when the new Community Planning Act came into being a
few years ago, and left the one that is creating all the furor around here (that is, that the Planning
Advisory Committee had the variance power) - rightly or wrongly, it was thought that legally the function
now belonged (and it is only one of a great many) to the Planning Advisory Committee. He stated that, in
his recollection, there has only been one case, although it applied to two areas, where the Planning
Advisory Committee has made what you might call a variance from underground installations - both had to do
with rear of lots overhead installations in McAllister Industrial Park and in the Spruce Lake Industrial
Park. He stated that there are some times, 'in addition, cases where Civic Hydro has to put in a temporary
overhead line but these are temporary and are part of the actual construction programme and are not
variances or exceptions - when they get to a certain stage, these temporary lines disappear and they are
underground. Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Zides if, in his interpretation, the Planning Advisory
Committee can refuse to entertain an application or a reQuest. Mr. Zides, in reply, stated he does not
think the Committee ever has done so - he thinks what the Committee might say, though, and maybe it was
the way the wording came out (unfortunately, he was not at the Committee's meeting) that the Committee
will not approve it - there are only so many applications that the person brings in. Councillor M.
Vincent, referring to the letter from the City Solicitor regarding the Committee's refusal of Mr. Lowe's
G L /.OWt!!! application and noting that the said letter says that, in addition, the Committee refused to "entertain a
I ',___ . request for an extension", asked if this means that a person can now be refused to even be entertained by
~~~ "~)r/ ~~ the said Committee, regardless of approval or disapproval. Mr. Zides, in reply, explained how it works:
when an individual is refused permission by the Planning Advisory Committee there is nothing to prevent
the individual from coming back and asking to appear again and to be heard again; in the rules of pro-
cedure of that Committee - and the Committee if Quite flexible on this - the Committee reQuires the
applicant to put something in writing to re-state his case, and the Committee has given itself the right
to refuse to hear a case when there is nothing new being added and it is just a matter of re-hashing the
old issues. Mr. Rodgers stated that, from what Mr. Zides has said, he would like to say that there is no-
one disputing the Planning Advisory Committee's power to grant variances to the Subdivision By-Law, and,
in the City Solicitor's opinion, ninety-eight per cent of the by-law can be varied by the said Committee;
however, there are two or three sections which, if the Planning Advisory Committee were allowed to vary,
it would mean a complete change to the by-law -- for example, (1) the underground wiring requirement, (2)
the Building Inspector is authorized to enter on people's property (surely, the Planning Advisory Com;
ittee could not say the Building Inspector is not permitted to go in on property), and (3) the connections
for sewer lines outside of an established system has to be approved by the Minister of Health - that
cannot be varied by the Planning Advisory Committee as it is a reQuirement. He stated it is in these few
areas that, in his opinion, the variance provision does not apply.
61f~ .J'o~c..fIO'"
(J,.f, .JQtP~
l/eI; 7;xi /-f~
rL,'s~
~Ce m0Pl/e
p/Ld.
PMn"./!,(ns.
(7t?P7.P'?-
(}vtJI'JI?dL /YIp/;
$<< ItIMff :JJ",.
Davis proposed an amending motion, which was not seconded, that permission be granted if the wire is not
available for underground installation, and if it is available, that the wiring go underground. Councillor
Kipping felt that the matter should be tabled by Council in order to get the background, to inform Council
regarding what has been done in the past in the matter of wiring services in sub-divisions, before the
Council proceeds and does something different and circumvents one of its own by-laws.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Davis, Gould, Kipping and MacGowan
voting "nay".
Read a letter from the City Solicitor to whom had been referred the letter from Mr. G. E. Lowe,
on behalf of Vet's Taxi Ltd., dated September 29th, 1975,. regarding a decision of the Planning Advisory
Committee concerning the reQuest of the said firm to establish a Kent home for permanent use as a dis-
patcher's office, submitting the following information:- on May 21st, 1975, Mr. Lowe was given permission
by the Planning Advisory Committee to install a small trailer on the Gulf Service Station property at the
intersection of Wellesley and Lansdowne Avenues on a temporary basis of a period of three months ending
September 12th, 1975; on the expire of this temporary period, Mr. Lowe was ordered to remove this instal-
lation by the Building Inspector, but, instead of complying, Mr. Lowe requested in writing to the Building
Inspector permission to locate on the site on a permanent basis - Mr. Lowe's letter to the Building
Inspector found its way on to the agenda of the Planning Advisory Committee's meeting of September 23rd,
1975 at which meeting the said Committee refused the application and, in addition, refused to "entertain a
reQuest for an extension"; Mr. Lowe believes that the said Committee treated his reQuest in an unfair
manner. The City Solicitor's letter states there is no evidence before him which either confirms or
denies this belief; there is no statutory reQuirement on the Planning Advisory Committee to send out
formal notices concerning matters of this nature, and, as well, the City Solicitor is not aware of any
information which would indicate that the said Committee acted and made a decision in bad faith. The
letter states that the City Solicitor understands that the said Committee has been in touch with Mr. Lowe
and has provided an opportunity for him to appear at its meeting on October 14th, and the letter further
states that the forthcoming meeting should satisfy Mr. Lowe and eliminate any injustice that Mr. Lowe
believes exists arising from the previous action of the Planning Advisory Committee.
On motion of Councillor HOdges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above noted letter be received and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he would like to know the following:- who placed the letter from
Mr. Lowe addressed to the Building Inspector (mentioned in the above letter from the City Solicitor) on
the agenda of the meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee held on September 23rd - how did the letter
from Mr. Lowe get there - why was it not placed there before - can the Planning Advisory Committee refuse
to entertain a reQuest? In reply, Mr. Rodgers stated he was stating a fact in respect to Mr. Lowe's
letter, where it finally landed - he does not want to get into assumptions except to say that he assumed
the Building Inspector received it and passed it on to the Planning Advisory Committee. Councillor M.
Vincent asked if he can be advised regarding what happened. Mr. Zides advised that it has become fairly
routine - there are many development items that come to the Building Inspector which the City staff knows
cannot be proceeded with. Mr. Zides explained the procedure that occurs: first of all, when the Building
Inspector issues a building permit, he processes the application through several departments, one of which
is the Planning Department - the Planning Department in turn is bound by some of the laws that come from
either the Council - you obviously could not allow something if the zoning was not right, or some of the
things that reQuire decisions from the Planning Advisory Committee - so, it is fairly routine and this
goes on all the time.
.
I
I
.
I
...
I
:...~\.'~
I
.
:'~ "
~
,....
. ,,(emL a~
~f/"eJJ.
w/Ii! 6117/17.1
~ If/, 1(.
$UrJ'8!f
t?tJ~ t-
(JI f4.f, .:? t, /f''A
I ee./J.
5upel"sed81
J!f ~~ve )
/11 pi- I fib
Tj.;msI'PJtGJ-
-r/oJ7 ~OM,p,
/Ila"'7fl-
o}'/7e
1.1Ju.6 ;-e 5
-F.o;o 5817/0
t:'lh7.ChS
e,:i!l /~~/
A/;-~.
'PIahT/, #tlPIS:.
C! 0/77.
(l/ u .tlPs, e"fC.
e.
!I1Pb11e 60h1
1Y11/'>- nf/,
Vt//IIt~/r/
IPlom17. /Ilia,
/t;J,.kvryJi:'w
Sulnt/'J/.
$Je/br
;!?e.5pUrces
k6tf1.
lfe-.7.onin~
Sit I-tiff/I/.
dr;ve/o'pm817
plen V"~,./
~ C()U~cl/
reStl!u.CtPh
.
1
IJ1IChcile/ NJ
,(allP/61/~/'f.
S()ltei~~r:
Qu,el'bf/ S
:zJe'p-&:
/J1etL/um
sec~riv.!1
'prIson
e
~
;97
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that on August
2~, 1974 the Common Council accepted the Committee's recommendation that the City purchase, for the widening of
Bayside Drive, 35,850 sQuare feet of land on Bayside Drive at $1.00 per sQuare foot, and that when the actual
survey was done there was only 35,461 sQuare feet of land at a cost of $35,461.00 and, also, the cost of the
survey, which was done by Canadian National Railways at a cost of $710.00, was not included in the said August
2~, 1974 recommendation to Council, and submitting the following recommendation to supersede the said recom-
mendation of August 21st, 1974, "That the Canadian National Railways be paid $35,461.00 for the land required for
the Bayside Drive widening and $710.00 for survey costs", be received and filed and the said Council resolution
of August ~, 1974 be superseded accordingly, as recommended by the Land Committee.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Transportation Committee, acknowledging
receipt of the Common Council's letter of September 26th last, from Common Council's meeting of September 22nd
last, regarding the letter directed to Council by Mrs. Mary E. Thorne on behalf of senior citizens in the Saint
John area regarding the possibility of having reduced bus fares on City Transit Limited buses for senior citizens,
be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
September 11th, 1975, outlining the duties, powers and responsibilities of the said Committee, which report was
laid on the table on September 22nd, 1975, be now taken from the table and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, ad~
vlslng that the Common Council on August 27th, 1973, in accordance with the Committee's recommendation, granted
emporary permission to William Kirk for a period of one year to locate a mobile home behind his house on his
roperty at the corner of the Old Fredericton Highway and the by-pass at Martinon, which mobile home is being
used by Mrs. J. Donald, his eighty-five year old mother-in-law; that on November 18th, 1974 the Common Council
extended the temporary permission; that Mr. Kirk is now reQuesting a further extension -- and recommending that
further temporary permission be granted for a period of one year -- be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
I RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recom-
mending that the Common Council vary its resolution of November 19th, 1973 regarding the Harbourview Sub-division
of Shelter Resources Limited by the substitution 'of a revised site plan of the said sub-division development for
the one previously filed with the Common Clerk (Which new plan is being filed with the Common Clerk and a photo-
copy of same is submitted with this letter), and advising that the Committee's recommendation is being made as a
result of a reQuest from the said company that approval be granted for minor modifications to the said Harbourview
development which is located on the northern side of Ocean Drive off Red Head Road and which was re-zoned to a
"PD" zone which means that it has to be developed in accordance with plans which are filed with the Common Clerk
- any changes in the plan reQuire a resolution of Common Council; and advising that the architects for the
company have found it necessary to make certain changes as the site plan is developed in detail in liaison with
the office of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the Corporation's provincial architects, and that the
changes are as follows:- (1) juxtaposition of several of the houses in the cul-de-sacs were reviewed with site
lines in mind, therefore, several driveways and houses sited on lots are reversed to what was shown in the
original plan; (2) exterior appearances of the existing units were reviewed - as a result, the roof lines were
modified and overhangs added; also, a new L-shaped home was introduced; (3) minor modifications to the townhouse
site plan are made, as follows:- (i) a smaller.number of units to a group, (ii) after consultation with Central
Mortgage and Housing Corporation, it ,was found to be more desirable to have individual unit car parking with some
additional small guest parking areas in lieu of large common asphalt car park areas; and further advising that
the Committee feels that the revised plan is an improvement of the original plan and recommends its adoption by
Council; and further stating that the said developer company has submitted several applications for building
permits and these are in accordance with the revised plan - these are presently being held up pending the amend-
ment by Council of the said previous resolution -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the above named revised plan is conforming with all the regulations, that
is, is the development, as far as the Building Inspector is concerned, " taking place in accordance with good
planning and good grooming. Mr. A. Ellis replied that he will have to make a report in that regard, and check
with his Assistant in the area, and report back to Council. Councillor MacGowan asked if Mr. MacKinnon has had
any word of a brOken pipe in this housing development in this area, that has created a problem. Mr. MacKinnon,
in reply, stated that he has not been made aware of that particular problem. Councillor MacGowan asked, as far
as Mr. MacKinnon knows, is this development proceeding very well, in accordance with our Works projects. Mr.
MacKinnon stated he thinks it goes along as well as other sub-divisions and other developers - we have inspectors
and engineers who look after it and there are various times we have to get the developers to adhere to particular
requirements - he felt that this particular development is probably going along as well as others.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Michael Landers, Member of Parliament
for Saint John-Lancaster, advising that from,discussion he had with the Honourable Warren Allmand and two officials
from the Solicitor General's Depart~ent on September 30th, 1975, it was made clear to him that the said Depart-
ment will be prepared to make a presentation to Common Council on the proposed medium security prison on the
Martinon site in the next two or three weeks, and outlining the various Questions that arise regarding the
matter, and advising that during the week of October 14th, 1975, after the House of Commons opens on that date,
he intends to place a number of Questions pertaining to the Parrtown Correctional Centre in Saint John, N. B.,
the Dorchester Penitentiary in Dorchester, N. B., the Springhill Medium Security Institution in Springhill, N. S.
and the proposed medium security penitentiary in Saint John, N. B. on the House of Commons Order Paper and that
he has informed The Honourable Warren Allmand of his decision to place these Questions on the Order Paper so that
various relevant aspects of the penal system in our area will be made public, and stating that the Solicitor
General's Department will be answering these Questions in due course; and stating that he reQuests that the
Council postpone any decision regarding the said Martinon site until the questions have been placed by him, the
answers received and all the pertinent facts laid bare before Council to better enable Council to appraise the
situation (he will provide Council with copies of his Questions as soon as they appear on the Order Paper, and of
98
/II. /t:ih triers, 112
~fi~i-cor-
~l1eyb1/; 2J~
lI1el!liurn
se~ur/~~
1',./50;'
Ct.ty .5f/1//ciror
IYp*,eCl~rn
S~r/l7e /Jssoc.,
/J,/1, 1/, IV- /J1.
.{()cal ammo
,
Shr/l1e/'S
{1PI7n?I1-/;" i oJ?
~e t!r/y$ ffJr'/
C't"!f~//:
'pf'emi$t'$ reh~
f!CI~J/~ ~o
~N~$r dl~t"I?Uh~
,{eeil5e
c/t-i/ /4I1/~.
am,.., .
(J/J5 ~//
!k de-reolfs
AFI!l~iJ1cL~d ~~ eo.
trov.:3j;,fI5" -;;Jk{.3S;
C/-fff ~'7te'ftor
1(evel1<<e 7'hJ~-
-E/eS een~%I /
Pet/do f?,?J e nrS
,(-&d,
~
any answers to those Questions, both of which will become public knowledge), and that if Council agrees
to his reQuest for a postonement, to allow for a fact-finding mission, he will gladly place on the House
of Commons Order Paper any questions the Mayor, Deputy Mayor or Councillors might wish to pose, and
further advising that since the site of the proposed prison appears to be a controversial subject among
the citizenry of Saint John he hopes that his reQuest for a postponement of the decision until the
answers are forthcoming, will be given serious consideration by Council -- and further advising that it
is his intention to write to the Prime Minister, the Premier of New Brunswick, the Minister of Justice
for New Brunswick, and all Members of the Legislative Assembly from the local area to ascertain their
collective opinions on such an important issue as the proposed prison site within the city limits of
Saint John, New Brunswick -- be received and filed and any <"decision of Council regarding the proposed
Martinon site be postponed until the Questions have been placed by Mr. Landers, the answers received and
all the pertinent facts laid bare before the Common Council to better enable the Council to appraise the
situation.
.
1
During ensuing discussion, the Question arose as to whether or not the Federal Government has
to go through the planning regulations and the Planning Advisory Committee before the proposed medium
security penitentiary project is approved by this Council. In reply, Mr. Rodgers reQuested that he not be
asked to give an opinion on whether the Federal Government at this point is downed by our Zoning By-Law
or not. He noted that the general practice is that the Provincial Government and the Federal Govermment
attempt to abide by local laws, and if there is a case where those two senior governments - the Federal
Government, in particular, in this case - believe that the local law should be challenged, he thinks that
the City should wait until that occurs.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. F. S. Haycox, Past-Potentate for
Local Committee, 'Northeastern Shrine Association, A,A.O.N.M.S., with reference to the Shriners' Con-
vention which was held in Saint John on September 19th to 21st, last, inclusive, advising of the en-
joyment felt by the members of the Shriners in attending the convention in Saint John, and expressing
appreciation of the "outstanding assistance and co-operation received by the local Shrine Committee from
the citizens, merchants, various organizations, the press, radio and television stations, and from all
City of Saint John departments (POlice, Fire, Salvage Corps, Works Department and the Tourist and Con-
vention Department), be received and filed.
..
The Mayor suggested that the Council adopt a motion of congratulations and thanks to the local
Shriners' Committee for their efforts in bringing to this Loyalist city the Shrine Northeastern Convention
and thereby engendering good public relations.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the matter of the above suggestion made by the Mayor
,
be added to the agenda at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the congratulations and thanks of the Common Council
be extended to the local Shriners' Committee for their efforts in bringing to our Loyalist city the
Northeastern Shrine Association, A.A.O.n.M.S. Convention in September, 1975 and for the good public
relations created for the City of Saint John thereby.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John City Hall Employees'
Union, Local 486, advising that it is difficult for the civic employees to work in a building with
abnormal temperatures (that is, the present City Hall building) and, also, it is difficult for them to
work in an office which is being painted while the civic employees are working, and that it is the .
employees' hope that the Council will make some arrangements so that all painting be done during the
evening, and that the problems will be rectified, be referred to the City Manager for action as reQuested
therein.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter of payment of rent by the City for
premises occupied in the present City Hall building, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the rent payable by the City of Saint John for
premises occupied in the present City Hall building in the future be deposited into a trust account until
satisfactory arrangements can be made regarding the defects in the said building - satisfactory to the
City's lease and to the City Hall Building Committee.
On being asked for an opinion, Mr. Rodgers stated that the matter would have to be examined and
he would have to discuss all the details with the administrative staff to see what the lease reQuires and
to get the opinions from the various people involved a~~Clwhether these services are being provided or
not, and only at that time can he give an opinion onAwhether the landlord at this time is violating the
-~
lease, and regarding withholding the rent. He stated that, however, faced with the fact that the Council
A
cannot get an opinion now, the resolution xhat~is now before the Council to withhold the rent, can be
defeated or passed and then can be examin.ed later. Councillor Kipping, Chairman of the City Hall Building
Committee, stated that although he is not in disagreement with the proposed motion, he thinks that the
timing is, wrong, and that it would be premature for the Council to take that bit of drastic action at
this time where it has a standing reQuest with Revenue Properties to come to Saint John and meet with the
Council. He stated he would like very much, as Chairman of the said Committee, to have us meet with the
City Hall building owners, find out what kind of progress we can expect to make, and then the Council can
consider a motion like this, which is good action where you are completely frustrated - however, the
Council is not quite frustrated yet and it has a meeting coming with the head of the company - he urged
that the Council have that meeting first. Councillor Davis agreed that the meeting with Revenue Properties
is essential, but he felt that they should also be told that the City intends to withhold rent. He
I
.
.....
,....
99
.
I.. (;/g11 /a/Is
,t:"/tPP#C aM
Prod"r+
1?etL' Idl'>> ~
$td~ ,.e
/lJzr~k
IGIeI7M//S-
/1Jvre/&~. L
TNlIft;r /'<iII'K.
$ewe/'f,;J~
.G!fSkhl,GleI1
r.;il//s
:J) hilll7<o/1e
dti-tJ'lfes
.eltf!llf/~r.
stet/en J
4/.J/ren
t/ns/qJ;l-&
p!,em/ se5
II1/1RtUTe ,.f~
~IJA !ilfllJtltL'
./ hne
W_c?h,tSe.,:1;V~
.,;,rel7&iJ
PfhQer //";JB
e,'t-.Y /J1~r.
sie/rer /.
/(eso/U'O!f?S ~"t
/(.;JrbfJf,(.rview
su.6-d'/v.
p/an
/77fJA',7'i "e,t
.
F!e-7.0lJinff
,(fe,IWc:J 0>11
t /un -<-tdo
~,h1hl1.4,(v/s.
C'OH/no
I
<I
.
Re-;l.Dn/n
Ale:>ma
{!on6-1 ru.:dt;'
.{-EL
....
pointed out that the motion should not say simply that we withhold rent - there must be a purpose to it and the
purpose is to inform the building owners that the City is going to follow that procedure. He felt that is the
procedure to take: the meeting must be held and Revenue Properties must know before that meeting that the City is
serious about it, and tell them what the deficiencies are.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Kipping, Davis, MacGowan, Parfitt and
Hodges voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Glen Falls Flood Committee asking for
the following information: a copy of the terms of reference issued to Proctor & Redfern Ltd. regarding the
current engineering study concerning the Marsh Creek (issued co-operatively by the City of Saint John and the
Province of New BrunswiCk); where the "Dumping Prohibited by Order" signs, ten in number, are located along the
banks of the said Creek; the total trailer-home capacities approved by the City of Saint John authorities that
may be deposited at the Glen Falls Trailer Park and at the Moreland Trailer Park which extends from Rothesay
Avenue through to Westmorland Road - also, how these figures were arrived at for the totals of the number of
residents using the present sewerage system in the Glen Falls area when it was installed - if, and how, the
increase in population (thus use of this system) is monitored, and what these figures actually are on paper, by
accurate count -- and suggesting that if these very important increase figures are not monitored, recognized and
controlled, they should be with accurate figures (of users rather than units) maintained in view of the present
construction boom in housing now in progress here, those already approved for construction, and the regular daily
installation of trailer homes -- and suggesting that all land drainage ditches in the Glen Falls community "flood
plane" area be dug out at once and cleaned not only of debris, but of plant growth - and those that have been
filled in, be excavated, so that during heavy rainfalls this fall, winter and next spring, these ditches can
carry the surface flow into the catch basins, et cetera - and noting that these ditches apparently are on City
property and under previous administration were serviced and maintained regularly and properly, and they are now
in very bad condition (the City Works Department maps will indicate the exact locations of these ditches which
run to the rear of properties on Todd Street, Simpson Drive north, Holland Street and Walter Street) -- be
received and filed and the City Manager be directed to give a complete report to the said Committee in reply to
the various reQuests for information contained therein, with regard to what is being done on the several subjects.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Steven J. Aitken of 63 Candlewood
Lane, outlining conditions that are a direct result of civic projects on University Avenue, causing unsightly
conditions, and advising that between Millidge Avenue and Candlewood Lane there now exists the beginnings of a
shanty town, and that the City arena is going unlandscaped for this year and possibly next and has been left an
"eyesore", and that both of the above locations have been provided with services via a new pole line which
virtually parallels the existing underground service - and adding that after writing this letter he was able to
ascertain the City Power Commission's reasons for the overhead wires, and that the City's confirmation of this
and assurance that the above noted situation will be rectified at the earliest possible time would be in order,
be referred to the City Manager for a report.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from Shelter Resoucces Ltd., reQuesting the approval
of Common Council of the following minor modifications to the Harbourview Sub-division plan: (1) justaposition of
several of the houses in the cul-de-sacs which were reviewed with site lines in mind - therefore, several drive-
ways and houses sites on lots are reversed to what was shown in the original plan; (2) exterior appearances of
the existing units which were reviewed - as a result, the roof lines were modified and overhangs added - also, a
new L-shaped home was introduced; (3) several minor modifications to the townhouse site plan are reQuested: (i) a
smaller number of units to a group;; (ii) in lieu of large common asphalt car park areas, after consultation with
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, it is recommended to be more desirable to have individual unit car
parking with some additional small guest parking areas -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the application from Lloma Construction Ltd. for re-zoning of
approximately 32 acres of land on Tho~nbrough Street on which it is proposed that approximately twenty-five
uilding containing a total of approximately 500 units be constructed, be referred to the Planning Advisory
Committee for a recommendation, and that authority be granted to proceed to advertise the said proposed re-
zoning.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he was under the impression that this property was already re-zoned for
that type of construction, and he Questioned the necessity of re-zoning it now. He recalled that it had been re-
zoned for a previous owner and he asked if it has to be re-zoned every time it changes ownership. Mr. Zides
replied that you do not have to re-zone it every time it changes hands but you do have to re~zone depending upon
the kind of development that is involved; the difference between this project and the Delrose project is that the
Delrose project was a so-called planned development project based on specific designs and specific types of
buildings and their placement, whereas the Lloma Construction Ltd. proposal is something different, entirely,
therefore it is necessary to re-zone. He added that the Lloma development is going to be a more conventional one
where there are going to be lots for individual buildings which can be sold off - the Delrose project was an
integrated type of development with no public streets, private driveways and accesses and with a specified type
of grouping which is not normal to a City situation for lots - the Delrose development was a group project,
whereas the Lloma project is a normal lot development. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he really wonders if
this land has to go through the re-zoning process now, and that he thinks it is just a waste of time to do the
zoning over again; he added that he is only ~uestioning the legality of the matter. Mr. Rodgers, when asked for
an opinion, stated he would have to reQuest time to examine the correspondence to see if this land needs re-
zoning. He added that he does not know anything about the matter. Councillor A. Vincent made the point that if
the Council commences the rezoning and finds that it does not have to re-zone this land, the Council will then
let the developer go ahead with the project. The Council members concurred in this observation made by Councillor
A. Vincent.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on both sides of
Thornbrough Street, between the properties on Anglin Drive and the properties on the northerly side of Parks
Street Extension containing an area of approximately 32 acres, from "PD" Planned Development district to "RM-l"
Three-Storey Multiple Residential district, be read a first time.
100
~
ift"'-Aonin~
ScoAo/kl1 J/ro~"
-t-Ies /rd.
PhlJh./1d'V/S.
CQ,m,m.
G^'i~~ $" /?'.~~
S. -:/~..!/$~ t:::"l'rYS
dg~'r~/~eJ'>-
noes :LT:Lnt:'.;
M$.~idh~
eyo. (ymC'.z)
(/~17 /'te;~bll
/I1et.OJm~A-9F-
~~.z",.;ln AM.
~/t'a/!l~pS;;/-
-C/t7h .J7a'..
lIJeA'e/Vo/:~
ZIf/Qlt!hUh7 ~
/;we.;;J~Jer
(Jp-t/~ina~/n!l
Cbmm,
(J, IV;,;/, e.
t:ol1'l/'J'l, tl/hlJ /e
s: .I..Lndadr/~
7JJm-s A-6L.
h1ls$in.~
d e/iis>d<<re
//;-"/".9' o.,c
IefdI41l/l'/C~
al7Jnt. tv hole
.J}aJ1ff tJr
Ncwc/1 e~1
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges'
RESOLVED that the application from Scholten Properties Ltd. for re-
zoning of approximately 60,000 sQuare feet of land at 770 Bay Street for the purpose of establishing a
local grocery store and gas bar, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and
that authority be granted to proceed with the necessary advertising.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the following letters, seeking grants for 1976 from
the City of Saint John,"be referred to the committee on budget, namely:- from Saint John Boys' and Girls'
Club, Family Services Saint John, Inc., New Brunswick Youth Orchestra, C. Y. O.(YMCI).
,
,
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
.
I
Seconded by Councillor Gould I
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager with regard to
payment of a bill of costs concerning McCormack and Zatzman Limited, be added to the agenda of this
meeting.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent'
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that
the Common Council on September 22nd, 1975 authorized payment of the Land Compensation Board award
to McCormack and Zatzman Limited in the amount of $191,875.00 and a Bill of Costs relating to this matter
has now been received from McKelvey, Macaulay, Machum & Fairweather, amounting to $7,603.07, which bill
will be submitted to the Co-Ordinating Committee at its next regular meetng to be held on October 7th,
1975, and further advising that because of the length of time that has elapsed in concluding the property
settlement, the company is anxious to obtain payment of the Bill of Costs without any further delay, and
the company asks, therefore, that the matter be considered by Common Council for authorization to pay at
this meeting of Council, and for the acceptance of the invoice as a project cost be considered by the Co-
Ordinating Committee subseQuent to Council's consideration of the matter -- and recommending that the said
Bill of Costs be paid to McKelvey, Macaulay, Machum & Fairweather and that it be referred to the Co-
Ordinating Committee for inclusion as a cost of project for cost-sharing with Central Mortgage and Housing
Corporation and the Province of New Brunswick -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like an item placed on the agenda for the next
Council meeting, regarding a Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. debenture that has been missing, and an
invoice that was paid in connection with this matter. It was noted that Council had discussed this matter
in Committee of the Whole on September 29th last.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above noted matter broached by Councillor A.
Vincent be placed on the agenda of this meeting at this time.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor A. Vincent explained that a $5,000.00 bond of Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. was
lost in transit between the Bank of Montreal branch in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, and the Saint
John branch, and that he asked for a report in this matter because he is a Director of the Board of the
said company and because he was not happy over this occurrence and that we paid $115.00 for the cost of
the legal document to make sure the owner of the bond was protected. He stated he feels that the said
legal cost should have been borne by the Bank of Montreal, because the City of Saint John did not lose the
said bond. Mr. Park pointed out that all the detail in this matter was given in a report to Council at
Committee of the Whole on September 29th last. He stated that as he recalls it, the bond was lost in
transit between two branches of the Bank of Montreal; the Bank of Montreal offered a normal form of
indemnity to protect Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. in case the original bond that seemed to have been
lost should turn up; the company in either December of 1974 or January of 1975 decided that the form of
indemnity offered by the Bank was not sufficient for the company's purposes and the company asked its own
solicitor to prepare a form of indemnity to satisfy the company and protect the company's interests; this
is what the solicitor was charging for and for which the solicitor was paid, by Saint John Industrial
Parks Ltd. Councillor A. Vincent stated that as a member of the Board of Directors of that company, he
does not remember hiring a lawyer in this regard. He stated that a further matter of concern to him,
which he would ask that the Mayor investigate, is that there was a meeting of Saint John Industrial Parks
Ltd. called for this morning and the time was deliberately changed where he (Councillor A. Vincent) could
not attend; he was in the City Hall building this morning and no-one told him there was a meeting - he
found out about the meeting, afterwards - Councillor M. Vincent was notified of the said meeting at 10.30
a.m. today that there was a meeting at 11.00 a.m. today of the said Board. Mr. Park advised he believes
that the said meeting was initially called for noon today; in the middle of last week he, as one of the
members of the company, was asked if he could change the time of the meeting to 1.00 a.m. today because
the noon-day time conflicted with another meeting that involved one or two members of the Board, so the
said meeting of the Board was actually held at 11.00 a.m. today and the change in time was made sometime
in the middle of last week, by telephone, as he recalls it. Councillor M. Vincent confirmed that he only
received notification of the change of time of such meeting, at 10.30 a.m. today.
.
I
.
I.
I'
Councillor A. Vincent advised that the~Common Clerk and the City Solicitor are Directors of the
~
Board of Saint John Industrial Parks_Ltd~,~d they knew nothing about the company hiring the said lawyer,
CJ0t6I7.It, fI'";na!!'HZ:- and he is a member of the Board and he knew nothing about it, either. The Mayor replied that he would
, suggest that Council get a report on who made the decision to hire the lawyer in this matter, and this
information can be provided to the Council members in a report in writing, and make sure that each member
of that company gets the same report. Councillor A. Vincent indicated that this would be agreeable to him.
He added that as a member of the Board he knows nothing about the loss of the said bond; he has tried to .
get the matter of hiring the lawyer straightened out by discussing it with the Board of the company, but
nobody would do anything about the matter.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
JJ} ~/;a/1iflq7
Co ,on Cle r
....1
,....
.
I'
I
/'f7~-7?
. Wpm/I?!'
/I/!!'f./'Iled
$. Th're
hJhlers~
,<oea/ '7'//
tI/~6'+I'!''''Ce
~S.,fl\iilih&.
I
.])r. ~ Ii/.
7101'111;//
.
:o,..:Brt".ii1h
(J~rlaJ1d
I
10Jj
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Tuesday, the fourteenth day
of October, A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, P. Clark, Fire Chief, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
and G. Baird, Commissioner of Economic Development
Rabbi Benjamin Eisenberg, of Shaarei-Zedek Synagogue, offered a prayer which opened the meeting.
The Mayor advised that the City Manager's report regarding the new Working Agreement with the Saint
John Fire Fighters' Association, Local 771, I.A.F.F. was ready for consideration at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above noted report from the City Manager be added to
the agenda of this meeting at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that negot-
iations between the City of Saint John and Saint John Fire Fighters' Association, Local 771, I.A.F.F. regarding
the 1975-1976 Working Agreement have now been concluded with the Union's acceptance at its meeting of October 9th
last of the City's offer - and recommending that the submitted additions, deletions, amendments and alterations
to the current Working Agreement be approved by Common Council and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized
to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City of Saint John following examination and approval of the Agreement
by the City Solicitor as to legality and form -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that the above report from the City Manager does not include the information
as to when the City made its firm offer, for public information, and that this was not done after the public
broadcast made last evening by the Prime Minister of Canada on the subject of wage and prices restraints in
Canada. Mr. Barfoot advised the meeting that the City's firm offer was made to the above named Association on
October 6th, 1975. Councillor A. Vincent added that the said firm offer was accepted by the Association on
October 9th last.
Councillor Kipping stated that on the principle he followed in dealing with all the City's collective
Agreements, on the basis that they are overly-generous and not taking due regard of the economic conditions of
the time, and other circumstances, he will have to express his disapproval of the acceptance of this contract.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Kipping and Parfitt voting "nay".
Tbe Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding a proposed amendment to the Zoning
By-Law, made at the reQuest of Dr. G. M. Thornhill, to make provision for permitting the office of one doctor in
any residential zone upon approval by the Planning Advisory Committee, and upon compliance with such terms and
conditions as the Committee may impose. He stated that no written objections were received in this regard. It
was noted that no person was present to offer comment on the said proposed amendment. The following letters were
considered: (1) from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising that the Commission believes that a single doctor
or a single dentist should be allowed to locate in any residential zone subject to such normal development
considerations as off-street parking and the like, and that the Committee, therefore, recommends that the Zoning
By-Law be amended so that there is provision in each residential zone to permit an office for one doctor or
dentist (as distinct from offices or a clinic for several such practitioners), on approval of the Planning
Advisory Committee and only on compliance with such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Committee; and
(2) from Dr. Brian E. Garland of 131 Main Street, Saint John West, advising that he is presently in the process
of purchasing a building for the purpose of establishing a medical doctor's office at 745-747 Manawagonish Road,
and this proposal is contingent upon approval of a change in the Zoning By-Law to allow one doctor to locate in
any zoning district providing approval is given by the Planning Advisory Committee, and advising that he is very
much in favour of the said proposed amendment and further advising that he has presented a brief to the Planning
Advisory Committee in regard to this matter and received approval in principle to establish a doctor's office at
the .above-mentioned address, depending, of course, on approval of the said proposed Zoning By-Law changes - and
adding that with today's rapid growth, land and properly zoned locations for doctors' offices in Saint John West
are scarce, and that he would appreciate the Council's support.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
~J1"'J1~ City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns amending subsection (2) of the following
~-~W sections thereof by adding a new clause "an office for one doctor or dentist" as follows:- Section 13(2) insert
1~~eJ1af~e new clause (ka); Section 27(2) insert new clause (ea); Section 35(2) insert new clause (ea); Section 43(2) insert
~ 1 new clause (ea); Section 60 (2) insert new clause (fa); Section 79(2) insert new clause (na); Section 90(2)
/I Q/1I? insert new clause(ka); Section 172(2) (a) insert new clause (xii) (a); Section 176(2) insert new clause (la) _
(e , 1'1 be read a first time
l"t".7idenl-i~/
;z.one Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
.2oM"!!"
2J'y-~w
dJme-htft,."en
.....
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns amending subsection (2) of the fOllowing
sections thereof by adding a new clause "an office for one doctor or dentist" as follows:- Section l3(2) insert
new clause (ka); Section 27(2) insert new clause (ea); Section 35(2) insert new clause (ea); Section 43(2) insert
new clause (ea); Section 60(2) insert new clause (fa); Section 79(2) insert new clause (na)~ Section 90(2) insert
,Jj
102
JJ/;;JIJI1. -1'a' ws.
~r. ~r/~h .I;:
(Tarland
~ol1il15. ~!/-4
.,t;Il11e,,-;t /fIfeh-r
~6'" 0 1-
d enl-ist of!!f/~
~,Ql7h, 4d'v/s.
C'omp? .
J1e-~Ol1h?ff
/},e ~/~
~ 50hs AT~-
~~hlJ,;f~I?~.a/lNl1
J?e-~on/TI!J
Seve~-~!/
/Jd veh6 'dtJIJ~
lI1amllJ1et;;'l
new,clause (ka); Section 172(2) (a) insert new clause (xii) (a); Section 176(2) insert new clause (la) __
be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above noted letters from the Planning Advisory
Committee and from Dr. Brian E. Garland regarding the above Zoning By-Law amendment, be received and
filed.
The Common Clerk stated that with regard to the proposed re-zoning for A. C. Fairweather & Sons
Ltd. of approximately 4 acres of land lying on the undeveloped streets in the Eastmount Sub-division,
south and west of Rockwood Avenue and Oakland Street, near the property owned by Mary M. O'Brien, the
necessary advertising took place, and no written objections were received in this connection. It was
noted that no person was present to offer comment with respect to this proposed re-zoning.
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recommending that the Common Council take
no further action on the said proposed re-zoning at this time, and advising that the reasons for this
recommendation are that A. C. Fairweather & Sons Limited land is an island removed from existing streets
and services, that access to the property is by means of what would appear to be roadways across others'
properties, that water, sewer, et cetera are some distance away within the Eastmount Sub-division, that
the street layout in the immediate vicinity as shown on the 1915 Eastmount plan is not acceptable for
modern day traffic reQuirements and under the City's Subdivision By-Law, and further advising that this
company has been discussing these problems with both the Engineering and Planning staffs and will be
attempting to resolve some of these problems, and that, at that time, a further recommendation will be
made by the Planning Advisory Committee to Council.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that no further action be taken regarding the above
proposed re-zoning at this time, as recommended in the above letter from the Planning Advisory Committee.
The Common Clerk stated that advertising took place for the Maritime Conference of the Seventh-
Day Adventist Church with respect to the proposed re-zoning of approximately 5 acres of land on the south
side of Woodward Avenue at the intersection of Boar's Head Road with a frontage of 860 feet on Woodward
Avenue and 900 feet on Boar's Head Road, to permit the establishment of a project consisting of a nursing
home, school and church, and he further stated that no written objections had been received relative
thereto. No person or persons were present to offer comment regarding the said proposed amendment to the
Zoning By-Law. Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising that the Committee is still
processing the application for re-zoning in this regard, and that a report will be made to Common Council
by the Committee at the earliest opportunity.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the above letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee be received and filed and no further action be taken regarding this proposed re-zoning pending
a further report from the Planning Advisory Committee.
The Common Clerk stated that the necessary advertising was completed regarding the application
ade..by Messrs C. J. Simon and F. J. Corbin for re-zoning of an area of land on the north side of the
Narrows Road off Highland Road, containing approximately eight and one-half acres, to permit the oper-
ation of a private club (Ace of Clubs Inc.) thereon. .
The following correspondence regarding the said proposed re-zoning was considered, namely:- (1)
a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee reQuesting that the Common Council grant the Committee an
extension of time in which to make its recommendation on the application for re-zoning for a proposed
licensed private club on the Narrows Road, and advising that the applicants had earlier asked the Com-
mittee for its views on the use of this property as a licensed private club and that, at that time, the
Committee heard both the applicants and objecting neighbourhood residents and the Committee felt that.the
application should be denied, and that now that the application has been made to Common Council, the
Committee is prepared to hear the applicants and other concerned parties again on October 14th, 1975, and
~~. that the Committee will report to Common Council immediately thereafter; (2) a letter from Mr. and Mrs.
/1 ~ Frank Vincent of 47 Highland Road advising that as parents of two school age children they learned with
~~hh~~~/~ ~ great concern that the City is considering re-zoning the said area to a general business classification,
~l1v~~.~~I.?;f and stating that traffic was extremely heavy this past spring but since a barricade has been put up at
Vj' ~ the end of the road a lot of unnecessary speeding up and down the hill has been eliminated, which is much
II1~eJ1 appreciated, and noting that Highland Road is a dead-end street with only one sidewalk part-way up the
hill and suggesting that to really determine the driving hazard the Council members drive to the end of
the road, following which it is felt the Council would not grant permission to a club or any other
business - and further noting what an increase in traffic would mean for the many children living in the
area, and calling attention to the dangers to motorists - particularly to persons not familiar with this
road - because of the turns and dips in the road which are difficult to manoeuvre, and which under bad
~ ~ ~ eather conditions could result in tragedy -- and requesting that this area not be re-zoned; (3) a letter
,'/'r.~/'/'rf. /"q!f. from Mr. George A. Lane of Atkinson & Atkinson, solicitors for Mr. and Mrs. Clayton Campbell of the
~bl1 ~I7,7;OdP~~1' Narrows Road, advising of the opposition of these clie~ts to the said proposed re-zoning and pointing out
/7 _ e /l. ~ that the adjacent area to the proposed re-zoning is a residential one and the proposed operation of a
~~~l!" '.--e private club could seriously depreciate the value of adjoining properties and that by allowing this club
~I'r/~~~r to come into existence, a severe personal loss and hardship would result to Mr. and Mrs. Campbell as well
as other area property owners; maintaining that if this operation was allowed to exist in the past as a
non-conforming use in the "RS-2" zone, it has now lost that character by being closed down for approxi-
ately three years; and advising that, additionally, inadequate parking facilities render the location a
otential nuisance to area residents, and that, in the past, area residents suffered great hardships on
eekends when former Club members would park their cars on private properties and drive at high speeds
fter apparently imbibing alcoholic beverages, up and down the Narrows Road, and that it does not appear
hat the new access road will prevent similar disturbances to the neighbours if this new operation is
llowed to open its doors; and stating that the topographical position of the premises, being adjacent to
300-foot cliff along the Saint John River, is an additional hazard to potential users of the Club (and
oting that in August of 1970 a death occurred at .the loction due to the excess use of alcohol combined
ith the unusually dangerous site, and that last fall, another death occurred nearby when a fourteen year
Id boy accidentally slipped over the edge); and noting that the applicants stated that they will operate
??e-~O'1/n!/
aT S//T1lJn
~ TCloro/n
19ae o-rcr<<~$
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
1
.
......
"..-.
10~3
.
16le~;ye /7,
,,(~n e
,. /I1r,~ /lJrs.
e/q~n
e~p/;e//
I
.
I
.
C! T Simon
rTG~b/;,
I
P?e-~OI1/
1/1~e ~
c%~,J$ .z;,c
"-pJ.;;;nl1.4t/v/
Oe>;n.nr.
C1f~J;,ht:>rto
. J17r,'dJ'/~:>.
F ,...,,,k
V/"een-t"
.~/2f/~h4
//, ".fh/-<l-'ld n.
,-.e$..(;I6'/7~$
tPRP~e/l-;(cm
....
a businessmen's club by membership only, with members to be well screened by the club's board of directors, and
that it is also the intention that mainly middle aged and married members will be recruited, according to the
indications given the :Planning Adyi(\ol'y.. COJllI!)ittee. ;" and 'l-tating that, needless to. say, this. is no guarantee that
this will in fact be the basis for club membership nor the makeup of the club - and suggesting that, as there can
be no guarantee as to this factor, the Council should completely ignore it when making its decision; and stating
that Mr. and Mrs. Campbell believe that the denial of the application when presented to the Planning Advisory
Committee on August 12th, 1975 was a proper decision and should be upheld by the Common Council -- and further
stating that on the basis of the aforementioned reasons it is the opinion of the said solicitor and clients that
the said re-zoning application should be refused in the public interest by the Common Council.
Mr. George A. Lane, accompanied by Mr. Clayton Campbell, was present at the meeting, on behalf of Mr.
and Mrs. Campbell, and advised that they had just come from a meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee. He
stated that it must be considered that the intent of the applicants in applying for re-zoning is to renovate and
put into operation a private club, and that in the 1920's and 1930's a club was originally begun at this site and
was called the Little Millionaires Club and as the members of that Club became older the Club was sold and it
became "The Picked Chicken Club" or something of that sort, which was a weekend operation whereby they obtained
weekend liQuor permits and held a party. He advised that during that time, Mr. and Mrs. Campbell, who live
adjacent to that area, were subjected to rather horrible obscenities (scenes of people relieving themselves over
the edge of the cliff which abuts the property) and problems with cars parking on their front lawn. He displayed
photographs at this time, for the information of the Council members, showing the building involved, and the
property site, which are the subjects of the re-zoning reQuest. He advised that during the time the said building
was known as "The Picked Chicken" and up until approximately three years ago when it shut down it was used
occasionally for weddings and occasions of this type. He stated that when the club applied in 1973 for a liQuor
license he represented the Campbells and opposed that application and the LiQuor Control Commission refused the
application. He stated he believes that, essentially, one must look to the location and consider what kind of
operation if any could be adeQuately served by the roads which lead to this site - both the Narrows Road and the
Highland Road are small, suburban type of roads and the Highland Road has twists and turns in it, with sudden,
blind hills and turns and there are many children living along it - he would suggest that even for the careful
driver it is not an easy task to drive along there and avoid hitting children. He added that in looking at the
Comprehensive Plan for Saint John the area between the Highland Road (which is the main access road coming into
the area) and the water of approximately 500 feet is set out to be open space as a green belt, to remain as it
is,.with little development, if any. He suggested that the reason this area was put into the Comprehensive Plan
is because it is a very beautiful part of our natural environment and we ought to save a little bit of it for
posterity. With reference to the current zoning, which is "RS-2", Mr. Lane noted that it is low-density resid-
ential zoning and that well it might be - there are some residences along that area and he thinks that the
intention behind making this zoning classification there is to see that it is not a sub-division. He added that
the zoning, going towards the main part of the city property is "R-2" medium density residential zoning, and that
this is the character and nature of this entire neighbourhood. With respect to the kind of development which the
re-zoning applicants are suggesting - namely, a club to serve alcohol to prestigous members - is somewhat ir-
relevant in planning considerations, he felt because he felt you have to consider that once they have the re-
zoning they can do many things with it. He stated that the residents in the area have been contacted by Mr.
Campbell and asked to sign a petition in which they object to the re-zoning. At this time, Mr. Lane submitted
the said petition which bears sixty-one names, to the Common Clerk for the Council records, these names being
those of residents along the Highland Road immediately adjacent to the area in question.
Mr. Lane stated that when the matter first came up, approximately the middle of this past summer when
the applicants were applying to the Planning Advisory Committee for the Committee's thoughts on the application,
only thirty-five people signed the petition against the proposal at that time as they felt permission was in-
evitable; however, in view of the support from the said Committee in response to the opposing of the said ap-
plication, and when the advertisement was published regarding the current application for rezoning, people came
to Atkinson & Atkinson and not only said that they wanted to express their objection before this meeting of
Council, but they also said they would like to share in paying Mr. Lane's legal fee. He stated that the lot which
has been purchased by the said applicants and for which they intend to put in a private club, has an access road
just in off of the Narrows Road - they state they intend to pave this access road and to make it Quite suitable
for access at any time of year; he stated he would suggest that it is not a road which he would like to try to
navigate almost any time of year - he would also not feel that persons who have consumed liQuor would find it
easy to negotiate the turns in this road, and he would not want such persons to be taking a chance with their
lives on the drop-off at that location down to the Narrows Road, which is approximately 30 feet practically
straight down. He maintained that the area is not suitable for a club or for any kind of commercial development,
and that if commercial development were to go into that area it would add traffic congestion to Highland Road,
which would be intolerable for the many people with young children in the area, and whether it were day or night
the kind of traffic hazard for anyone driving along that road would be simply adominable. He suggested that, in
the name of good planning, the application for rezoning be denied.
Mr. C. J. Simon, one of the applicants for the proposed re-zoning, was present and as a representative
of the Ace of Clubs Inc. stated that the lawyer he consulted this afternoon felt Quite strongly that there is no
need for re-zoning, and that this lawyer has written a letter to Mr. Simon which he asked Mr. Simon to give to
the Planning Advisory Committee Chairman at the Committee's meeting this evening and to the Common Council. Mr.
Simon gave copies of the said letter fro the Council's information, at this time. He stated he a~so has a list
of some of the Club members who are presently involved in the said Club, because there has been a lot of con-
troversy about the type of club they are going to have (a motorcycle club, and a teen-age hangout, and so on) _
he therefore thought he would show to Council the names of some of the members they presently have, with the
feeling that the Council would think differently.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until a full report is
received from the Planning Advisory ,Committee with reference to the meeting held by the Planning Advisory Com-
mittee between both parties:
AND FURTHER that the material submitted by Mr. C. J. Simon on behalf of the rezoning applicants be
referred to the City Solicitor for an opinion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named letters from the Planning Advisory Committee,
Mr. and Mrs. Frank Vincent, and Mr. George A. Lane of Atkinson & Atkinson, Barristers, be received and filed,
together with the above noted petition submitted from residents of the Highland Road.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager with reference to the
~
104
~/'/ ~~~~~~ reQuest received by Council on August 18th last that families on the Old Black River Road and the Cottage
~"/' j' Road be provided with City water services because of contamination of well water supplies, advising that
~l'/~)1 ~~ , to extend City water to these residences a distance of 1,500 feet would cost an estimated total of
IY~I" ~d?~4V/~~ $96,000.00 which includes a pumping station which would be needed because of rising ground, and further
t7~~~Ar~'~ advising that the plans for industrial land servicing in this area contemplate the extension of water and
L?~~~~ ~et'~. sewerage at some future time, depending on the demand for such lands, and, in the meantime, this ex-
~ tension would service only twenty properties, not all of whom are in need of City water -- and recom-
mending that the reQuest for City water be denied at this time, but that it be considered for the long
range Capital Budget for implementation as development takes place -- be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
.
~fli(-tiil/ krr-
(St!'e tbe/oQ.),
Councillor Cave suggested that the above matter be tabled temporarily until he has an opport-
unity to meet with the people involved and for them to meet with the School Board to see if the schools
in the Black River area would be interested in the extension of water - and if so, what percentage of the
cost they would pay - and report back to Council.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until a report
is received by Council as a result of investigation by Councillor Cave and the residents of the Old Black
River Road area into the possibility that the School Board would be interested in the extension of City
water to the schools in that area, and, if so, what percentage of the cost they will pay in this regard.
(>OU,h, CSV~
SCh6t>/ ~d. ,
If!aU>''' t!')(#>hS/()
I
,~
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
existing gymnasium floor at the Carleton Community Centre in Saint John West is in very poor condition
and a hazard to the public using it - that tenders were called for the supply of a new floor and the only
tender received was more than double the estimate for the work in the Capital Budget of $9,200.00, and
the tender was therefore not acceptable - and further advising that as it is urgent that the work be
done, the City staff has investigated the possibility of doing the work with City forces and that it is
estimated that the total cost of the project should not exceed $8,954.00 using City forces, and it is
therefore proposed that the work be proceeded with immediately on this basis -- be received and filed and
authority be granted for the City forces to perform the said work.
r1a1"/eltJl1 '?u.Jhc
/lCiI// ~
a/11/11l1hllya
t7ffmn~5/lIm
+>1tP171"
.
Councillor A. Vincent made the following points regarding the above matter: the City is not
going to have an accurate cost figure for this work (payroll overhead, et cetera) that a contractor has;
it is not fair for the Council to give this work to the City's own work forces at the price of $8,954.00
and take a chance of the staff just telling Council it costs that much; the City will never get con-
tractors to submit tenders if it follows this type of procedure; the City is a member of the Saint John
Construction Association and is violating the bid depository and everything else in following this
procedure; if the City wanted its own forces to bid for this work it should have had the staff submit a I
bid at the time tenders were called for the work; the procedure that is being proposed now in the matter
is not proper, in the construction industry, and the City will end up with no-one submitting bids for ,~
work.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
,Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, Commissioner of
Community Planning and Development, and the Building Inspector, advising that in regard to the application
from Irving Oil Limited for permission to install one 6,000-gallon gasoline tank at the Irving Oil
Limited station at the corner of Wellesley and Cranston Avenues, this location has been inspected by the
Division of Technical and Inspection Services and found satisfactory, and that it has been approved by
the Planning and Fire Departments, and the Council's approval is reQuested in order to issue the necessary
building permit, be received and filed and the reQuested approval granted.
.L"v;h~OI/~U.
6?a$ohne ~d'ln
.:7Ju//tf/ 17~.
pt!?1"/I?ff
,.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, advising that
~~/-'~C1I1~~o" the Common Council on July 14th, 1975, adopted a recommendation from the Land Committee in respect to an
;7 ,L exchange of land between the City and Lockhart Woodworking Company, and that it is understood that prior
~~J?~ e~C"'7~~e to that recommendation to Council, negotiations took place between the City and representatives of the
~~~),(C7~~~ said company whereby it was agreed that the company would not be bound by Paragraphs 4 and 5 of a 1973 I
~/i1~ ~. Agreement - however, the item was not reflected in the Committee's letter to Council on July 14th, 1975
tc1~I1)' (the 1973 Agreement between the City and the said company imposed on Lockharts a condition that a building, "
IPekase re, housing a national reputable retail outlet, would be constructed at a cost of $1,000,000.00; this building
~~~n~ ~/hfe was to be erected by Lockharts on land which the company was to obtain from the City; since 1973, it has
. ,~~ been determined that this land cannot be obtained by the City from the Province and, conseQuently, the
~~-", company cannot satisfy the building erection reQuirement of the Agreement) and further advising that in
e>e(l/~/J?~ order for the change of land to take place as agreed to by Council on July 14th, 1975, it is necessary
<?~II~~/'e>J7 that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute a Release document releasing the company from
the obligation of erecting a retail outlet as envisaged in 1973 -- be received and filed, and the Mayor I
and Common Clerk be authorized to execute on behalf of the City of Saint John a Release document releasing
Lockhart Woodworking Company from the obligation of erecting a retail outlet as envisaged in 1973. ',_j
Consideration was given to a letter from Councillor Pye, stating that in view of the Criminal
Code provision which allows a Judge to grant an absolute or conditional discharge to a person who pleads
guilty or is found guilty without a conviction being registered, he proposes that Sections 3 and 14 of
the Taxi By-Law be amended so that the Taxi Inspector be authorized to suspend the taxi license of a taxi
owner or operator who pleads guilty or is found guilty of a criminal offence, and reQuests that the
matter be referred to the City Solicitor for the drafting of the appropriate amendment. In submitting
the above letter, Councillor Pye pointed out that the existence of a strong Taxi By-Law is of importance
to the taxi-using public and the regulation of the taxi industry, and that when the effectiveness of that
by-law has been seriously impaired by the action of the Court, it becomes essential to restore that by-
law to its former status by the introduction of an appropriate amendment or amendments. He stated that,
because of a recent judicial decision involving a violation of the Taxi By-Law which resulted in the
undermining of the said by-law, he submits the following resolution for Council's consideration.
C6U,h, ?'ye
7:i1X'i .?y-.ldW'
[~a;("/ hCUJ?$f
SusrhSI'oJ'P1
.
- .,.,
.....1
,....
.
I {buh,te
'"Tina"
{-{-.tu;' lC'ehS
$U5/l~5/0"
e/t-!f ~G-yZ!l
I
./D1,J(/~
7?e-Zon/l1ff
JOSeph
2)uhMh-J
p/a,Jn, IJdv/
I Cbmm.
7(e-;xo nihtf
,(/o~L.22 7ft'"
?J,;u;t4A' fh S-,
Comm.
.
.C'~~~ A L
"-lam!nrer
t!?r~1 fl'J;-
Oml?4a I"
men-cs ~M.
<1J C/-ty
I01f~
5p//c,:Cor
.
....
105
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded.by CouncillQr'Q~een
~ESOLVED that Sections 3 and 14 of the Taxi By-Law be amended so that the
Taxi Inspector be authorized to suspend the taxi license of a taxi owner" or operator who pleads guilty or is
found guilty of a criminal offence, and that the matter be referred to the City Solicitor for the drafting of the
appropriate amendment.
Councillor Higgins felt that before the Council votes on the motion, the matter should be referred to
the City Solicitor for an opinion so that the Council will know the legal basis on the decision it is going to
make.
Moved in amendment by Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter be referred to the City Solicitor for a report.
Councillor Pye explained that the matter has been taken up with the City Solicitor, and it was the City
Solicitor who reQuested that Councillor Pye refer it to the City Solicitor, as he did - therefore, the City
Solicitor is well aware of the nature of the original move. He added that it is merely a matter of making the
phaseology more legal, if it is reQuired. Councillor Higgins replied that as a Council member, he would also
like to have the City Solicitor's in-put to himself as well as to Councillor Pye; he felt that asking for that
in-put for all Council members for the next Council meeting would give a much better basis for the Council's
decision in the matter. When asked for his comments at this time, Mr. Rodgers replied that he can do it by
bringing in a short synopsis of why Councillor Pye is making his recommendation to Council, with the appropriate
amendment attached, and if Council wishes to adopt it at that time it can do so, or it can just receive and file
it.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table for one week for a
report, and the written amendments to the Taxi By-Law as reQuested by Councillor Pye be presented to all the
Councillors.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the application from Mr. Joseph Dunham for the re-zoning of
two acres of land at 2435 Ocean Westway to permit the use of this property for four apartments, be referred to
the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation, and that authority be granted to advertise this
proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the application submitted by Mr. Lloyd D. Pierce for rezoning
of Lot D on Brown Street, which adjoins 635 Brown Street on the west, on which to construct a building for the
operation of Lloyd's Heating Service Ltd., be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and
recommendation, and that authority be granted to advertise this proposed re-zoning.
Councillor A. Vincent reQuested that an item which appears on the Legal Session section of the agenda
of this Council meeting be dealt with in open session of Council at this meeting. The Council members did not
comply with this reQuest. Councillor A. Vincent felt this matter could be discussed in open session because
everything on the said subject has been dealt with in the Courts and there is nothing in the Legal Session letter
that has not already been before the Courts, and he felt it was only fair to deal with it in open session of
Council.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillors A. Vincent and Green voted "nay" to this motion.
Councillors Parfitt and Higgins withdrew from the meeting.
A progress report, dated October 10th, 1975, from the City Solicitor on the Court action between Claude
Lanthier et al (Plaintiff) and Omega Investments Limited (Defendant) and the City of Saint John as the Third
arty, was considered at this time. Councillor A. Vincent discussed the possibility of the matter being settled
out of Court, and felt that the Council should give the City Solicitor and Mr. D. Gillis, Q. C., the solicitor
engaged by the City in this case, back-up that if they can get the case settled and they recommend it, Councillor
. Vincent will accept such settlement. The Mayor noted that what Councillor A. Vincent is saying is that the
Council will back the City Solicitor and Mr. Gillis if they have to make a decision.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named progress report from the City Solicitor, be
eceived and filed.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~
~on Clerk.
106
..,
EfHi'ph1l'nt- I
rent-Ol
:JJ.&Hi',V Ar6<C.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twentieth
day of October, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye and A. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City SOlicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer
,
of Operations of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides, Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of
Housing and Renewal Services, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, H. Jackson, Deputy Chief
of Police, and. G. Baird, Commissioner of Economic Development
I
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
October 6th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
.
October 14th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor HOdgES
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following invoices for eQuipment rental, namely:-
D. Hatfield Ltd. - to the Works Department
Sept. 1-15, 1975 )
(dated Sept. 18, 1975) $ 19,469.80
Sept. 1-15, 1975
(dated Sept. 18, 1975) $ 13,490.00
Department I
Sept. 16-30, 1975
(dated Oct. 1, 1975) $ 3,096.00
Sept. 16-30, 1975
(dated Sept. 30, 1975) $ 10,597.00
Sept. 1-15, 1975
(dated Sept. 17,1975) $ 8,943.60
- to the Water Department
S~e-~t!'h COpd,." ~
F::on C~,,(-t; Stephen Construction Company Limited - to the Works
C'h/Hi{"ls(/~kJ..
AT-/.
7?~ ~Cl5K~ A-I1l
,,(tJ'.;j177
tflo/F t'ourse
/9H~Z/
. eh/t//cK.s
(/"'~;J.. ) A~,c.
:J1'l'ffh}01h<l-
//dl1?7Cl17 J?
41arket-~ -
-.Z>a::-k S-/-. q /1// ~
~ t'Oh1P;eret"cv /
~t!!;77f""e
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. - to the Works Department
- to the Works Department
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the invoice, in the amount of
Ltd., for the purchase of loam for the Rockwood Park golf course, which is
project.
recommendation of the City
$2,730.00, from R. H. Laskey
a Recreation capital construction
.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the City Manager,
approval be given for payment of the invoice from Chitticks (1962) Ltd., in the amount of $4,974.00, for
eQuipment rented to the Water and Sewerage Division during the period September 1st to 15th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be given
for payment of the final account received from Bregman & Hamann in the amount of $7,202.48 for professional
services rendered regarding the evaluation of schematic designs, preparation of revised schematic design
drawings and related services, for the Market SQuare civic and commercial centre, the approval of the
Partnership for payment of the said account having been acknowledged - and that this account be charged
against the project. and shared in the usual way.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
~ /~ RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
~~~ ~ /? --G-_ granted for payment of the invoice from Stephen Construction Company Limited, in the amount of $47,008.41,
.9U.e"t!lhfA?h~ 'for supplying asphalt to the Works Department during the period October 1st to 15th, 1975.
?f-/O~ eO~/t7f-~.
On motion of Councillor Pye
S'ub-L{:e'1fr-
C~ti1,."p/.;,;h //Is..
Sub-d/v;
/Y,'B./hff' a?
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
New Brunswick Housing Corporation is developing in the Champlain Heights Sub-division a parcel of land on
the west side of Champlain Drive which will involve approximately 1,800 feet of street and services and
make available 42 lots for the construction of single family homes, and that the servicing plans which
.
.....1
,...
.
t/P'bii1h
1 1?6'ht:?H/dl
/#/yI?/s.,o/?~
/ ~ /I/, 4fAr.
(A/"CjJ16h <?
et?,~-/-;t.
/17-/2 N"eh-o.
se:
13/v./YJ/r1.
l/p-II/JI;/lJ1rt:
ft/JJ-r:
Wilf'ehouSe
.p. 7rQlh~
Iht?J"l?e,
71/lt/teJ/~a.
.
1
.
""0"".'
.i 4
were submitted by the developer met with the approval of the Engineering and Works Department, and further
advising that according to the City's sub-division polic~, the City will be responsible for the following costs:-
(1) water materials lwaterll)ain, gate yalyes, et. ceter\'\). $26,000.00, (2) sanitary sewer materials (pipe, manholes,
et cetera) $2,000.00, (3) storm sewer materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $22,500.00 -- totalling $50,500.00;
and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water and sewerage materials to be charged to the
1975 Capital Budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in
due course -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the following
properties are reQuired for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme and negotiations with the owners have resulted in
an offer being made to settle compensation in the total amount of $236,000.00 free and clear of all encumbrances
and to include business disturbance claim and any and all claims of any nature whatsoever. in the said properties:-
F-6-19-14
F-6-19-15
L-6-19-16
L-6-19-17
L-6-19-18
14 Nelson Street
10-12 Nelson Street
15 North Market Wharf
13 North Market Wharf
10-11 North Market Wharf
W. F. Allan & Co. Ltd.
Warehouse & Transport
W. F. Allan & Co. Ltd.
Warehouse & Transport
Warehouse & Transport
and further advising that realty was agreed to at a figure of $200,000.00 based both on the appraised value of
$200,000.00 and the current assessed value of $201,700.00, and that business disturbance in the amount of $36,000.0
was recommended by the auditing firm of Thorne, Riddell & Company hired by the City to independently audit any
business disturbance claim (this claim would include appraising costs, legal costs and any other claims of any
nature whatsoever); and further advising that the Partnership's approval for the aCQuisition of the above-noted
properties in the total amount of $236,000.00 has been acknowledged, and that the Council's approval is reQuested
for the aCQuisition of the above-noted properties in the said total amount of $236,000.00 free and clear of all
encumbrances and to include business disturbance claim and any and all other claims of any nature whatsoever, and
that settlement will be subject to the normal adjustments for outstanding taxes, water rates, et cetera -- be
received and filed and the reQuested approval granted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the Council's
approval is reQuested for payment of the submitted account received from Grove Construction Ltd. in the amount of
$2,000.00 covering losses suffered by the company when it was unable to continue removing salvage under its .
contract to demolish the property known as 15 Dock Street previously owned by E. S. Stephenson & Co. Ltd.; and
further advising that this company, to whom had been awarded the contract to demolish this building, had begun to
carry out salvage from 21-35 Dock Street (the company had also been awarded this demolition contract) but,
unfortunately, one of the tenants was delayed in relocating and the tenant's legal representative was reportedly
preparing law suit against the City for damages to his client's business and stock and it therefore seemed
prudent to the City to request the contractor to cease working in the buildings until this problem had been
resolved; and stating that when the contractor was advised that he could resume working in the buildings, it was
discovered that the buildings had experienced rather serious vandalism which could not be witnessed from outside
the buildings, in addition to the very extensive damage which had befallen the exteriors - and that since con-
tractors, as a rule, inspect the premises, determine what they wish to salvage, estimate the cost of demolition,
estimate the recovery from the salvage and deduct the expected financial recovery from the estimated cost of
demolition to arrive at the figure which they submit as their tender figure, it was agreed by the Co-Ordinating
Committee that in view of the extenuating circumstances which prevented the contractor from realizing the recov~'.'2
eries which he had based his tender on, that he should not have to suffer this loss and, therefore, the Committee
agreed to recommend payment of the said invoice of $2,000.00 to Grove Construction Ltd., composed of various
items as listed in the letter -- be received and filed and payment be approved of the said $2,000.00, as reQuested
therein.
In reply to Councillor Gould's Question as to whether the demolition contractor had made any efforts to
prevent. vandalism and was in control of the building, Mr. Buck advised that the City was unable to get possession
of 21-35 Dock Street and for a long time could not get the one remaining tenant out (the rest of that building
was empty); that building had access from Nelson and Dock Streets and was continually broken into, and the
demolition contractor did what he could to protect the building but there was little he or anybody else could do
about it. With regard to the list of items comprising the figure of $2,000.00, Mr. Buck advised that some of
these units were destroyed and some were taken. Councillor Gould expressed the hope that the City took the
necessary precautions to board the building up while it was withheld from the contractor.
Councillor MacGowan asked - with regard to the lawsuit that the legal representative of one of the
tenants (who was delayed in relocating) was reportedly preparing against the City for damages to his client's
business and stock - how would the stock be involved. Mr. Buck replied that in the same way that the vandals were
gaining access to the rest of the building the tenant who remained at 21-35 Dock Street claimed they were also
gaining access to his store stock - it was a used second-hand store - the said tenant did not sue the City, but
he had a lot of problems and the building was continuously broken into and he was claiming that the City was
responsible because people were breaking into his store. Councillor MacGowan raised the Question of, if the City
,. approves payment of the above amount of $2,000.00 is the said tenant likely to come back at the City. Replying
in the negative, j~. Buck advised that the tenant has been dealt with and he has no legal redress against the
~~t?I.Iit.lo. City. Councillor MacGowan asked Mr. Rodgers to express a legal opinion in this regard, and he replied that he is
1~~Ar ->~ not aware of any circumstances - he cannot give an opinion on that - Councillor MacGowan is asking what recourse,
from the above noted letter submitted by the City Manager, the tenant has against the City, possibly, and he
cannot answer that - he would need to study the correspondence.
I
~P!J~es
1 (;rr/ye
eOIl~-ffrUdi().
,A-t-d.
C!/'!f~~ei
.
lrl...
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
can
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the City Solicitor
answer the Question as to what possible recourse the above noted tenant has against the City.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
(Councillors Kipping and A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the City Solicitor's report to Council in the above matter include
information as to the specifications used in the tender call for demolition of the building in question. Mr.
Rodgers replied that he will accede to this reQuest.
108
f/"b-h N?A~/
1f/;//4-~ /II~hful
kp/-f'tfl's
/ s-,/o~ tft/h-/:
Ed;.L /'It/l7e
$//71/)17~ s
/l pjJl'j /$.;:1 /5
JlQ~,1t? .5techt!
-r i'lss~ /d/~es
~-I-L
e~e'.5k% 7J1"/ve
;;:1!!fI!f
t?P1~n~s
<led s~.;)hd'/h!l
-<~/ -Ikes
%keI",O'&;lle
~ 7<<rnJu/A
~,.nb~~
:1knt'/o/-.~ '
-.sf; Jl!'O~rt.les
CetI-rtJ/1 t'P.
I/g;r<<il5.;l /
$bwi/J/-"'h ~
;t/ar/-t-imes 'l-it.
ty,:J.);-, 'fJ, C'.
:JJ{)()Jr Sf; I'D
p/&/ht-
O-et,on -f~/el
JeIPI4J)
1~:8. .E 'P. C
:J}, 'R.E E
aClPlp/all17-
.4I1rt:w,tNf /#0$,
t?,I!. Sewer
(ft?p;//d X~:~,.,
C:>o, A. -t-d.
~o;...
f? edt'-I'e;r;, ~-hl.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor'C~ye
RESOLVED that as reQuested and recommended in the letter from the
City Manager, the approval of Council be given for payment of the account received from Willet & MarQuis
in the amount of $120.00 for legal services rendered in connection with the aCQuisition from the Irene
Simonds Estate of property at 15 Long Wharf (F-IO-7) for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme, the Partner-
ship's approval for payment of this account having been acknowledged, and that this account be ch~rged
against the project and shared in the usual way.
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the reQuest and recommendation
of the City M~nager, approval be granted for payment of the accounts received from Roy de Stecher &
Associates Ltd. in the total amount of $946.20 for appraising the following properties in connection with
the North End Urban Renewal Scheme:
L-1l-13-15 Chesley Street
L-6-18-1 Smythe Street
F-6-18-1 Smythe Street
Property
Canadian
National
$ 185.00
542.20
219.00
$ 946:20
Finance Ltd.
Pacific Railway
Harbours Board
the approval of the Partnership for payment of these accounts having been acknowledged, and that these
accounts be charged ~gainst the project and shared in the usual way.
Councillor Green asked if there are any other outstanding Urban Renewal accounts for Chesley
Drive where complete ~nd final settlement has not been effected. Mr. Buck advised that he will supply
this reQuested information for the next meeting of Council.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as reQuested and recommended by the City Manager,
the Council grant approval for the payment of the account received from Palmer, O'Connell, Leger, Turnbull
& Turnbull in the amount of $200.00 for legal services rendered in connection with the acquisition of the
Bentley-Chesley Street property (F-11-13-1) of Gulf Oil Company reQuired for the North End Urban Renewal
Scheme, the approval of the Partnership for payment of this account having been acknowledged, and that
this account be charged against the project and shared in the usual way.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
, RESOLVED that in accordance with the request and recommendation of
the City Manager, approval be granted for payment of the accounts received from Shawinigan Engineering
Maritimes Ltd. in the total amount of $324.11 for professional services rendered in the appraising of the
Dock Street power plant in connection with the North End Urban Renewal Scheme, covering the work carried
out during the months of April and May 1975 (the estimated cost of the said 'appraisal work is $15,000.00),
the approval of the Partnership for payment of these progress accounts totalling $324.11 having been
acknowledged, and that these accounts be charged against the project and shared in the usual way.
In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's Question, Mr. Barfoot confirmed that the above noted
appraisal work was done on the Dock Street plant of the New Brunswick Electric Power Commission and that
the City did not have this plant appraised by some other people; he added that this is the full pro-
fessional appraisal by Shawinigan Engineering, and, in reply to Councillor A. Vincent's Question as to
whether this firm was also representing the said Power Commission, Mr. Barfoot made negative reply.
Councillor A. Vincent asked who made the appraisal that the said Power Commission gave to the City. Mr.,
Buck advised that Montreal Engineering are doing the appraisals for the New Brunswick Electric Power
Commission, (and Shawinigan Engineering is acting for the City) as far as he knows. Councillor A.
Vincent stated he was told by the Chairman of the said Commission that there were three appraisal com~
panies involved, one of whom was Shawinigan Engineering. Mr. Buck stated he only knows of the two
companies, as stated, and that he has not heard of another company.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the Council has
a meeting with the Chairman of the New Brunswick Electric Power Commission.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors Cave, Higgins and Gould
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager,
granted to make payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved
engineering services regarding projects that have been undertaken in connection with the
Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
authority be
invoices for
Department of
1. Champlain & Lakewood Heights Collector Sewer
(a) Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
Champlain Heights System
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated September 30, 1975
$ 178,810.23
158,813.12
26,998.23
69,850.57
$ 61,964.32
(b) Proctor & Redfern Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 29,
dated October 7, 1975
$ 192,913.06
$ 4,355.65
~
.
I
1
.
,1
.
I
I
.
.....1
,....
'U:;elU~ 2.
~j/e:o;;J&'he.s
.17.J;avk~
y /lS?tX'.
t9,tId'.f/&:i9 ;>
~Y;l1f ~-fd.
I
~IIO~ de.
Cb//,SI?tI/. S-~ 4.
Ga7~an.
I .4~
(7/;e!P /.s 5 .
/lssoc. /--Ed'.
. s:..r.- ~~'or
#,.;;dr?/' 6.
s,(Ut:!e ake
inT<iJJre
//.!lJ,;Z:: ~-E-d.
I
(}t~~'J".
.J}e~. .
(~
/i1ed/~m
.seelf?/tlf
'pY'/StPYJ
s/te
,(clJ7L am.
7?e-;Z()h;/'7~
I
I
.
...
109
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
A. J. Callaghan & Associates
Engineering Service~.fopEqstern.ApprQqche~
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 42,
dated October 1, 1975
$ 142,558.48
$ 450.00
3.
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approache~
Goodyear Paving Limited
Construction of Western Approaches
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 10
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 10,
dated October 8, 1975
$1,285,044.50
1,199,891.63
179,983.74
902,712.99
$ 99,394.90
Milford-Greendale-Randolph Collector Sewer System
Gaspe Construction Ltd.
Construction of Collector Sewer System
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 6
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 6,
dated October 3, 1975
$1,463,230.25
737,274.60
110,591.19
519,853.67
$ 106,829.74
Milford-Greendale-Randolph Collector System
Giffels Associates Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 48,
dated October 2, 1975
$ 160,927.93
$ 5,054.39
Saint John Major Water Supply (Spruce Lake Intake)
A D I Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 4,
dated August 31, 1975
$ 12,377.22
$ 1,580.32
In reply to Councillor Parfitt's Query regarding whether the figures given in item 3 above mean that
there is only $85,000.00 remaining in work to be done on this job, and if that amount is held back until the job
is satisfactory, Mr. Barfoot explained that the original value of the contract was the figure given, namely,
$1,285,044.50, and the value of the work done to date according to unit prices, is $1,199,891.63, leaving
roughly $85,000.00 between what work has now been done and what was originally tendered. Councillor Cave
expressed concern about the way tenders are called - for instance, there were two companies (one of whom was
Ryan, and he does not know the name of the other company) who were doing work in Lakewood and evidently there
was another job in Lakewood and they were asked to say if they would work on it and give a unit price the same
as they had done previously and was accepted as the lowest bid by Council; but, for some reason this man got it
lump sum. Councillor Cave stated he would like a complete report of how City staff get around changing it from
unit price to a lump sum job. Mr. Barfoot replied that he will prepare a complete report for Council on that
matter.
Read a letter from the City Manager, submitting correspondence from Mr. R. D. Hoyt, Regional Manager,
Property Services, Federal Department of Public Works, dated October lOth, 1975, containing notice of the
epartment's intention to apply for City land in the area of Green Lake and also to apply for re-zoning of the
land to allow for the construction of a medium security penal institution. The City Manager's letter advises
that a re-zoning application in the proper form is being submitted by the Department and it is the Department's
intention to supply full details on the proposed penal institution at the reQuired public hearing, and that, in
the meantime, a copy of the Department's letter in this regard has also been forwarded to the Land Committee for
the Committee's consideration.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until after the
public hearing regarding the proposed medium security penal institution.
Councillor Parfitt advised that the matter of the said medium security penal institution was debated
from the floor of the House of Commons in Ottawa on October 17th last. Bearing in mind that there had been
objection from the Morna area residents to the proposed institution being located in that area, she stated she
sought a hearing with The Honourable Andre Therien, the Commissioner, and she obtained information regarding
this matter while she was in Ottawa last week.
It was pointed out that Councillor Parfitt had only seconded the motion after speaking on the matter,
and the Mayor thereupon stated he would entertain a motion on the City Manager's letter in the matter.
Councillor Hodges proposed a motion, which Councillor A. Vincent seconded, that the said letter be
referred to the Planning Advisory Committee and that the proposed re-zoning be advertised so that the public and
the said Federal department may come in here and do their arguing, and that the petitioners who object to the
said medium security penal institution being located in the Martinon area be notified of the hearing (per Mr.
and Mrs. Frank Doiron of Martinon). Councillor Cave asked that the motion include asking the appropriate
Federal Government representatives come down here and explain to the Council about the proposed medium security
penal institution because as of now, nobody knows about it, and stated he would like to have such meeting before
the re-zoning hearing. Councillor Hodges suggested that the motion now read, "That the letter from the City
anager be received and filed and the Federal Department concerned be notified that they have to apply for re-
zoning.". In clarification of his letter, Mr. Barfoot advised that the Department of Public Works of Canada had
intended to have the re-zoning application to Council for this meeting of Council but it has been delayed, and
it is in the process of being prepared, and he stated that he thinks the appropriate time for action is when
that re-zoning application comes before Council. Noting that the application from the said Department to buy
City land for the proposed institution is going to come, Councillor Gould asked if the Land Committee should not
e already looking at that aspect of the matter, without just receiving and filing the City Manager's letter.
The Mayor replied that the Land Committee will take this matter into consideration. Councillor MacGowan called
attention to the wording in the letter from the Department of Public Works of Canada, dated October 10th, 1975,
110
J
:z;~ ~~, #/b.
(/:e,('.)
L', 'i!f /)f fI' r,
IY/d/~h1 5ecU.
'pr/SOh .5/l-e
7?e- .7.on /h~
addressed to the City Manager, as follows, "It is, therefore, the intention of this letter to formally
reQuest the City of Saint John to approve in principle the sale of this site to the Federal Government,
with the details to be worked out ~t a later: date for this institution and also to formally apply for a
re-zoning of the site to allow for the construction of a medium security penal institution.", and stated
she thinks that their reQuest and the reason it is before Council is so that Council will take some
action - that they want the Council to approve in principle the sale of this site. She stated she does
not think that the Council can do this, without further information. Councillor Kipping noted that the
said Department has to make formal application for the purchase of the land in question and apparently the
City Manager has told the Department that - a re-zoning application in the proper form is being submitted,
and the Council can deal with it at that time. Councillor Higgins pointed out that even though the
Council has .received this notice of intention on the part of the Federal department, it still has to
receive the formal re-zoning application, which it would refer to the Planning Advisory Committee and
authorize advertising of the re-zoning, hear the proponents and opponents, and then make a decision - the
Council cannot do anything prior to that.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
/
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the City Manager be
received and filed.
Councillor Green felt that maybe through this means, the parties who oppose or who. are in favour
of the proposed medium security penal institution in the area will receive an opportunity to appear before
the Council and to be heard, and stated he is in support of such procedure being followed because many of
the residents feel that this Council has taken the stand of being one hundred per cent to sell any land in
Saint John West that is reQuired - therefore, he feels that by this method the matter can be brought to a
head and give those wishing to oppose it the opportunity to do so.
Question being taken, the motion to receive and file the said letter from the City Manager was
carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
",
.
I
I
Consideration was given to the letter from the City Manager regarding proposed changes to the .
Building By-Law. Councillor MacGowan noted that the letter states that sufficient copies of all afore-
mentioned books and supplements referred to in the said letter, are available for Council, and that the
Council members only received their Council correspondence on Friday and were at meetings all day today
and therefore did not have an opportunity to look at such background material.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
C~!/. /I'lfr.
71 ~./_/. Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
..PU//H/J7~ RESOLVED that the above matter
~~Q?J7~~;r Council members have an opportunity to review the material referred to in
1'~1';>;1'cY.i'~~eZ'~ reference to the 1975 National Building Code and supplements.
t?/?d' e
be laid on the table until the
the City Manager's letter with
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Higgins, Gould and hodges voting
~s/l1e~s
PI't'du rbance'
Read a letter from the City Manager in regard to the matter of the City aCQulrlng the freehold
interests of Atlantic Surgical Ltd. in 29 Mill Street and to settle total compensation for all freehold
interests in the property for a figure of $125,000.00, and in the matter of the owners of the said pro-
perty receiving immediate payment of one hundred per cent of the market value (the company intends to
implement plans for its relocation in the city) and submitting their claim for business disturbance
subseQuent to the relocation of the business, which claims when submitted to the Redevelopment Office are
reviewed and audited by one of the independent firms of accountants located in the city. The City Manager's
letter states that with regard to the business disturbance claim in Question, the Company has indicated an
estimate of $25,100.00 for this claim, which puts an upper limit on the amount. His letter recommends the
aCQuisition of the said property in the amount of $125,000.00.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
~ roperty of Atlantic Surgical Ltd. at 29 Mill Street (F-6-11-13) is reQuired for the North End Urban
lI'''~Q1J1 7Ti!'J.?8~ Renewal Scheme; that negotiations with the owners have resulted in an offer being made to settle total
;9tA d-, Co SK~- compensation for all freehold int.erests in the property for a figure of $125,000.00; that an agreement has
, ~/ '::1f~ een made with the Company that the City will transfer title of this property and subseQuently arrange for
~/~ ".. it to occupy the premises under a rental arrangement mutually acceptable to all parties concerned, until
~~~/~ ~~ such time as the site is reQuired for the development of the Market Square complex, or the new accommodations
are erected and available for the Company to occupy and that such an arrangement will provide the Company
ith the capital funds, represented by the realty, and enable it to proceed with its intentions to im-
lement plans for its relocation in the city - which arrangement is identical with the procedure as set
ut in the Expropriation Act, in that the owners receive immediate payment of one hundred per cent of the
arket value and subseQuent to the relocation of the business submit their claim for business disturbance;
hat among the items which are considered eligible for compensation is the cost of packing, moving and
packing the stock, machinery, equipment and furnishings, the cost of dismantling and reassembling of
achinery including the disconnecting and reconnecting of motors, et cetera, the costs of services per-
ormed for owners by consulting, accounting, legal and appraisal firms, the costs of advertising the move
nd the moving of telephone and electrical and intercommunication systems; that when such claims for
usiness disturbance are submitted to the Redevelopment Office, arrangements are made for them to be
eviewed and audited by one of the independent firms of accountants located in the city; that the Partner-
hip's approval for the aCQuisition of the freehold property known as 29 Mill Street for a figure of
125,000.00 has been acknowledged; that concerning the business disturbance claim, the Company have
.ndicated an estimate of $25,100.00 for this claim, which puts an upper limit on the amount -- and re-
ommending the acquisition of the said property in the amount of $125,000.00 -- be received and filed and
he Council approve the acquisition of the said property at the said figure.
In explanation of the information contained in his letter with reference to the estimate of
25,100.00 concerning the business disturbance claim, Mr. Barfoot recalled that the Council had reQuired
ore in~ormation on the dimensions of the business disturbance claim which might be submitted by the
ompany, and this information .was obtained from the Company - this is what the Company itself had estim-
ted as what the claim might be for moving its business according to the criteria which are applied in
his case; this means that the recommended settlement for realty is $125,000.00, and the amount for
usiness disturbance will be calculated, and it will be monitored during the actual business moving -the
ount of $25,100.00 is the ceiling in that regard. He stated that the City has a letter from the Company,
ated September 11th, 1975, regarding the said ceiling of $25,100.00 in this matter.
I
.
I
I
.
....1
,...
11l
,.
I~~I'/es
IYPh- (/nl/J17
e"7//o}/eeS
I
.
I
.
I
I
. ;,car~dt?tZ "n
? /"Z5; -t-h /s
.30 "A-
ll...
The Common Clerk asked if it is the intent of the Council that payment for this property be permitted
in whatever name or names of the owner or owners of this property, as the case may be. In this regard, Mr.
Barfoot stated he believes that there are. two. cOJlJpi\nies inyol,yedj. Ei3,!;tteI'll' Dl'lig..{3eMr;l:ces Limited, and Atlantic
Surgical Ltd. Mr. Buck stated that to the best of his knowledge, the freehold interest which is what we agreed
at $125,000.00, is owned by Atlantic Surgical Ltd.; a detailed search of the title has not been carried out but
Atlantic Surgical Ltd. is the company we have been negotiating with. He stated he thinks that it is Eastern Drug
Services Limited who actually do the operation of Atlantic Surgical Ltd. - it is another company; one is a
holding company for the land and one is an operational company for the building.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report from the City Manager, dated
October 20th, 1975, salary adjustments for 1975 and 1976 for non-Union employees of the City of Saint John be as
follows:- (1) that all e~isting salaries and salary ranges for positions 1 - 90 inclusive (as shown on the
submitted listing which forms a part of these minutes) be raised by 17%, retroactive to January 1st, 1975, except
where 1975 salaries have already been set; (2) that increments be granted for 1975 as shown on the submitted
listing which forms a part of these minutes; (3) that a further increase of 16% be applied to all salary ranges
and positions from 1 - 90 inclusive (as shown on the said submitted listing), commencing on January 1st, 1976;
(4) that increments. be granted as shown on the said submitted listing for 1976; (5) that salary adjustments be
made as shown on the said submitted listing for positions 91 - 99 for the years 1975 and 1976; (6) that for the
positions of District Fire Chief and Administrative Officer, Fire, the salaries be set by the appropriate per-
centage of 1st Class Firefighters salary.
Councillor Kipping stated that because he felt all along that all these settlements this year have been
too large - despite the fact that the non-Union group would be a group that he would not want to see penalized in
any way - he believes that the Council has been sQueezed into a position where this settlement is also too large,
and that he will continue on the principle that he will vote against it.
Councillor Green stated that in view of the increase that was granted to the C1V1C Unions in salary
scales he knows there has to be an increase in~ages for the non-Union staff and so on - however, he feels that a
17% raise on positions in the higher eschelon opens a gap between the employees earning lesser amounts of money
and that the range between the employees earning lower salaries and those receiving larger salaries is getting
too far apart; therefore, he feels there have to be adjustments in salaries and so on for those Qualified for the
positions, as well as increments, and so on, but he cannot go along with the raise recommended by the City
Manager regarding positions 1 to 90 of the staff which positions range right up to the highest eschelon for
salaries, for the reason already explained by him - the widening of the gap between salaries paid to the higher
eschelon positions and those paid to the lower eschelon positions.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he thinks that the Council was placed in an embarrassing position to let
itself settle with the Unions and then settle with the non-Union staff. He felt that if the non-Union staff is
scared or distrusts the Council it should come to the Council and say that whatever the Unions get the non-Union
employees want. He noted that it is said out on the street that negotiations have dragged out for eight months
or longer - prior to our contract expiring we start negotiating - and the committee has in the back of its mind
that every bit of money that it gives to the employees it is going to get more; he felt that leaves the situation
very much to be desired. He stated he would like to see a resolution passed at this Council meeting that in the
future, City staff - the City Manager - will bring in the non-Union people and that the Council budget for it and
put it in the budget no later than November, and then those employees know what they are going to get - he added
that it puts them in a stronger position when they are bargaining across the table. The Mayor noted that this is
what we are doing for 1976.
Councillor Parfitt noted that there are extenuating circwnstances regarding the non-Union group which
had no-one to represent it, and stated she feels that if the salary range for this group had been settled first
the Council might have had a different wage increase picture today regarding the civic employees. She pointed
out that the Council has been told that the City staff is weak in middle-management job and things like that and
the Council has seen that it has become harder to attract men that we need in the City structure, and stated that
if she votes in favour of what the City Manager has advocated it is because we are finding it harder to replace
any of these men who might be attracted elsewhere.
Councillor Cave expressed disagreement with Councillor A. Vincent, pointing out that even in private
industry they wait until the Unions are settled and then make the salary increase in comparison.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she agrees with a great deal of what has been said by the Council
members who have already spoken in the matter; she is concerned and wants to see everybody get a fair deal _ she
thinks the Council's first mistake was being too high on its first negotiations, probably, and this has led to
the suceeding settlements - but, two wrongs do not make a right. Noting that an increase of 17% on a higher
salary makes a much higher salary increase than 17% on a lower salary amount, she felt that basically the reason
these increments are so high is to look after the cost of living. She felt that if this is why the increase has
been given, at such a proportion, that it is not reQuired at this increase percentage when you get into the
higher salary range. She recalled that in the past when we had two representatives from the Federal Government
who were in personnel, on our staff, the policy was to "red cirle" certain positions and when they reached that
there were no increments other than their cost of living; she felt that this is perhaps another area where the
Council has made a mistake because there is no "red circling" of positions. She noted that the Council has
gotten itself into a "bind" where it has to make a decision regarding the non-Union employees salaries, and that
whether the Council gives the increase, or does not give the increase, it is going to be wrong.
Councillor Higgins stated that the Council settled with the Unions for what he considered a fair, just
wage that, if anything, will restore the work ethic and pride to Unions in comparison with unions throughout the
Maritime provinces and .Canada. He stated that the Council has another problem, with its non-Union employees, and
he thinks it only fair that the press get from the Common Clerk or the City Manager information of comparative
salaries and comparative positions not only throughout Canada and the United States of America, but throughout
the Maritime provinces - and in order to keep what he considers an excellent non-Union staff that has done
excellent work for the City, we have to be competitive. He stated that he looks at the matter from that point of
view and he thinks that this is a fair offer to good men, and good women.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Kipping, MacGowan and Green voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he feels strongly that the directive should go this date to the City
Manager that in the future he bring in his recommendations to Council, before the budget is made up, with a
clause that if the Unions'get more wages the non-Union employees get more wages. ~ouncillor Hodges pointed out
that one of the Council Committees is the Personnel Committee which should bring in the recommendation on how the
salaries are to be arranged, at the next meeting, and the for~at regarding same.
,.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Director of
112
~
Rinks ~uzl~
p'he,!/ roe
t:>Ler.;Jt/ Ph
7j>,t:"!rf'.;d/Q)} y:.
'P.;;l,..,fs :J)e"td".
(1f?~h,#- V'/~t!5'H
JfihKS v sed' P.
"oJ? - (!J 'f.q
sba(tPlffS ~,..
Sc#6~/ A odey
Su..m,m/-i- 7J1^.
overhe,,;u;{
I!l)Wer lines
iYe~~rs /1'
~ Hi/A:/'es~ /h~
eo-ty/s.
$",!FI/V/S/"Oh
.13.!f- ~.;;} w
L_
Recreation and Parks, in the City Manager's report of October 17th, 1975, the outdoor rink service in the
City of Saint John become a co-operative effort between the Department of Recreation and Parks and neigh-
bourhood groups with the prime responsibility for organization being that of neighbourhood group5,
-~
At the request of Councillor MacGowan, the Council members agreed that section (c) of section 5
(2) of the "Conditions of Application - Responsibilities of the Recreation and Parks Department" as
outlined in the report dated October 16th, 1975 by the Director of Recreation and Parks' made to the City
Manager be worded as follows, "Arrangements be made for an initial flooding", with regard to outdoor rinks
services.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the above recommended policy is going to perhaps mean the phase-
out of rinks and stated she is sorry in that respect. Noting that in 1971 there were 29 average outdoor
skating days, Councillor MacGowan pointed out that if in 1975 there was a winter similar to 1971, it would I
mean a cost of $2,000.00 a day for outdoor rinks (the cost in 1971 for the said 29 days was $34,900.00)
and stated she does not think it warrants it at this time; therefore, this is why she will have to go
along with the above motion.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for a report from the Recreation and Parks Department on how many
outside residents are using the school-hockey ice in the City of Saint John. He explained that he was
given to understand that people cannot go to rinks in Kings County because their parish or their village
would not contribute to the parish rink, but they are finding it very convenient to occupy the City's
indoor rinks. He stated he wonders if this information is correct. The Mayor replied that the reQuested
report will be .obtained.
I
Consideration was given to a letter from the Common Clerk, dated October 16th, 1975, which
advises that further to Council resolution of October 6th last which gave permission for the construction
of overhead wiring on Summit Drive, rather than underground services, for the Newcomers 1975 and Hillcrest
Housing Co-Operatives, in preparing the resolution it was not clear where the overhead wiring would be
placed; however, the co-operative group now has received a reQuest from both the telephone and power
utilities that they obtain permission for placement of overhead lines on the street rather than at the
rear of the lots, and the Council is therefore requested by the said co-operative group to have this
clarified to permit the pole lines on the street.
During the ensuing discussion, Mr. Rodgers reminded the Council members that he advised the
Council on October 6th last that the Subdivision By-Law says that the wiring has to be underground, or
above ground at the rear of lots on poles - those are the two alternatives open to Council. Councillor
Gould recalled that when the Council on October 6th passed the resolution in Question and made its decision
to help this group out, the Council, as he understands it, was told at that time that underground wiring
was not available. He noted that, according to the engineer at the Saint John Power Commission, that
underground wire is available and there is plenty of it, to do this job. He stated he does not mind if
the Council is told that, by putting in the wiring on the overhead basis requested, it will save a certain
amount of money, but it is his feeling that the Council was inadvertently misled in the matter and that
the Council made a decision without knowing all the facts, and he is rather concerned about it. The Mayor
advised that we were told that the wire was not available for underground installation. Councillor Gould
advised that the next day he was told by an engineer at civic Hydro that they had more wire there - that
they could have done three more projects of just the same size as the one under discussion by Council.
Councillor Kipping, in confirming Councillor Gould's comment, advised that he checked'on October 7th with
civic Hydro on the question of non-availability of the cable and found that it was not so that it was not
available. The Mayor stated that the information he gave in this regard at the meeting of Council on
October 6th came from the president of the co-operative group, who received it from the said Power Com-
mission; he told the Mayor that if they did have the money to buy that right cable, the cable was not
available. Councillor Kipping suggested that the said president may have been acting on old information,
and that with these companies you have to keep up to date on what supplies they have - these companies
continuously receive supplies. He stated that, in any case, the cost factor also was given as $1,000.00
per lot in order to go underground, over and above, and he understands that that figure is also off
kilter, checking _ he does not know what the true figure is, but he is told that it is considerably less
than $1,000.00. He suggested that there may be a very practical reason why the wiring cannot go on the
back of the lots in this particular case: he did more checking in the matter today and found out that the
utilities require 20 feet right-of-way and in most of the houses, if not all of them, there is only 13 or
15 feet at the back of these houses - so that it is probably impossible to go in the rear of the lots - a
practical impossibility; so, the Council is faced with two alternatives - the line either goes on a
street, or it goes underground and he understands from the utilities that they are not concerned either
way which course should be followed; however, they feel privately and the Planning Advisory Committee
feels, and has made into law, that electrical power lines should go underground - so, as far as cost is
concerned, if it is not going to be any greater and.if it is not going to be any more time-consuming -
which he is assured it is not - then he suggests that the line should go underground as the law reQuires,
and not make any kind of an exception in a case like this. The Mayor noted that we accepted the overhead
wiring on the grounds that it was to cost $600.00 a unit more.
.
I
.
Councillor Cave pointed out that this co-operative group is faced with advancing cold weather in
this project, which is now held up for the wiring. He noted that the Council approved deviating from the
by-law temporarily.because it is a dead-end street and the rest of the area out there has overhead wiring.
Councillor Cave proposed a motion, which was seconded by Councillor Pye, that permission be granted for
the placement of overhead lines on the street rather than at the rear of the lots. Councillor Gould
pointed out that this motion was in direct contradiction of the Subdivision.By-Law and that, in effect, it
says we are going to change that by-law, and he does not think that the Council can do that. Councillor
Cave noted that the co-operative group in this matter was acting upon the reQuest of both the Telephone
Company and the power utility who ask that the overhead wires be left on the street.
I
In reply to Councillor Higgins' Question as to whether the background of this present reQuest is
that because the approximately 4,000 feet of homes from the Loch Lomond Road in, have overhead wiring at
the front .of the lots, the remaining 250-odd feet be permitted overhead wiring on poles at the front of
the lots, which was permitted for the 4,000 feet of homes because this housing was considered to be a new
sub-division, Mr. Zides stated that the reQuirements for underground installatiqns came in late in 1968 or
1969; he would think that most of that area would have been developed to that point - what actually
happened is, that the Planning Advisory Committee has .not been involved in the past in these matters
because the provision in the by-law was, correctly or incorrectly, delegated by the Council of the day to
the Commissioner of .Works - the Commissioner would not make a decision until after consultation with the
utilities (sometimes he had to make the decision - maybe it was misinterpreted). He stated that the
Planning Act was changed a couple of years ago and more recently the Planning Advisory Committee has
assumed that it has the right to grant a variance; to his knowledge, the Committee never did grant a
variance which permitted anything on the street. The Mayor pointed out that the City Solicitor says that
the Council has the right to make such decision. Mr. Zides replied that that is the City Solicitor's
opinion. Councillor Higgins asked if the Council, when it made its decision, is saying that the 4,000
feet of poles are just fronting on the properties and that is just presumed that if we grant a variance
that those poles and lines must be in back of those remaining properties. Mr. Zides replied that he
I
.
~
r"
il~3
.
I
I
.
1
.
I
I
g~--d"v,
~-4
$tf./71/H/t"
OY8rht3dJ,t
po~r //1117
.
;rt'IP'~h79'I'S
1~7fFer--
fI, 'I/c;.ed-
/Is~- a,-o~
~
thinks what happens is, that the by-law reads as if something is happening today - and when you read the by-law
you cannot make it retroactive, you have to deal with whatever you are dealing,with', as of now, so, under that
by-law, the intent of the by~law is that any new installation of pOw€!': and telephone line!!f, " ca1Jleteleyt!!fton, ;for
that matter - be buried in the street, and sometimes the utilities have found it necessary to bury it in the back
because of different problems - but when you cannot bury it in the street for one reason or another, then the
intent of the by-law is to take it overhead at the rear of the lot. Councillor Higgins stated it was his im-
pression that the Council's decision of October 6th in this matter was made with the thought that there will be a
continuation; he does not think there was the intent from the recommendation of the Planning Advisory Committee,
or the intention of this Council to say that there is a frontal line and poles, and then the Council if it
suddenly gives permission, it means to the rear of those lots; he noted that the Council just said it gave
permission.
Councillor Cave advised that there are front poles for wlrlng on all the streets in that area with the
exception of the Bonaccord Sub-division, which he believes has underground wiring, and that what the co-operatives
group is asking is for a change regarding the wiring for a short distance of dead-end street; he felt that it is
ridiculous to hold up this group in this regard. Councillor Kipping advised that there is no necessity of
holding them up - the re-design to go to on the rear of the lots, if they could do it, would hold them up more
than if they went underground right now; he determined this information from our engineers, as well. He stated
that another point, that is important, is that if the Council makes a variance of this kind, in this case or in
any other case, there are many developers waiting, and he does not know how the Council would be able to turn
down another reQuest of a similar kind, because the developers naturally would rather go in overhead because it
is fast, easy and somewhat cheaper; he felt that if the Council grants this reQuest, the developers are going to
make similar reQuests, because the Council will have set a precedent until the Council's legal advisor tells the
Council that it can declare that it is not a precedent, or something like that.
The Mayor advised that he has been told that the motion proposed by Councillor Cave in this matter at
this meeting is illegal. Councillor MacGowan proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the co-operatives
group be told that we cannot change the Subdivision By-Law and that their only recourse is to place the electrical
lines at the back of the properties, and if this is not possible, then they have to install them underground.
Councillor Kipping proposed a motion, that was seconded by Councillor A. Vincent, that the reQuest in the letter
from the Common Clerk be denied. Councillor Cave proposed an amendment to the motion, which was seconded by
Councillor Green, that this matter be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation. With
regard to the said proposed amendment to the motion, Mr. Rodgers pointed out that in the opinion he gave to
Council on October 6th last he said that the Planning Advisory Committee had no authority in this Question - it
is a Council decision - the by-law requires wiring underground and if it is not feasible to be underground, it is
to be placed on poles at the rear of lots. He pointed out that the Council can change that by amending the by-
law but if the Council does that it has to be careful that it does not discriminate against others. Councillor
A. Vincent stated that the reason he seconded Councillor Kipping's motion was because it would take about eight
weeks if the matter goes to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and he does not feel these
people should be held up eight weeks. Councillor Green stated he feels that the Council should help this co-
operative group in this matter, this being a dead-end street and wiring already exists on poles there; noting
that the winter season is approaching, he felt that the Council could amend the by-law to allow this group to
proceed. Councillor Kipping, with the consent of Councillor A. Vincent, at this time withdrew his proposed
motion.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the following resolution which was adopted by Common Council
on October 6th last, namely, "That with regard to the reQuest made by members of Newcomers 1975 and Hillcrest
Housing Co-Operative that the present overhead electrical lines along the continuation of Summit Drive, (to help
defer costs to individuals who are now building there and who all reside or will ,shortly reside on the said
Summit Drive in Lakewood Hejghts) be continued, permission be granted for an overhead electrical line in the said
sub-division, rather than underground as required in the sub-division agreement.", be rescinded.
Mr. Rodgers asked if anyone knows whether the said group has incurred expense in the last two weeks
acting on the October 6th Council resolution that was passed, because that resolution that was passed was legal
to the effect that Council could permit overhead wiring; what is not clear is the fact that the Council did not
say the wiring had to be at the back of the lots, and that is what is required, he pointed out.
Councillor Parfitt asked if her understanding is correct, that if there is any extra cost involved now,
it will be absorbed by the Saint John Power Commission. She stated that if it did not add to the cost of the co-
operative housing group, she would go along with the underground wiring for this housing project.
Councillor Higgins felt that this housing group should be informed through the Common Clerk of what the
Council resolution was, what the by-law states, what the variance implied and that they make an application for
an amendment to the Subdivision By-Law, if they so wish - then this group will know what the story is, and he
noted that the Council if it so wishes can turn down the amendment, but the important thing is to communicate the
foregoing information to this group. Councillor Cave noted that the Council has already given a variance to
those people, and stated 'he does not think the co-operative housing group cares whether the electrical wiring
poles are overhead in front of the houses on the main street, or to the rear of the houses - they are concerned
that they are held up on their housing development - they cannot build until this Question is settled. He stated
he would go along with a motion to put overhead wiring at the rear, or at the front - it does not matter; since
the by-law says it must go at the rear of the lots, he would support a motion to put the wiring at the rear of
the lots.
Question being taken, the motion to rescind was lost with only Councillors Kipping, Gould, Hodges and
A. Vincent voting "yea" and the remaining Council members voting "nay".
Councillor Higgins pointed out that when the co-operative housing group appeared before this Council in
September, and he voted to permit overhead wiring, he was given no direction whatsoever by any City staff, or by
their lawyers, or by his fellow Councillors, that it meant a particular type of variance, that the wiring can
only go behind the lots; he felt that what is good for 4,000 feet and so many families, to finish off 252 feet is
fair, and that is how he voted. He stated he would like to make a motion giving the group a copy of the Council's
October 6th resolution and telling the group that even though a motion was made, we must go by the by-law,
according to the variance - this is the way it has to be done - and that the alternative is underground wiring,
and that the next move for the group at its reQuest is to come in and make a reQuest of the Council to amend the
Subdivision By-Law, with a presentation; this is communication, he pointed out. Mr. Rodgers at this time was
asked to explain again why the wiring has to go at the rear of the lots. He replied that he can explain it by
saying that Deputy Mayor Higgins has expressed it, and the resolution passed on October 6th by Council only needs
to be clarified to say that it meant the rear of lots.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the complete situation be clarified to the said co-operative
housing group.
114
~
ZPb/hlff 2/~-
cll11,nLmel?-r
.])~Qr o)?
dentIst-
0-<</ C e
:z; r. (7., //1,
74PPhhl//
C//!/ .50/'1:'110
(J1lt/h, 1}e
7aKi :llJl- MW
7dlxi /i'e~175e
st,ts!ensi ,,>>
c?hid pf
pulice
Councillor Kipping withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns amending sQbsection (2) of
the following sections thereof by adding a new clause "an office for one doctor or dentist" as follows:-
Section 13(2) insert new clause (ka); Section 27(2) insert new clause (ea); Section 35(2) insert new
clause (ea); Section 43(2) insert new clause (ea); Section 60(2) insert new clause (fa); Section 79(2)
insert new clause (na); Section 90(2) insert new clause (ka); Section 172(2) (a) insert new clause (xii)
(a); Section 176(2) insert new clause (la) -- be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common
Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
Councillor Kipping re-entered the meeting.
.
I
Read a report from the City Solicitor with reference to the request made by Councillor Pye to
the Common Council at its meeting of October 6th last that the Taxi By-Law be amended, advising that the
reason for the recommendation from Councillor Pye arose out of a provision under the Criminal Code which
allows a Judge to grant an absolute or a conditional discharge to a person who pleads guilty or is found
guilty without registering a conviction against a person; that under the Taxi By-Law at 'present, the Taxi
Inspector is authorized to suspend, by Notice, a license issued under the by-law if the person named
therein is convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code - as well, the by-law provides that no person
shall be licensed as a taxi cab owner or operator if that person has been convicted of a Criminal Code
offence; that Councillor Pye's recommendation is to provide that by-law and the Taxi Inspector with the
authority to refuse to issue a license or suspend the license if such person pleads guilty or is found
guilty of a Criminal Code offence. Submitted,with the report was the appropriate amendment if the Council
wished to adopt Councillor Pye's recommendation.
Councillor Higgins asked if the Council is getting into a very dangerous area whereby the ~
Council is more or less setting itself up through a by-law, as judge and jury. In making negative reply,
Mr. Rodgers stated he does not read this recommendation from Councillor Pye to cause Council to become in
that area at all - it is a simple question of the present by-law authorizes the Taxi Inspector to suspend
licenses if the person driving a taxi is convicted of a criminal offence; under the Criminal Code, there
is a section which allows the Judge, when a person pleads guilty or even is found guilty, to give an
absolute or conditional discharge and it is deemed not to be a conviction - and if it happens, that if the
person pleads guilty or is found guilty under the Code the Taxi Inspector is not authorized to suspend the
taxi license; Councillor Pye is recommending that these words be added to the Taxi By-Law so that if a
person pleads guilty or is found guilty of a criminal offence that the taxi license can be suspended, even
though he is absolutely discharged by a judge, and is not convicted. Councillor Higgins commented that he
would not want to get involved in that. Councillor Cave stated he is concerned that once the particular
driver has created an offence and has been charged and found guilty - does it mean that he is out permanently
regarding his taxi license, and does not have any recourse; he made the point that many times people have I
done wrong on one, or sometimes two occasions, but have turned out to be good citizens, and he is concerned
about this matter. Mr. Rodgers explained that they only have recourse to Council if their license is
suspended under the by-law. Councillor Kipping noted that in order to understand the matter properly the
Council has to know under what conditions (and he pointed out that there is no way the Council will have
time to learn it) is a conditional discharge given, in law. Mr. Rodgers replied that it depends upon the
circumstances of,the case, and in the circumstances of a particular case the Judge might want to use this
particular section; if the man pleads guilty, the Judge could still give him a conditional discharge, or
he might not.
In reply to 'Councillor Higgins' discussion in the matter, Councillor Pye pointed out that what
is outlined in the City Solicitor's letter could happen frequently; if it does, let us. consider the taxi
driver's responsibility - he has, among other things, a position of trust in that he conveys passengers
from point to point; if you happen to get a great number of individuals (as taxi drivers) who are highly
undesirable because of their tendency possibly to molest females, attempt rape, and by the Court go scot
free according to the probation system, then you can see what type of driver you have conveying passengers
about the city - the passengers would be hardly in safe hands, he pointed out. Councillor Higgins stated
that he realizes that point, but he is still saying that the Council is'replacing the Judge in this
matter. Councillor Hodges stated that his understanding of the law is that when these conditions are
given they are generally given for a person who has been to the court for the first time, and so that the
person will not lose his job. He stated he cannot agree with Councillor Pye, that anybody who commits the
crimes that Councillor Pye is talking about would be given one of these discharges - he feels they would
not get such a discharge because these are the types of crimes against persons and a taxi driver is a
person who is serving the people. He noted that in the case that we had previously it ended up as a
misdemeanor, and stated he does not think the Council should be putting this man in a second judgement,
which is what it appears to be, to him. He stated that if that is the case, he is against it.
Councillor Higgins stated that he would like to see the recommendation received and filed
pending further discussion that he would like to have with the Chief of Police, possibly Judge Harrigan,
and certain lawyers, and with the Attorney General. He stated that if a Judge gives an absolute discharge
to a taxi driver, and we say it makes no difference to us or to the Taxi Inspector of the City of Saint
John, and that ,the taxi driver is now suspended from his job; he stated he does not like to get into that
type of law - he does not know what he is doing, in such case, when he makes a decision like that.
Councillor Pye advised that this matter has been discussed with the Chief of Policy by himself, and the
Chief is highly desirous that the by-law be provided with the necessary strength, which at the moment it
lacks in view of this recent occurrence.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until the Common
Council and the Chief of Police can meet and have dialogue on the subject.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
report s
I
.
I
I
~
....
""'"
~PlM, P?/hP.
. Cr.;:JJ'7t-
Ilk$"& Sdil/I7-r
.r olin /~7r
U/e"dJ1
/lClffUilard
/II/ss ~
fd:,~HC
I
I ,(a,,/ ~~
,,<ease
6~fI' /I.;J/~
bncade;t
.J)e~.&k/~
q/. 'Se;rVtees
.
ef?l&-h, 4.
1//l7ee4
1/;l;I1~/ .~
1
11~
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Tuesday, October 14th, 1975, and begs to submit the
following report and recommendation, namely:-
1. That the City of Saint John provide Miss 'Wendy Hayward who is Miss Saint John 1975, with $500.00 for
travel expenses to the Miss Canada Pageant in Toronto.
Saint John, N. B.,
20th October, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recommendation
contained therein adopted.
Councillor Parfitt asked if there is any provlslon in the budget for an expenditure such as the above
grant. Mr. Park replied that the item is not in the budget as a specific amount set aside for this purpose, but
it will be charged to the amount set aside for this kind of purpose, entitled Unspecified. Grants.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, recommending that the
former Lancaster City Hall be leased to the Department of Supply and Services of the Province of New Brunswick
for a three-year period to begin October 1st, 1975, at a rental of $10,000.00 per year payable in six-month
intervals in advance, and advising that the City will be responsible for structural repairs and insurance only,
and that the lessee will be responsible for all other outgoings which will include maintenance, heat, light,
water, taxes, janitor services, et cetera, and that the City has agreed that it will paint the exterior of the
building this fall providing weather conditions permit, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted, and
that the Legal Department be asked to prepare the necessary lease:
AND FURTHER that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute on behalf of the City the above
named lease.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for information for Council and for the general public as to what the City
was receiving from the Department of Supply and Services at the time the City leased the above named building
when the City was supplying janitor service, heat and everything else, in comparison with what the City is not
supplying now. He pointed out that this is the kind of revenue generation that the City senior staff should be
doing, and stated he was shocked when he found out what the said Department was paying for that building. Mr.
Barfoot stated he did not have that figure with him at this meeting. Councillor A. Vincent asked that a report
in this regard be provided for next week for the Council, giving all the details, so that it can be made public.
The Mayor replied that such report will be provided. Councillor MacGowan noted that the building needs to be
painted, and expressed the hope that it will be painted this year.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
/7 . RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, with re-
f?~hJ1.Ii'~v.rS ference to the enQuiry received at the September 22nd last meeting of Common Council from Reverend E. Lloyd Lake,
~~~. rector of All Saints Church, on behalf of himself and citizens of Cottage Road and Old Black River Road, as to
~ettJf,~ whether the lands adjacent to the Cottage Road (a small parcel of which they are considering using for the
/~Are construction of a church building, which construction would depend upon a commitment from Council that the said
/l':'/e-'J....LI; lands would be utilized in accordance with the proposed plans now set forth in the Planning Department's schedule
rJlt~'~~ and that the area which is reserved for residential building would likely develop in this manner) would be
~~~ utilized in accordance with the said proposed plans in the Planning Department's schedule in the Comprehensive
~~ ;>,' Community Plan - advising that the schedule setting out future land use in the Municipal Development Plan shows
/? ~ this area slated for low density residential, and that is the current intent at least - and further advising
l-~~)1~ that, however, there is no way of guaranteeing what might happen in the future, and, although the Planning
Advisory Committee would like to see the area retained for that use and density in perpetuity, it cannot guarantee
. that it will be; and further advising that under the existing zoning, "RS-2" Suburban One and Two Family Residentia:
a church lot is reQuired to be at least one acre in size with a minimum frontage of at least 100 feet, and that
under the City's Zoning By-Law, a church may not be located without the prior approval of the Planning Advisory
Committee; that the Committee is recommending to Common Council that Reverend Lake be advised that the present
intent is to retain the area for low density residential use but that it is impossible for the City to give the
assurance sought - and further, that he should be aware that the parcel of land under consideration is too small
for the construction of a church building, with the minimum size reQuired in the existing zoning district being
one acre -- be received and filed and Reverend Lake be so informed.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee regarding
the matter of the Committee's decision on the reQuest of Vet's Taxi Limited to establish a Kent home for per-
manent use as a dispatcher's office, which decision was protested to the Common Council meeting of September 29th
last by the said taxi company at which time the Council asked the company to seek a hearing 'before the Committee
concerning the application, advising that the Committee's October 14th, 1975 meeting heard the representatives of
Vet's Taxi Limited and of the Kelly & Hovey Insurance Limited of 128 Lansdowne Avenue, who were not objecting to
~t-~ ~~ the principle of a dispatcher's office or taxi stand at this location, but only against the placement of the
I ~/ ."-~ , obile home unit only several feet directly in front of their office windows - and advising that the Committee
("PL'~~~~I!'J" eceived only five replies to the twenty-five letters sent to property owners in the immediate area and two
17l1Cii:oe) etters were returned as the people were not there or had moved, and stating that four of the received letters
stated that they had no objections - the other letter listed a number of objections, all of which were considered
y the Committee; and further advising that the Committee decided it had nothing against the idea of the dis-
atcher's office in relation to a taxi operation at this location, but that the permanent occupancy of a trailer
here should not be permitted; and further advising that taxi stands (a dispatcher's office is not specifically
entioned as permitted in the Zoning By-Law) are included among those uses which reQuire Planning Advisory
Committee approval and may be subject to such terms and conditions as the Advisory Committee may impose, and the
Council has no role in this process - consequently, the Advisory Committee resolved that the application for
ermanent occupancy in the trailer be denied, but thst Vet's Taxi Limited be given until December 31st, 1975 to
emove the trailer and find a new site - alternatively, permission would be granted for the establishment of the
adio equipment and dispatcher's office within the existing service station building at the intersection of
ellesley and Lansdowne Avenues or in an extension to the service station building which meets the City's building
nd zoning reQuirements - and advising that Vet's Taxi Limited are being informed of the Committee's decision by
67,~~~~~ copy of this letter being sent to Mr. G. E. Lowe -- be received and filed.
I
tI f?/s ~)(/
AlP(
IfpJlk
.
ll.....
On motion of Councillor Higgins
116
'P~J7h.Il'(V/S .
(?t7P?P?
lIe-2PI7'.htj'
Jgee p.f" (fVAbS 7nc
t? :r: ..)/ /non
r,J:{!t?rb /n
c~ ..J"hc/-/t?
II/rs.fIf,/l, ./
C'n:>7w-I"P r~
TI151#/~ /'ff..h~
I/.ar",/~pn ~-
C'IIB$/I?!f 7J!'-/
t?!=Y:!SI'7 .
~ t>s~er I?~.
hdtlr.se::t7'oh$
Eh9r-1.~PM-S cI-
'Po//"ee.lJ~$.
{'OWl- ~rt"e"n
2J,.e~Jr/hJs. /~I1-
&fJ$'t#r ^ t;Pt
~37 1/17/1117 S-I,
~r,,1$II h.
w/bh/ 111~-
I"e t/17/6/1 5-1.
LEG A L
Ct:.t, .J;fii:>#C?r
S<<..f1'frviS"t?1",
7idhn/OilI -
7nt7p"ecCi" oh
Sernces
~f!~/ J)~~.
Kfe~#ftJ,fr.
/(Ql7ltZ ~rk
vif1~/ioh ,Pr0t?-
! CUV;PI1
During discussion of the above matter, Councillor A. Vincent advanced the suggestion that if
the Planning Advisory Committee in the future would consider not giving a temporary permit for this type
of a mobile building (mobile office building) in the first place, there would not be this controversy
about having it removed, by the Council being blamed for same. It was pointed out to him that the
Council does not have any role to play in such a matter, and that was the reason for the motion to
receive and file the Committee's letter.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting ';nay", stating
he was not permitted to finish what he had to say on the above subject.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges.
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with
regard to the application for the re-zoning of an eight and one-half acre parcel of land on the Narrows
Road from "RS-2" Suburban Residential to "B-2" General Business classification, made by Messrs. C. J.
Simon and F. J. Corbin whose proposed use of the land is a private club (Ace of Clubs Incorporated),
advising that the Planning Advisory Committee received the opinion from the solicitor for the applicants
that the property is.a non-conforming use and as such does not reQuire anyone's approval for the private
club to operate, and further advising that the solicitor appearing. on behalf of neighbhourhood residents
objecting to the proposed use and change in zoning was also present, and that the applicants asked that
the question of zoning not be considered at this time - and stating that the Committee resolved to advise
the Common Council that the applicants have reQuested withdrawal of their application for re-zoning and
have submitted a letter from a solicitor giving an opinion that they have the right to continue the use
of the property as a club because it is an existing non-conforming use, and further stating that the
Committee is reQuesting that Common Council refer the application to the City Solicitor for a legal
opinion on the matter of the existing non-conforming use and the applicability of the current zoning
regulations on cabarets to the property in question, and that the Committee would expect that the City
Solicitor would also consider the views of the neighbourhood residents' solicitor before giving his
opinion to Common Council -- be received and filed. .
It was noted that at its meeting of October 14th last when the Council heard the presentation
concerning the said proposed change in zoning, the City Solicitor was asked for an opinion, and that this
opinion is yet to come to Council in the matter, as the City Solicitor is working on preparation of his
opinion.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. M. A. Crawford of Morna Heights
recommending the installation of traffic lights at the Harrison-Chesley Streets (by the underpass) and
the Manawagonish Road-Manchester Avenue intersections, and that such lights be erected before the pro-
blems of winter driving compound the existing problems referred to in her letter, be referred to the
staff of the Engineering and Works Department and to the Police Department for a report.
Councillor Green recalled that several months ago he had brought to the attention of the
Council the matter of the Manawagonish Road and Manchester Avenue intersection, at which time it was
referred to the City Manager to have it investigated and to have a report brought in to Council. He
asked if the City Manager has that matter in hand. Mr. Barfoot replied that, as he recalls, this section
of street has already been looked at and we have the information. He stated that he will incorporate
that information in the reQuested report to Council; it will be up-to-date information that will be
provided in the report.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd. dated
October lOth, 1975, be added to the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd. advising
that the company would like permission to establish a retail ladies' clothing outlet at 237 Union Street
(Which is located in the area of Union Street that is governed by a Deferred Widening By-Law) on which
property it has an option, and further advising that this building will reQuire renovations that would
cost approximately $30,000.00 to complete, in order to convert it into the proposed retail outlet, and
that the company's application in this regard is subject to the conditions set forth in the said letter,
e referred to the City staff for a report back to Council next week, hopefully.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor HOdges
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Mr. Rodgers gave a verbal progress report regarding Kierstead Mobile Home Park, advising that he.
eceived a letter today from the solicitor he engaged to see what can be done in the courts, and as a
esult of the information contained in that letter, the Legal Department is proceeding at this point with
simple violation prosecution under the by-law, of operating without a license, rather than at this point
etting involved in the Question of plumbing regulations and that streets are not paved properly. He
tated that there is authority or power in a Judge to order that certain things be done - that is, the
obile home park close down until the owner gets a license. He added that by proceeding in that manner,
ouncil authorization is not needed in this matter of prosecution.
In discussi'ng; the matter of designation of the Supervisor of Technical and Inspection Services
(Which position was held by Mr. R. Dhar until his resignation from the City's employ this year) or his
esignate, under the provisions of the Mobile Home Parks By-Law, Mr. Rodgers pointed out that it is a very
estrictive designation and there are other areas of the by-law where he should be designated. He stated
hat the City Manager should be asked to look at this problem as soon as possible and either put someone
cting in this position, or confirm it, or amend the by-law, because right now there is a serious missing
art to the by-law because of no-one in that position.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the Legal Department proceed as outlined by the City
olicitor with reference to the Kierstead Mobile Home Park:
",
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
~
1,1'1
SupE?rnsor,
./eChn/edlf.
kS?e'eh 0
$ernCf?$
/J'!,b//e #om
~r/rS
:#iff- .4w
:PM'", II! Sj?-
I&;t:t~r,
I/t'n<:en-t-
(lhr/stb~t'r
(Jpl//€r
KtersleaL
IlIfqQl/e~~
'%J rk
. CI'~
S"j,i:/for
C!oJn(n '/.
Whf7(e
$ew~rAhe
,( ~/, ;(;'~Oh
~~s
I KX'pf1'tiprid -
.clon 5
bJ/~r#'$l/I1$
ekal1/n~
..7)OIM~e5
(',hIm /A/
1?~J'7t-fI'V.
Waters
/J~hQ
..
I
I
.
AND FURTHER that the City Manager make a recommendation to Council for a person to replace the position
formerly held by Mr. R. Dhar, with reference to the Mobile Home Parks investigation and enforcement.
Mr. Barfoot was asked if he would like to make his recommendation at this time regarding the above
mentioned position. Mr. Barfoot advised that 14r. Dhar designated the Building Inspector to act regarding the
Mobile Home Parks By-Law for enforcement purposes; in order to have the Building Inspector carry out his duties
fully according to the by-law, he asked if the Question is: does the City Manager recommend to Council that the
Building Inspector be actually named to that position, or just change the designation. On being advised by the
City Solicitor at this time that it is the City Manager who can make this designation, Mr. Barfoot advised that
he would like to think about this matter and make a recommendation to the next meeting of Council. Councillor A.
Vincent indicated that he would like to make in-put regarding this particular matter.
Councillor A. Vincent expressed his concern that the City have all legal loop-holes covered in taking
legal action against Kierstead Mobile Home Park. In this regard, Mr. Rodgers read from a letter he received from
Mr. Christopher Collier, the legal counsel he engaged for the City to take the Kierstead Mobile Home park case to
court, as follows, "The Mobile Home Parks By-Law reQuires that notice pursuant to Section 91 be given by the
Supervisor or his designate. We understand that at present there is no-one~pointed to act as Supervisor of
Technical and Inspection Services for the City. There is, however, a memo dated April 2nd, 1975 from R. K. Dhar
as Supervisor of Technical and Inspection Services designating the Building Inspector to act in the place of the
Inspector. This appears sufficient to meet the reQuirements of the by-law and allow the Building Inspector of
the City to act as the designate of the Supervisor for the purposes of enforcement of the by-law only.". He
stated that, as City Solicitor, he is also recommending that the matter be straightened out by someone occupying
that position either permanently or acting - that is, the position of Supervisor of Technical and Inspection
Services, while the by-law reads the way it does. The Council members at this time agreed that the City Manager
make a recommendation to the next meeting of Council regarding filling the position of Supervisor of Technical
and Inspection Services in either a permanent or acting manner.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the aforegoing verbal report made by the City Solicitor be
received and filed.
The meeting at this time adjourned to Committee of the Whole, following which the Committee arose and
the Mayor resumed the Chair in legal session of Common Council. Councillor A. Vincent withdrew from the meeting
during Committee of the Whole session.
Consideration was given at this time to a report, dated October 20th, 1975, made by Mr. D. Buck, Acting
Deputy Commissioner of Property Managem~nt, to the City Manager regarding the claim for compensation made by Mr.
Robert W. Waters for damages to his land and market gardening business allegedly caused by construction of the
sewer line in 1971 in the Loch Lomond Road area, and for alleged damages he has suffered as a result of former
expropriations and from cleaning the watermains on his land. The report concludes that Mr. Waters' claim is
based upon loss of profits and wages both during and subseQuent to the entry by the City, and advises that Mr.
Waters' operation at the Loch Lomond Road is only a part of his total operation, and it would reQuire a detailed
accounting review of his total operation to extract any damages which may have resulted from the installation of
the watermain by the City. The report recommends that the City engage the services of an independent accountant
to review the claim made by Mr. Waters and to give an opinion of the losses which can be attributed to the work
carried out by the City.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the City Manager be authorized to engage the services of an
independent accountant to review the claim made by Mr. Robert W. Waters to Common Council on April 7th, 1975 in
Committee of the Whole, and to give an opinion of the losses which can be attributed to the work carried out by
the City.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
1.-..
:z;t;!
C~'.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-seventh
day of October, A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, J. Gabriel, Deputy
Commissioner of Administration and Supply of the Engineering and Works
Department, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development,
A. Ellis, Building Inspector, and C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation
and Parks
Temple.
The meeting opened with a prayer, which was invoked by The Reverend Gerald E. Morgan, pastor of Calvary
/J1u/-ftjlex
Cbl'j?' removed
ll....
The Mayor advised that he had just been informed that it has been announced that Multiplex is being
from Saint John and is being established by the Provincial Government in Fredericton under another name.
-"
118
~
/I'k~~I"'-r
dPmm/ttt!'~
~/t1rq.
6iP/net-
/I1alt/,P/~x ~"'~,
(!(lI7"t?/~~es
A-#. 7,;3/~~e
~(I~h~r!f'
Rji!r'
~Kh,Cave
Fir~~ 7J()1:;,l
.'Per-So
W'dge5
'li'e-~ ()I7/hff
Ifan/(,rd /I'Z'
71D/71p5f?h all$.
C'(I,AI-L
1?e-~Oh/n~
111..,,-/'oht /it.
nQ/?fp.5M t$hX.
C7eP, A-&tC.
He stressed that this is a step that is retrogressive in the interests of Saint John, and stated he would
entertain a motion later in.the meeting expressing the Council's feelings in this matter.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Mayor and a select committee meet with the
Premier and Cabinet ministers involved in the removal of Multiplex from Saint John, and that they be
informed of the concern of the Common Council,at this announcement, and that the Council was not informed
of the announcement prior to its release to the news media.
Councillor Green felt that it would be a tragedy to lose Multiplex from Saint John in view of
what is being contemplated and underway at the present time in this city in industry, and he expressed the
hope that the Mayor and the committee will do their utmost to see if the situation can be changed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that a letter of sympathy on behalf of the Mayor and Common
Council be forwarded to the family of Lieutenant Talmadge Loughery of the Fire Department, whose sudden
death occurred while on duty at the scene of a fire in Saint John West on October 25th last.
The Council observed a moment of silence in memory of Lieutenant Loughery at this time, while
seated. at the Council table, and thereupon rose from their Council seats to signify passage of the above
motion.
Councillor Cave stated that before voting in favour of the wages for the Fire and Police Depart-
ments which were discussed during the last, few months, he took into consideration the dangerous conditions
under which these two departments operate, and decided to so vote.
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising took place regarding the proposed re-
zoning for Manford M. ,Thompson Construction Co. Ltd. of a parcel of land on the west side of Molson Avenue
(the former Speedway Express property), and that no written objection had been received. It was noted
that no person was present to offer comment on the said proposed re-zoning.
A letter from the Planning Advisory Committee was considered at this time, which recommends that
the said property be re-zoned, subject to certain conditions set forth in the letter.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning a parcel of land on
the west side of Molson Avenue commencing at the rear of the lots which front on Sand Cove Road and
running in a northerly direction with a frontage on the said Molson Avenue of approximately 315 feet and a
depth of approximately 207 feet on the north sideline and 127 feet on the south sideline, from "I-I" Light
Industrial district to "RM-l" Multiple Family Residential district, be read a first time.
Councillor M. Vincent asked what is the actual space in the above area that is going to be there
in frontage per unit of occupancy. Mr. Zides advised that the town, or row, houses, will be as depicted
on the drawing he displayed at this time; each of these attached housing units is about 20 feet wide; the
buildings are approximately 120 feet wide on the drawing and there are six semi-attached one-family
houses; therefore, you buy the unit you occupy and you have a frontage of 20 feet per living unit of
occupancy and that 20-foot width extends from the street to the back; the depth of the lot varies - in
some places, it is 250 or 260 feet deep.
Councillor Green felt that the present light industrial zoning classification should be retained
for this site because it is compatible with the present light industrial areas of business that are now in
that vicinity. He pointed out that good spots such as this area, are going to be hard to come by in this
city for light industry.
Councillor MacGowan asked if any of the residents of the area met with the Planning Advisory
Committee, or made representation to the Planning group. Mr. Zides replied that the residents have not
done so in this re-zoning application; he recalled that when the previous re-zoning application came up
regarding this property there were considerable objections - at that time, there were 48 units proposed in
two apartment buildings, each containing 24 units; this time, the Planning Advisory Committee again went
to the people and received three objections, as stated in the Committee's letter to Council; the majority
of the people who replied really had some reservations and these were brought into the resolution that is
being recommended to Council. He confirmed that these people therefore are more or less protected.
.
I
I
.
I
.
Councillor Kipping expressed the view that any time we can get industry moved away from the I
residential areas and perhaps into the industrial parks, if it is that kind of a case, we should assist .
them in leaving.
Noting that there is a railway line adjacent to the property under discussion, Councillor Cave
felt it would be a shame to re-zone the property for housing because he feels it is an ideal site for
light industry. Mr. Zides pointed out that there is no railway track adjoining this property. Councillor
Green pointed out that the railway track is right across from this property - about 300 feet away from the
property.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green, Pye, Cave, A. Vincent and
M. Vincent voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of.Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning a parcel of land on
the west side of Molson Avenue commencing at the rear of the lots which front on Sand Cove Road and
running in a northerly direction with a frontage on the said Molson Avenue of approximately 315 feet and a
depth of approximately 207 feet on the north sideline and 127 feet on the south sideline, from "I-l" Light
I
.
.....1
,....
.
I' PhJl1,4d'ns
C't?m17'1.
1Ie-;((}hlhtfA
/lQn-fOydf TI1.
~ol1l/!son
~n5;1r, Ct7,
/-6-d.
1
. F"eL If,(
e rite/"
Pe.h'f/bJ1 f1
W.i/~St96W~
,serv/J!.f?S /0.
sA ill/n.1ft?h
~".
1
t/rkh f'(?1')
eft?f /Ifi '11$1:
1Jt(0017.e-lc
Su/"tff~/.
/V~f. :JJ1vf2,
C%el17/O;1!lb,
.of'ca~
,.(-6t.
C!6'V41,;/, IIi;
r/l6aw 'iV~
oe>$6-s re
#l1r&~-Y.
,St-. c/vlc
8I?l'rlre ,PPoj
.td~V, ~
~~ree"!5!~~
~ocea r:a:;P
B/~/f ./
7f<;;ee SaP-H.I.
%aSe.L
I
/lSSeAC -t-o
su~-d'/v-;f;n
FIIe$/e ~/.
Sub-tL/V,
'Phase I
.
.....
1'18
Industrial district to "RM-l" Multiple Family Residential district, be read a second time.
"
Question being taken, the motion was cl3.rried wHh COlJncillQV(}, Cllye, 'I(:reen';':\'re ,,!I. YJ:pcent APc1 ,11;
Vincent voting "nay".
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
October 21st, 1975, regarding the application made by Mr. Manford Thompson, President of Manford M. Thompson
Construction Co. Ltd., for the re-zoning of the former Speedway Express Limited property on Molson Avenue for the
purpose of erecting 20 townhouse units, with each townhouse to be 20 feet wide, advising that Mr. Thompson
proposes to sell each townhouse unit with a strip of land eQual to the width of the townhouse unit running from
the street line to the rear of the property line, and that the only area which would be common to all property
owners is a right-of-way to give access to the rear of the properties; that letters were sent to 19 property
owners in the area and seven letters were received in favour of the proposal, although some contained conditions -
three letters were received in favour of the proposal, although some contained conditions - three were negative -
those against the proposal state that they would prefer to have the area left in its current light industrial
zoning; and recommending that the said property be re-zoned from "I-I" Light Industrial to "RM-l" Multiple
Residential classification pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act limiting development to the
erection of 20 townhouse units in accordance with a plan filed with the Common Clerk by Mr. Thompson and
on condition ,that: (1) the site be so graded so as to ensure drainage away from the adjoining properties; (2) the
site be suitably fenced; (3) the whole development be appropriately landscaped -- and advising that other condition
suggested by the adjoining property owners included snow removal, garbage collection, and additional future
building on the property (WhiCh would be protected by the proposed re-zoning), and further advising that the
first two items are normal to all developments and need not be zoning concerns -- be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
Mr. Fred W. Cotter of the Shillington Road, was present and submitted a petition from the residents of
the said Road, making application for a water and sewerage service in their area at the earliest possible date,
and advising that the petition bears the names of all the residents of this street (one hundred per cent) who are
in favour of this reQuest. Mr. Cotter advised that these residents comprise a small community of eight houses at
the present time, and there is a potential for another eight to ten lots that could be built on in this area; at
present, they have no sewer or water lines coming from the City, and this is the subject of their application, as
noted. He stated that, to his knowledge, these eight new houses on Shillington Road have been there for four or
five years, and were built by being contracted out by contractors. Councillor Cave advised that before he could
make a decision regarding this particular reQuest, he would have to have a report from the City engineers to find
out the urgency of the Shillington Road application as compared to the reQuest for water extension made by the
people on the Black River Road where the water'supply is being polluted by pollution from the septic tanks, and
having regard to the advice from the Department of Health that nothing can be done there regarding the drilling
of a well in that area, and also having regard to the fact that those people are being asked to bear a portion of
the estimated cost of $96,000.00 for providing City water to them.
Mr. Cotter was advised by the Mayor that the Council will render a decision regarding the above noted
petition, later in the meeting.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager with reference to the
resolution adopted by Common Council on October 20th, 1975, to aCQuire from Atlantic Surgical Ltd. the property
situate at 29 Mill Street (F-6-11-13), advising that confirmation has now been received that the title of the
said property is in the name of National Drug and Chemical Co. of Canada Ltd., and recommending that where the
name Atlantic Surgical Ltd. appears in the said October 20th resolution of Council the name National Drug and
Chemical Co. of Canada~td. be substituted therefor by so amending the resolution, be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that in view of the attitude of the Federal and Provincial Governments,
and so on, he would like to have the total cost spent on the Urban Renewal development of the new civic centre on
Dock Street whole area to date, from the time we started; he would also like the total costs paid out, the total
cost recovery and the total number of hours spent by all City staff and the true costs to date, so that we can
take a look at where we are going.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that The Rocca
Group Limited is developing a parcel of land on Ellerdale Street, known as Ellerdale Place Sub-division, Phase I,
which development will involve approximately 1,400 feet of street and service and make land available for the
construction of eight 12-unit apartment buildings and one 96-unit apartment building; that the servicing plans
submitted by the developer met the approval of the Engineering and Works Department, and that according to the
City's sub-division policy, the City will be responsible for the following costs:- (1) water materials (water-
mains, gate valves, et cetera) $16,400.00; (2) storm sewer materials (pipe, manholes, catch basins, et cetera)
$3,000.00 -- making a total of $19,400.00 -- and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water
and sewerage materials to be charged to the 1975 capital budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be author-
ized to execute the sub-division agreement in due course -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recommending
that the sub-division plan for Phase I of Ellerdale Place, as shown on the submitted print, be assented to by
Common Council, and advising that Phase I includes a 1,200-foot extension to Ellerdale Street, eight lots, each
to contain a 12-unit apartment building, and a larger lot to contain an eight-storey 97-unit apartment building
together with a 122-space parking facility, and that also included for approval is a 2.8-acre parcel for vesting
in the City as land for public purposes (this parcel is ultimately to be combined with a land for public purposes
proposal for a sub-division of the adjoining property); and further advising that the developer for this project
is the Rocca Group, and that when the adjoining lands to the east were being sub-divided for the so-called G & R
apartment project, the Rocca Group set aside a parcel of land which has been held in trust by the City for
subseQuent conveyance to the developer upon provision of land which is more suitable for this purpose, and that
the presently proposed land for public purposes is more suitable and so the original parcel, which has been held
12()
~
,(.;mCGl~r " /
If/'PI~"/..;j/ h#o
-f'.;;l~;/I'i /es qI.
D/~d1Ch'r~~
7ihA"/:$"C:O c:;;,I"/
~17t::GIs.&:t!' ,.
Ex?~s~kTIJ
/Hlah-l/t!' ;?j;
pal/ f:P~"h?/,:b/r-
~{P$ /?71.
t:fg~/~ Sr.
:ildse~// "?;mrJr.:l
me nr /~7'1
Pe,.{tJrn?ClhCS
bOh#(,
?lJu,~se p.,c>
~I'}flhe 6,..
,<q.;der
C!t.t h1J?1/ h:1 JJ;ese,
{!/:fy J;//CI-,!()r
J?e-Abl1/I1I'
C. T $/171 ~17
F.r Corbin
/lce ~ ~/<<ps
:The.
in trust by the City, is becoming absorbed in the Phase I layout - and further advising that the plan
also shows a service easement which will be reQuired for storm sewer drainage and utility lines, and that
Phases II and III of the project, are subsequently being developed for more 97-unit apartment buildings
and townhouses, respectively -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
On motion'of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the
Director of Recreation and Parks, submitting a letter received from the Lancaster Expos Baseball Club
seeking support in submitting a bid to host the 1976 Atlantic Junior Baseball Championships and the 1977
Canadian Senior Baseball Tournament, and recommending that the City of Saint John support the said
Baseball Club in its efforts to ho~the said two Tournaments at the Memorial Field adjacent to the
Lancaster Centennial Arena, by: (a) resolving to have the necessary facilities completed when required,
(b) agreeing to post the $2,000.00 performance bond reQuired for the 1977 Canadian Senior Baseball
Tournament, (c) authorizing the calling of tenders now, or bids, for 1,000 bleacher seats for delivery in
early 1976 (since the City will not have expended all the Recreation capital funds allocated for 1975,
and in order to ensure that permanent seating will be available for the spring of 1976) -- be received
and filed and the recommendations adopted, it being understood that the aforegoing three items are agreed
to by the City if the bid ~s successful for hosting the said tournaments.
1
Councillor Parfitt stated that before voting on such an expenditure regarding the above noted
facilities she wanted to know whether the matter was being referred to the committee on budget, regarding
the costs. It was noted that the above named letter from the City Manager and Director of Recreation and
Parks states that it is anticipated that the additions necessary to provide a top Quality softball and
baseball complex at the Memorial Field, adjacent to the Lancaster Centennial Arena, capable of hosting
national competitions such as the said championships, can be accomplished at a cost to the City that will
not exceed $100,000~00, half of which is already approved. Councillor M. Vincent stated it was his hope
that the above motion and the recommendation would be that the Council is, in fact, supporting the bid
(and that the Council is, in fact, supporting the bid)and that if the bid is successful, we are committing
ourselves to hosting the tournaments. Councillor Gould confirmed that this is the intent of his motion.
I
Councillor Parfitt voted "nay" to the above motion.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by' Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Engineering and Works, advising that the 1968 Trojan loader Number 450 used by the Water and Sewerage
Division of the Engineering and Works Department is presently out of service and in need of an engine
overhaul and as the City repair plant is not equipped to overhaul an engine of this type the purchase of
a rebuilt engine'has been investigated'which, if approved, can be installed by City mechanics, and
further advising that Cummins Diesel has Quoted a price of $7,693.00 for a rebuilt engine and, when the
old engine is removed, if the block is found reasonable, that company will reimburse the City $2,700.00
(this cannot be determined until the present engine is removed), and also advising that replacement cost
of this loader is approximately $60,000.00 compared to the engine replacement of $7,693.00 and if the
necessary repairs are carried out, this loader should be serviceable for another three or four years --
and recommending the purchase of the rebuilt engine from Cummins Diesel at the price of $7,693.00 subject
to the condition of the present engine block -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
Councillor Gould asked what the cost would be for a new engine as compared to a rebuilt engine.
Mr. Barfoot stated he did not have a figure on that at the moment, but it is the City's normal practice
in reconstituting a machine to buy a rebuilt engine if available. Councillor Gould asked if the rebuilt
engine is as good as a new one. It was confirmed to him that it is - it is as good as the machine it
goes in. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the rebuilt engine has a warranty on it, and if so, is it a one-
year warranty, or for twenty-seven months. Mr. MacKinnon replied that we have been negotiating an upset
price on this rebuilt engine and there is not a year's warranty on, a rebuilt engine. Some Council
members confirmed that the warranty in such case would be a three-month warranty. Councillor A. Vincent
noted that if there is no warranty on the engine and if it fails two days after it is installed, the City
will have just spent $7,600.00. He stated he is in favour of buying a reconditioned engine but he thinks
the City should have at least a twelve-month warranty for that type of an engine, for that kind of money, .
for that type of a machine. Mr. MacKinnon advised that the estimate for the engine that is going to be
put in this loader is the "outside" price; it is hoped that once the loader engine is taken to Fredericton
and the engine is taken apart, it will be found that there is not as much wrong with it as estimated and
that the estimate at the present time would be somewhere in the area of $5,000.00; the estimate of
$7,693.00 covers the eventuality of having to replace that particular engine, and rebuild it. He stated
that Cummins Diesel do instal it (he does not know what the time limit on the warranty is) and they
guarantee their workmanship; he 'added that a Cummins engine is an exceptionally good engine as far as
this particular model is concerned. In reply to Councillor Gould's Query as to what a new engine would
cost, Mr. MacKinnon felt that a completely new engine would cost approximately $15,000.00. Councillor A.
Vincent stated that from reading the above noted letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner of I
Engineering and Works he was under the impression we were buying a reconditioned engine, and he asked for
the warranty, but he now understands that we are not really doing that - we are taking our engine out and
having it repaired, so that is a different thing.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay",
Read a letter from the City Solicitor in reply to the reQuest made at the Common Council
meeting of October ~4th last that he give an opinion with regard to an opinion submitted to Mr. Charles
Simon, one of the applicants for re-zoning of land on the Narrows Road for the Ace of Clubs Incorporated,
by Mr. Simon's solicitor on the question of the status of non-conforming use of this club property. The
City SOlicitor's letter advises that subseQuent to the public hearing of the said re-zoning application
for the re-zoning of a parcel ,!f land on the Narrows Road from "RS-2" suburban .residential to "B-2"
general business, for the purpose of operating a private club, the solicitor for the applicant raised the
Question that re-zoning was not required in this case to permit the operation of a private club in that
the applicant is protected by the law of non-conforming uses, in that the operation of the club existed
prior to the present residential re-zoning and that such use has not been discontinued. The letter
recalls that the residents in the neighbourhood have objected to the proposed re-zoning, and the solicitor
for the residents has indicated that the law of non-conforming uses does not apply in that such use has
been discontinued for a period longer than four months; and the 'letter states that, at this stage, it
appears that the issue in dispute is with respect to the Question of whether the applicant is permitted
to operate this club under the law of non-conforming uses and thereby make re-zoning unnecessary -- and
further states that it is the City Solicitor's opinion that as this dispute centres around a Question of
'fact and not law, the Planning Advisory Committee has to determine this question after hearing arguments
from both sides.
I
.
......
,....
0't!/JP~~~
.lfe-7.Dhlhj'
~ T .5/moh
F. ;T:ebntb~
/Ie'€' Irf"t?/M
InC'.
I
I
.
I
CtiyJ;lre~
. :JJI'eSklhS
'M11(!dJ$tr?~
~ 3 '1 t/h/())J
:PefeI'Md'
wllt'en/hf
~~-/aw p
(/11/Ph S-i:
I
tveilir?r/PIJ
J}ef:'/WteA
,y/dPh)h/f
I b~-ki6'
.J}r, "THed'WlOl
. C'/-t.
, ..sp~hfp'~.
t?t::>nserY<iiK1
;(one
$~";j,f .s
Qe~^t-
';;I'>ea
Zoh/hd
.:l3H-A~vv
....
121
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the City Solicitor be received
and filed and as recommended therein, the letter received by Mr. Charles Simon from his solicitor on the Question
of non-conforming use status of the property on the Narrows Road having been retained thus making unnecessary the
proposed re-zoning of the property as non-residential, for the private club proposed by the Ace of Clubs In-
corporated, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report.
,Councillor M. Vincent stated that on giving study to the above matter this afternoon so that he may be
more aware of how the Council should handle it, and on talking with some members of staff it appears that this
may very well not be the thing to do, but that we may have to have legal in-put into this matter without having
it sent back to the Planning Advisory Committee. He asked that Mr. Zides comment on this matter. Mr. Zides
advised that there are really two Questions involved: he thinks that the second question will have to go back for
a legal opinion - that is, whether or not it was a private club is not as important to the Advisory Committee as
the fact that it does not call a licensed club a club at all under the by-law - it is included in the definition
of the word term "cabaret", and the Question of whether a club that existed as a private club without a license
continued or not, is entitled by that virtue of the fact that it is there to have the license under our by-law;
so, to him, there are two different things, and that has to be resolved - he does not think that the City Solicitor
should give the Council .an opinion here because he would have to study that matter - Mr. Zides felt that we are
going to need an opinion on that. He stated that the other Question is, that we are in no better position than
anybody else as a group to find out whether the club, in effect, was a continuing non-conforming use because
there are numerous arguments with, unfortunately, the proponents on the one side standing up in front of 100
people who say that it has not been a continuing non-conforming use. He pointed out that it is going to be very
difficult for a citizen body to determine anything - it is really the kind of thing that probably will have to
end up in litigation and be resolved by the courts. Councillor M. Vincent stated that his point in raising the
Question is that he sees no point in referring the matter to the Advisory Committee if, in another week's time,
it is going to be back before Council again for referring it on for a legal decision; he felt that what the
Council has to try to determine perhaps is if, in fact, a justifiable non-conforming use is acceptable there -
and if that is the case then perhaps it need not even go to the Planning Advisory Committee but Council can
either accept or reject the application. He asked if that is what Mr. Zides is saying. Mr, Zides stated that he
might be getting to that, but he does not think he would want to put the City Solicitor in the position of giving
a legal opinion, right here. Councillor M. Vincent replied that he was just trying to determine the proper way
of disposing of the item - he does not want to see it referred to the Advisory Committee, then it come back to
Council with no action to be taken on it.
Mr. Rodgers pointed out that his report deals with the item that was referred, and Mr. Zides raises two
Questions nOW: (1) the interpretation of a private club versus cabaret - that is a separate Question and that is
properly a question for a legal interpretation; but, that is not what was referred to the City Solicitor at the
October 14th Council meeting - the Question that was referred centred around the dispute that exists between two
sides as to whether or not a non-conforming use exists. He stated he does not know, and it is a factual matter.
Councillor MacGowan felt that the letter sort of leaves the Council up in the air, and that she would
like to see the Council take a stand, one way or the other, if the Council thinks that it should be permitted or
if it thinks it should not be permitted. She felt that if there was a motion that it should not be permitted,
she would think that the onus would be on the applicants on behalf of the private club to prove that they had a
right - she thinks they would have more difficulty proving they had a right to build there, than we would after
having passed a resolution denying their reQuest. She stated she therefore would like to see the Council deny
the request. She made the point that it is a residential area and has been empty (that is, the club building)
for quite some time, but when it was in use it certainly created problems - she is very much aware of the problems
that the Council had reported to it.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor with regard to the
reQuest made to Common Council on October 20th last by Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd. for permission to establish a
retail ladies clothing outlet at 237 Union Street, which is located in the area of Union Street that is governed
by a Deferred Widening By-Law, subject to the conditions set forth in the company's letter, advising under the
provisions of a Deferred Widening By-Law, no person is permitted to place, erect, alter or repair any building
unless subseQuently permitted by the Council, and that, however, notwithstanding the provisions of the Deferred
Widening By-Law, Section 61(2) of the Community Planning Act authorizes the Council to permit "the placing,
erecting or altering of a building or structure if the owner of the land consents to make such land available to
the Council in accordance with terms and conditions as may be agreed in writing", and the Act provides for such
an agreement to be filed in the Registry Office and to be binding on any subsequent owner of the land, and
further advising that in view of the statutory provision allowing Council to meet the request of Dreskin's
Limited, and if Council so wishes, he recommends that the Council instruct the City Manager to negotiate an
agreement, and that following negotiations the City Manager will then submit to Council the negotiated items and
request, at that time, that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the agreement -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Deferred Widening By-Law relating to Waterloo Street is handled in
the same manner as in the Union Street Deferred Widening By-Law; that is, can a similar request as in the above
noted case, be made regarding the section of Waterloo Street that is governed by the Deferred Widening By-Law,
and can the Council grant a similar permission for someone on Waterloo Street. Mr. ROdgers replied that the
provisions are there. Councillor A. Vincent asked why it is not done. He recalled that when Dr. Freedman wanted
to build a two-storey office building he was refused permission, next to Fitzpatrick's Funeral Home on Waterloo
Street - he understands that Dr. Freedman was prepared to waive the same conditions. He stated that it is his
desire that all citizens, regardless of who they are, or who the tenant might be, or anything else, or the owner,
be'given the same consideration. He added that this has not been given, in the past. The Mayor noted that the
answer is, that we treat them all the same. Councillor A. Vincent stated that all he wants 'to know is that if
City staff inform anyone they turn down on Waterloo Street they can re-apply and there is the same consideration.
He stated that he is in favour of the procedure that is being followed in the case of Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd.,
provided we treat everyone the same.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, advising that several
months ago the Common Council, upon a recommendation from the Planning Advisory Committee, took steps to amend
the Municipal Plan By-Law and the Zoning By-Law in order to establish a new zone, namely a Conservation Zone, for
the purpose of protecting the salt marsh at Saint's Rest in perpetuity in its natural state and at a recent
Council meeting in which objections were made to the re-zoning, the Council referred the matter to him in order
1,':> ~)
..... ...
t>>'I~ ~h~/t4
2"I'7/i'l~ ~
4>.17 .5i?rl'~tt I DJ?
2oJ7e
~/n-/fs 9('es
R1.:lrtil O/,..ea
P/.aJ7h. /It:lns.
am;n.
?/ann. /lA'ns-
(?Pmm.
S~t/dl'1t-A-J)a
/Jd't/dl1-c/d
eAa/leh
lfe-~bl1ih~
~e- ~()n/nff
l{e- ~ on/J'/:)'
Mnd eJ/7//;7.
37~e/h#r
/l~t9S ~/e!/
hfll'\P'p/"fao'tln
,.,
(
to assure Council of its legal position in this matter prior to third reading; that he has examined the
relevant correspondence as well as the existing law on this subject, and it is his opinion that the
Council may re-zone this area to a Conservation Zone without being legally liable to the owners for
compensation - however, in examining the correspondence and steps taken to date, he cannot assure Council
that if the proposed by-law is attacked that it will be upheld in the Courts - he makes this statement
based on the fact that procedural errors, although slight have been made, and that first and second
reading have been given on two separate occasions - he can state without any reservation that any doubt
will be resolved in favour of the property owner; that in view of the foregoing, he is recommending that
if the Council wishes this area re-zoned based on the Planning Advisory Committee's recommendation, it is
his opinion that the matter and re-zoning procedure be reinstituted from the beginning - that is, that the
Council obtain a further recommendation from the Planning Advisory Committee, and then authorize the
Common Clerk to commence the necessary advertising ,which will eventually lead to another public hearing
and the necessary three readings before enactment -- be received and filed and the matter of the said
proposed by-law amendments be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a further recommendation,
and that the necessary advertising be authorized with regard to the said proposed by-law amendments:
.
1
AND FURTHER that the ,authorities who wrote in regarding the said proposed by-law amendments be
notified of the above resolution and be provided with copies of the City Solicitor's letter.
Councillor Parfitt voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Pye
I
Seconded by ,Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with
reference to the application made by the Maritime Conference of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church for re-
zoning of the lot of land at the northeast corner of Woodward Avenue and Boar's Head Road to permit the
establishment of a project consisting of a nursing home, school and church on this site, (the public
hearing for which proposed Zoning By-Law amendment was on October 14th last and the Council took no action
regarding the reQuested re~zoning pending the Planning Advisory Committee's report), advising that the
Committee ,recommends that the Council re-zone the area of approximately five acres on the said corner from
"R-IB" One-Family Residential to "RM-l" Multiple Residential classification and that the zoning be pur-
suant to a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act limiting the use of this property to
the church and school complex including the following: (1) church with a seating capacity of 400, (2),
school for a student enrollment of 100 with gymnasium, (3) nursing home with a bed capacity of 100 at the
present time - this is to include three different levels of nursing care -- and advising that the ap-
plicant states that it would like to start building in the following order: (1) school by November 1st,
1975, (2) nursing home, spring of,1976, (3) church, fall of 1976 -- and advising that the applicant
further states that the buildings would be constructed of masonry exterior to conform with existing new
structures 'in the surrounding area, and all would be architecturally designed with the overall complex in
mind so as to produce a harmonious development - due care to be taken for adequate parking and green areas
to arrive at a pleasant development and to allow for possible expansion in the future -- and advising that
all of the proposed uses are conditional ones in the proposed "RM-l" zoning classification so that the
Planning Advisory Committee would have to consider each development proposal on its own merit wh~n detailed
plans are available be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
,On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of'The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on the
south side of Woodward Avenue at the intersection of Boar's Head Road with a frontage of 860 feet on
Woodward Avenue and 900 feet on Boar's Head Road, containing approximately 5 acres, from "R-IB" One-Family
Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a first time.
In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's Question, Mr. Barfoot confirmed that the above named land is
serviced now. Councillor A. Vincent asked for information as to what type of school the above mentioned
school is to be. Mr. Zides replied that he cannot be specific as to 'whether the school would be operating
on a seven-day basis, but he got the impression it was going to be what you might term a church school
which is one where they would have Sunday school and intermittent classes during the week, maybe.
.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by, Councillor MacGowan,
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on
the south side of Woodward Avenue at the intersection of Boar's Head Road with a frontage of 860 feet'on
Woodward Avenue and 900 feet on Boar's Head Road, containing approximately 5 acres, from "R-IB" One-Family
Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a second time.
I
,Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
Councillor Davis requested that a letter from the Land Committee be placed on the agenda of this
meetingQf Council.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee with reference to
property situate at 37 Leinster Street, owned by Agnes Daley, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the
property owned by Agnes Daley at 37 Leinster Street is required for the completion of the proposed fire
station of the City of Saint John, and that, due to unsuccessful negotiations with Agnes Daley through her
agent, Mr. Harry Schaven, of Canada Permanent Trust, it was recommended on August 7th, 1975 that this
property be expropriated, and further advising that since that time, negotiations have continued and a
figure of $26,200.00 has been reached for the aCQuisition of this property plus the said owner's legal
.
~
r"
.Expro}''''~
~e-!lspi:::-
I
I SoT .JJ;strIC
,(abQUI" /
~u~e/
f1r:dQS
S~/f/M~nts
J.~'
Jkv. Cb/HPf.
.
l1?ockwood
'/!;Jr4- /jpfbJ
?resarv.
1!~i:'$S
Vf/J';'i>>li ~
mt?h/
.f:.E~~
M~
~uel
f/P/JinL
lle-:lOhlhj'
f8/nfs';ftist-
Hki!r9J t5)Pteiil
I
111/,,5. Ce/bJ/~
/lJe!dnSP/1
/ifPb//e ~om
JJlahh. /ldns.
Cph?m.
.
~
12~3
costs in preparing a deed for the City -- and recommending that this property at 37 Leinster Street and owned by
Agnes Daley be aCQuired for $26,200.00 and that Agnes Daley's legal costs in preparing a deed for the City be
aid, and that the Legal Department be reQuested to stop proceedings for the expropriation of this property -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
In reply to Councillor Gould, who asked for an estimate of the legal costs in the above matter, Councillo
Davis stated that it is a simple deed preparation, and he does not know the cost. Councillor Gould stated he
does not like to see no reference to a figure for legal costs in the above resolution. Councillor Parfitt asked
whether this building is needed right away for the City's purposes. Councillor A. Vincent replied that the City,
in purchasing the property from Agnes Daley, who is in Vancouver, British Columbia, requires the fire station for
the fire engine it purchased a year ago. Councillor Davis pointed out that drilling is now going on, on the
Daley property. Councillor A. Vincent adv~sed that the property is valued at $30,000.00 - our own assessed
figures - and the price was negotiated down from that figure to the above noted $26,200.00, and he stated he is
satisfied with the negotiated price. Councillor Kipping asked if the price covers land and building, and is the
building salvageable. Councillor A. Vincent replied that the building will be demolished so that a new fire
station can be constructed at the corner of Leinster Street. Councillor Davis advised that he does not believe
that this building at 37 Leinster Street can be moved.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from The Saint John District Labour Council
stating that it has come to the attention of the members of the Labour Council that the tonnage of flour and
asbestos now being handled at the port of Saint John in the future will be reduced and that the members are
dismayed at this information and are asking the support of the Common Council in retaining this traffic in the
Saint John area, be referred to the Saint John Port Development Commission for a report.
Councillor Kipping felt that the proper place to which to refer the above named letter is the Com-
missioner of Economic Development, whose department is the one which deals with port matters. He stated he
wanted to register a protest about the way this letter is being referred, and that the City has a Commissioner of
Economic Department, who is responsible for port matters. He asked why are we by-passing him and referring the
letter to somebody else. He noted that, normally, the Council just refer it to staff and the City Manager would
decide that it went to the proper and appropriate person - so, he is asking why are we specifying specifically
where the letter is to go. He added that, in his opinion, this would be the wrong way to proceed, with regard to
the said letter. The Mayor noted that there are various branches in the Economic Development Department, in-
cluding port matters, and that this Department is under the Commissioner of Economic Development, and that
through the process of co-ordination among the civic departments, the item goes to the branch concerned with a
certain item. Councillor Cave noted that Councillor Hodges has more extensive knowledge of port matters than any
of the Council members and expressed confidence that to whomever he moves that the said letter be referred, is
the proper body.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the. above motion.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Rockwood Park Area Preservation Assoc-
iation reQuesting that the Association be provided with information requested at the Council meeting of July
28th, 1975 concerning the anticipated volume of traffic on the Haymarket SQuare by-pass, and also reQuesting that
he model of the Haymarket SQuare-Gilbert Street by-pass be presented and explained publicly to the people of the
City of Saint John and in particular, to the people of Rockwood Court, whose lives are so directly affected, be
referred to the City staff and that as soon as a meeting can be arranged with the Department of Highways and with
the appropriate officials a meeting be held in the said area to try to inform the public of what we are doing in
that area.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the New Brunswick Branch of the United
Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada, advising that the Branch has learned from Mr. A. B. Gilbert, Q; C., one
of its members, that letters dated June 6th and September 1st, 1975 had been written to the Common Council
~urporting to come from the Samuel Holland Branch of the said Association in connection with property commonly
known as "Saints Rest" and a proposal for re-zoning the same, and that to ensure there is no confusion between
the actions of the said Branch and that of the New Brunswick Branch and the Association, it was resolved at the
October meeting of the New Brunswick Branch to write to the Council to clarify the situation; and advising that
apparently there has been some misunderstanding that this letter was authorized a~d spoke on behalf of the United
Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada - and stating this is not correct - that the Samuel Holland Branch was an
independent self-governing branch of the Association and the New Brunswick Branch is informed that it had its
Charter revoked on September 16th, 1975 - and stating that in no way did the Samuel Holland Branch speak or
represent either the National Association or the New Brunswick Branch of the Association; and further advising
that the terms of the National Charter have been examined and it would appear that matters such as re-zoning
could be deemed to be outside the terms of reference of the said Association, and stating that it is their view
that the only relationship they would have in such a matter would be upholding those principles of justice for
which their ancestors and founders of the Province remained loyal to their Sovereign - namely they should resist
arbitrary action or action which would improperly deprive a citizen of his property or rights -- be received and
filed, and a copy of same be provided to the people who originally approached the Council.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Gerald Melanson of 165 St. George
Street, Saint John West, making application for the temporary placement of a mobile home at 214 Riverview Drive,
Saint John West, where services are now available, and advising that it is her intention to seek a permanent
location for the mobile home within one year, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report.
Councillor MacGowan advised that there is some urgency connected with the above matter as these people
would like to place the mobile home on the site in Question and made a down payment on the mobile home, and if
they do not have it located by the end of the month they will not be able to qualify for the $500.00 Assistance
Plan. The Mayor noted that there are other problems, and that we have to be in sympathy with these people who
are having mobile homes. Mr. Zides advised that the Planning Advisory Committee would probably want to find out
the attitude of some of next-door neighbours before it makes a recommendation in regard to this application, and,
obviously, that is going to take a little longer than the end of the month.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
124
s,:J. :PeffhCe
,(aw!$'!'S"
C,n~~,.~nce
~.;;le?/ l";,ti/d'~Nt-
re -/ire a"'?? .
d/SChary'e-L
?t7/I~e .ptfd
mem~e~
C/I~ 5P;j(:>~t>r
C'~/ef?uI" ,tb//C'e
...Ln?u/iry
P~/6011 "e
wdeJ"flsewer
s_e/"Y1'<!~.$ re
Shl/I/J1~On ??d
,(IIIupr /t~e
4"1'/1~~/bns :
J?';;}hJt'ys/~7/.4
.7Uhl1 /I~"h1a~
/lple
61-9' /fa//
f7arA-/~ $~
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Defence Lawyers Con-
ference advising that at its October meeting, the Conference discussed a recent incident at the Saint John
Gaol involving the discharge ofa.firearm, and that at that meeting a resolution was adopted noting that a
recent incident involving a lawyer at the said Gaol resulted in the firing of six shots by a Saint John
City policeman, and that information available to the said Conference indicates that the firing of such
shots may not have been necessary or in the best interests of the safety of other persons in the gaol, and
that the Conference is concerned that the discharge of firearms by a person in public office may become
accepted without Question and feels such should not become an accepted practice in Canada; and urging that
the City of Saint John cause such investigations and inquiries as it may deem proper, into the discharge
of a firearm by a police constable at the said Gaol, to determine the reason for discharge of the firearm,
and if such discharge was justified under the circumstances -- be referred to the Legal Department and to
the Chief of Police for a report.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to have an investigation in the above noted matter,
under oath, as to what really took place. Councillor Hodges asked if there is anything in the Police
Manual regarding this type of thing. In reply, Mr. Barfoot stated he thinks that the matter is properly
referred now to the City Solicitor and the Chief of Police for their in-put. In reply to Councillor A.
Vincent's Question as to whether an inQuiry will be held or whether it will be just a report that will be
received, the Mayor stated he would trust that the City Solicitor and the Chief of Police will come back
to Council recommending action if it is necessary for an inQuiry. Councillor A. Vincent felt that it
really should not come before Council, and stated that if what he is informed has happened, and what
certain people know has happened, he thinks that the Chief of Police should have had a report in by now on
the incident.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the petition from the residents of Shillington
Road in Saint John East, reQuesting the extension of water and sewer services in their area at the earliest
possible date, be referred to the City staff for a report.
The Common Clerk advised that he received notice by telephone today of liQuor license applications
hearings to be held before the New Brunswick LiQuor Control Commission, and that this information is
contained in a letter .prepared by him for the Council's information.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letter written by the Common
Clerk be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Common Clerk advising of
receipt of notification from the New Brunswick LiQuor Control Commission that an application for a dining
lounge and cabaret license from Randy's 1971 Ltd. for premises located on Rothesay Avenue, and an ap=
plication for a beverage room license from John Herman Holt. for premises at 115 City Road (change of
ownership), will be heard at a public hearing of the Licensing Board on the 7th day of November, 1975
commencing at 2.00 p.m. in the Hearing Room, Head Office, .New Brunswick LiQuor Control Commission, Wilsey
Road, Fredericton, N. B., and that the applicant and any person objecting to the application as here-
inbefore mentioned and the representative of any municipality wherein is situated the premises proposed
to be licensed are entitled to be present at the hearing and to be heard personally or by counselor agent
and to produce witnesses and evidence, be received and filed.
Councillor Cave advised that six cars were parked in the passageway to the rear of the City
Hall, today, and he urged that the problem be resolved, in the interests of safety, through regulation of
parking or by using the services of a Commissionaire. Mr. Barfoot advised that the City is taking steps
to re-organize that parking and to issue new parking permits, and to have a Commissionaire posted at the
Chipman Hill entrance and have an appropriate block at the Union Street entrance - and noted that this
will help to resolve the situation. He added that these measures will be taken, very shortly. Councillor
Cave noted that the car of a news reporter is parked in the parking area in a spot where, by the fact that
the car is quite long in length, other cars have difficulty in manoeuvring; he made the suggestion that a
smaller car use this particular parking spot and the news reporter be allocated another parking spot.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Common C
k.
~
.
1
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
f
125
.
1
I
.?ersoJ7l1el
Gm;s-r ;-t6ee
S~/aries
C/ v/e
l?/7Jf1/oyees
iJ/ / tl tt:t-es _../
corredea
I
JJrel?7/er
1i1';;f/ 0 r <>'-
(!om P1 /riee
I!/ttl-l-/,PI ex
a,.,p
. C&uJ7, /l
V/l7eeJ1C
{/rb G/ J7
l7fenl?U/dl
'f1 eflll% re
rY;e.5~~ 7Jr.
. (7tt~tJd/11<
pro/NJrI'I
~c~itlslt7t?11.
Tl10f7l1es!/a
I We9reA-hC
It(7dr~/
-r;,~$-t-Co~
P;:tlf'e4y /
,c1i7crJ7ee An
o // I)/r!!~h
.l7e,;rdl:d/ol?
Z;w/n;l J
; n6ereSLS
,jdJ/?,{ e,(O;
C~ e sIB!!:zJ r..
ll...
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint Jon, on Monday, the third day of
November, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A. Rodgers,
City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C. MacKinnon,
Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations,
and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply, of the
Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning
and Development, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services,
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, C. E. Nicolle, Director of
Recreation and Parks, E. Ferguson, Chief of Police, and S. MacDonald, Manager
of Tourism and Convention Promotion of the Economic Development Department
The Reverend James MacDonald, Minister of Glen View United Church, offered a prayer which opened the
meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
October 20th last, be confirmed.
Councillor Hodges noted that the above minutes Quote, as follows, "Councillor Hodges pointed out that
one of the Council Committees is the Personnel Committee which should bring in the recommendation on how the
salaries are to be arranged, at the next meeting, and the format regarding same." in th~ paragraph following the
vote that was taken regarding salary increases for Non-Union civic employees. He felt.there was some misunder~
standing because it is impossible to prepare such a recommendation and format in such a short time, as it may
take about three years before that is done. He stated he does not know how long it will be before the said
Committee will be bringing in a recommendation in this matter. The Mayor advised that the said Council minutes
will be corrected, by deleting the reference to the time factor.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on October 27th
last, be confirmed.
With reference to the meeting with the Premier of New Brunswick by the Mayor and a select committee
that had been asked for by resolution of Council on October 27th last, Councillor A. Vincent stated he knows that
the meeting is arranged, and that he would like to have a copy of the Brief and to be advised who the committee
~
members are. He stated he would hope that in the said Brief that the Mayor and committee are presenting on
November 4th, it is pointed out that Multiplex is the only industry that is really trying to bring something to
this city and that it deserves the support of this Council at the present time. The Mayor advised that Questions
were presented to Multiplex in order to get basic information and he received the reply today, and he is prepared
to show it to any Councillors who wish to study it, and would appreciate any additional information if the
Council members wish to add to the present information. He advised that the meeting in Question will be held at
12.00 noon in the Premier's office in Fredericton; so far, the Mayor and Councillor Davis are the Council members
who will attend this meeting, but the Mayor is prepared to accept other names, bearing in mind that the committee
should not be too large. The Mayor added that the Premier asked him to keep the committee from Saint John in
this regard a small one. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is a member of the Industry Committee, and he
feels very strongly about this Multiplex matter. Councillor Pye requested that Councillor A. Vincent be asked to
go on this special committee tomorrow, due to his experience and the fact that he is extremely conversant with
that situation. Councillor Green also felt that Councillor A. Vincent should attend the said meeting. The Mayor
stated that from a previous discussion with Councillor A. Vincent he was assured that the said Councillor would
be in Fredericton and would attend with the Mayor and Councillor Davis.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the report submitted jointly by the City Manager and
Assistant Redevelopment Officer, in reply to the reQuest made at the October 20th last Council meeting, listing
nine properties on Chesley Drive (formerly called Chesley Street) which have not as yet been aCQuired for the
Urban Renewal project, eight of these being owned by the Irving interests(Thorne's Hardware Ltd, and Montreal
Trust Company), and one being owned by Property Finance Ltd.; and advising that it is difficult to determine what
costs will be involved in the final aCQuisition of the said Irving properties, and further advising that the
property of Property Finance Ltd. is under renewed negotiation with a recommendation expected in the immediate
future as to whether a figure of compensation has been reached which will be acceptable to all parties concerned
or refer it to the Land Compensation Board for the earliest possible hearing -- be received and filed.
On the Question of the possibility of completing the acquisition of the above named properties, Mr.
Barfoot advised that in general the City has been attempting to meet with the gentleman in charge of negotiating
for the Irving interests but we have not as yet come to a conclusion of negotiations on this point. With reference
to the property of Property Finance Ltd., Mr. Buck advised that this property is scheduled to be heard before the
Land Compensation Board, and it is a question of the Board hearing the case - he believes the case has been
scheduled a couple of times but has been deferred.
(Councillor Kipping entered the meeting)
Councillor A. Vincent asked why the above named Chesley Street properties were not included in the list
of lands involving the Irving interests when the negotiations took place regarding the oil pipeline. Mr. Buck
replied that he does not know, except that there is a separate agreement between the City and the Irving interests
for an exchange of lands on Chesley Street which includes negotiation for these particular properties. He
advised that some of these properties of the Irving interests have been outstanding for some years, some of them
before Land Compensation Board; with regard to the aforementioned agreement between the City and the Irving
interests there is a procedure set up for the land exchange negotiation; for a long period of time it was very
difficult to define the exact boundaries of the land involved but the survey has been completed for some months
ow and the Irving interests are in possession of this survey.
126
1
$'~~~O/d-'
;Jtt~~~
/Y .:;.t? I/d/'~t?t'?/'.s
:PoL.
tlrk h 'l8/76?((/0j> I
Cl?es/e~ flr.
?J-1O/el'E:t
c?o/ tt/.s 1-t/o/1 S
.L f"1//nl' ; J7z?;;?/7€'.st
-<'an'" eKe) &17,;1
{!/-i!1 .5);,//(!/ror
:J)j-/,;;;-f-f!/e/d ..(6j
kft{ /J?me n-r
re nzfc>l /
01; /tt/ cks {(f'6:<.)
~ -6-L .
.;(dh6;;JS-cer
C/6-!f f/a //
ren17 $/l7ce
1ft; 7 ?.,;u'd b!J
,"?roi/- Cove:
J?en-lO// o~
elf:! - O~l7ed
bu./I dl 17.;1$
~tftt/~ .alent-
rel1t-e>I /
C',4 /ti-/~Jr5 (;f6i/
.At-d.
5'd3f/~e/7 Co.l7-
~6'rt?d/o/7 ~t?/
/t-L.
~ J_ /
7eh<<.eY'dJ~
C/-6~ /auhclYy
--<rL
J)J-1!1e/edh/ /7.!J,.
'"Pol/de :P-r:r,
Councillor A. Vincent stated that in the Land Committee he is told that the Saint John Harbour
Bridge Authority and the National Harbours Board are holding up the Chesley Street property aCQuisitions -
however, they are not on the above mentioned list of properties. He asked if all the land that was deeded
over to the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority was deeded back. Mr. Buck made negative reply, and
Councillor A. Vincent repeated his Question. The Mayor observed that they want a large sum of money for
the over-pass. Mr. Buck stated he thinks that the outstanding thing there is that there is only a very
small piece of land which is in the North End Redevelopment.... Councillor A. Vincent interjected that
even if it is only a very small piece of land, he wants it included on the above named list of Chesley
Drive (Street) properties.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
.
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the next meeting
and that Mr. Buck be instructed to bring in the details of every piece of land that is a problem on
Chesley Drive regarding aCQuisition for the North End Urban Renewal Project.
In reply to Councillor Higgins' reQuest for information with reference to land involving the
National Harbours Board, Mr. Rodgers stated that the items listed on the above named report, separate and
apart from Property Finance Ltd., are involved in an agreement that the previous Council and the Irving
interests entered into - he does not know all the details of the agreement, but it certainly was an
agreement with respect to exchange and surveys had to be done and negotiations take place, and Mr. Buck
says that is in the process of happening; the other point raised by Councillor A. Vincent with respect to
the Harbour Bridge Authority and pieces of land, and that sort of thing, he is not familiar enough with
the problem at this moment to say that there are not some small outstanding problems - he does not know -
so, from that point of view he assumes the tabling motion is in order if Mr. Buck cannot say that the
Harbour Bridge Authority land is clarified - he is not sure.
.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillor Cave voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the invoice, dated October 3rd, 1975, from D. Hatfield, Ltd., in the amount of
$19,410.00 for eQuipment rented to the Works Department for the period September 16th to 30th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, approval be given for payment of the invoice, dated October 20th, 1975, from Chitticks (1962)
Ltd. in the amount of $10,025.25, for eQuipment rented to the Water and Sewerage Department, for the..
period October 1st to 15th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the joint report from the City Manager and the Acting
Deputy Commissioner of Property Management, submitting information reQuested at the. Council meeting held
on October 20th last regarding annual rent that has been paid since 1967 by the Province of New Brunswick
for occupying the lower floor of the old Lancaster City Hall building (namely, $2,400.00 annual rent), and
regarding other space rented in the building to various organizations for a nominal fee of $400.00 per
year, and advising that the Recreation Department has used space on a casual basis, and further advising
that during the said period, the building presented a net liability to the City of approximately $1,600.00
per year as the average annual cost to the City between 1967 and 1975 was about $4,000.00 per year to
supply all maintenance, partial janitor service, and to pay taxes, water rates, heat, lights, insurance,
et cetera; and further advising that as of October 1st, 1975 the entire building and parking lot was
leased to the Province of New Brunswick for $10,000.00, including all repairing and expenses to be borne
by the lessee, with the City to bear the cost of insurance and structural repairs; and further advising
that the insurance premium is approximately $400.00 a year and the cost of painting the building will be
deducted from the first year's rent -- be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent asked how many other buildings that are rented below cost today could be
examined by the City staff and some more revenue generated from them. Mr. Barfoot replied that the staff
is in the process of examining all sources of revenue for the City including rental revenues, in pre-
paration for the budget meetings. Councillor A. Vincent asked when could he expect a report. Mr. Barfoot
replied that the subject could be discussed when the said item is reached at the budget meetings, he
believes. Councillor A. Vincent urged that the increasing of revenue and cutting of expenses by the City
must not.be delayed that long, and stated he thinks that the City Manager should immediately assign
somebody to this task, and take action on it.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, payment of the following invoices for equipment rental be authorized, namely:-
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. - to the Works Dept. October 1-15, 1975
(dated October 20, 1975) $ 7,552.00
Stephen Construction Company Limited - to the Works Dept. October 1-15, 1975
(dated October 16, 1975) $ 2,968.00
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
1975-1976 Working Agreement between the City and Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local 61,
includes a clause which provides drycleaning service, to the uniformed members of the force of which there
are approximately 160 and is limited to 2 pair of trousers per month, 1 dress tunic twice per year, 1
nylon pea jacket twice per year and 1 bomber jacket twice per year, and that using this as a basis for
bids, Quotations were reQuested from all dry cleaning companies in the city to provide this service until
December 31st, 1976, and recommending that this contract be awarded to City Laundry Ltd. as shown on the
submitted bid summary, this being the lowest total bid received -- be received and filed and the recom-
mendation adopted.
.
I
I
.
:1
.
1
1
.
.....1
r'"
$UI'j/e!f/h9
.lIttf~es
$Ui"I/6'tfS .It.
fJm~l//eaJ
/ll/e, $ewdiTj'e
Id,ft7P/1
!11/hf!t?so-k,
I /fl/olJ?/h!J'*
/l//j- 0'r.t.
Sedc41/1e
.$ /,pI :;
. 1l1f/l11%l~ /_
:lJea-ff:t /10=
ISJ~:;;'
. q/dj:mje
ren-1f-a
J),lIdrt----h'ef,
,(U
C'~/tf/t1fs
U{p:<.) ,{-t-L
;r; t7JtC-h&
/'e'pp71ff
I$grtt~e ~it'
/T/tt$fa4sn
tv',;;;/l!3r,. d, r
e(})J5tUJlI'~/M
nl'es tf 11)/1s
Sc);~/
Siol'frl $8@e.
7J/9f/1 h!l-f}e!&
'. /J1(JMh (~
re;oyrt;
pl7aJ1e1a/
.$I.g/emeHC::
I
ffe/y')hrj()
~?.' Pr~
R61;( 1(<9
IlS;$; .?6r1lvfi .
I Sbd-J? /;ha
?hJj'/1e sS' ~
I'e~"
J), R,E ~
/-t;l A 8/1 0,
~eW11&tfr
PIaI7-t-
. Co~-,c~
I7s:soelak
..(-fL.
~
127,
,....:....
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be granted for
payment of the invoice from Hughes Surveys Limited, in the amount of $2,035.50, covering fees for surveying the
Grandview Avenue sewerage lagoon.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the City Manager, approval be
granted for payment of the invoice from 3M Canada Limited, in the amount of $2,321.36, for the purchase of
Scotchlite reflective sheeting used in the manufacture of signs.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
authority be granted for payment of the invoice, in the amount of $6,847.98, from the Admiral Beatty Motor Hotel
covering expenses incurred at Saint John Port Days, October 6th and 7th, 1975.
It was noted in the above regard, that approximately $10,000.00 has been deposited in a special account
in the Port Development Commission budget derived from registration fees from delegates, and that invoices are
being submitted for payment against this special account, and it is expected that Saint John Port Days will be
self-supporting. It was further noted that the above $6,847.98 payment will be recovered by the City from the
said special account.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manag~r, payment of the fOllowing
invoices for eQuipment rental be authorized, as follows:-
D. Hatfield, Ltd. - to the Water Dept.
September 16-30, 1975
(dated October 3, 1975)
September 16-30, 1975
(dated September 30, 1975)
$ 17,275.65
$ 9,299.20
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. - to the Water & Sewerage Dept.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the report for September of the Water and Sewerage Division
of the Works Department, be received and filed.
Councillor Parfitt indicated she would like to receive information explaining the jump in the water
consumption in the Spruce Lake-Musquash area as shown in the above named report. Mr. Barfoot replied that a
report will be supplied in that regard, next week.
Noting that the above report refers to a new storm sewer at the Forest Hills School, Councillor M.
Vincent asked what progress has been made in this matter at the present time. Mr. MacKinnon replied that that
portion of the Capital programme has yet to be finished as far as the storm sewer is concerned, but the portion
affecting the school and the capital monies to be shared by the Province is completed, he understands; the
sodding in that area has been completed; we have yet to do some work that does not involve the sodding, at the
far end of the project.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report for September of the Division of Technical and
Inspection Services, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the month of September, be
received and filed.
Councillor Parfitt noted that the above report lists payment of $1,500.00 of professional fees re-
garding the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme and the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Programme in the
South End, and stated that she knows that these Programmes are funded from the central government by the City
paying the account and then recovering the cost from those accounts, so, actually, it has not cost the City
anything.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the progress report, dated October 1975, regarding the
Neighbourhood Improvement Programme and the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Programme in the South End of
the city, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services in
connection with projects that were undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
1.
Hazen Creek Sewage Treatment Plant
Godfrey Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 33,
dated September 30, 1975
$ 34,399.45
$ 446.00
12&
~
..7), R, EE 2.
S, ;J; trJ a.J CJ Y'
ftlat-er $U/jlf,
$f'ru~e ,.(c;>.r,e
/n iake
C.4a/71J?/9; fJ +: 3.
A.;;I/rewood
L10/./ $eU/er
K2t7~YJ?e ~-&t.
&u seW.59!1;
6/fJ'pro~24es
/1,J)..:r: ~~d.
CoJjJ/t-OlI
fJro./eczfs
$etver<l-w.;;{er-
ma/n
~dJret</(N~ /It/e,
'JJ.;u~//h e %'
1f/i3~-t-fro()1r #,',1
OeecU1 #"edWd
al7::/md, k
;;'tf-orr/?1 S6'<</er
bJreeI7c&/e S.d-
d/'J/,.
Ch/!f;cb(fj?6:;)
Xt-a.
/!re>>aS
/1. .J),I ~?-L
1?oCG:l C'P7?'.Je)'f,
CO.
11b?ff.O ~(' fl.{g.
.9'y.81f~/?JS ~~d.
/lrenas /i!e
Inalr; i?j et(.(/';>-
meh-r
Saint John Major Water Supply
Spruce Lake Intake
A. D. I. Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 5,
dated September 30, 1975
$ 13,957.54
$ 913.86
Champlain & Lakewood Heights Collector Sewer
Ecodyne Limited
Supplying two package Pumping ,Stations
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention 3%
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 2,
dated October 27, 1975
$ 34,210.00
36,890.80
1,106.72
31,357.18
$ 4,426,90
4.
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
A. D. I. Limited
Engineering Services for Western Approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress'Estimate Number 42,
dated September 30, 1975
$ 181,091.16
$ 3,079.43
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the penalty factors that have been existing in the causeway
approaches are being deducted from the cost of the project as the progress payments are being made, with
regard to item 4 in the above list of progress payments. In making affirmative reply, Mr. MacKinnon
stated that this particular payment is to the consultants and not to the contractor; the progress pay_
ments that are being made to the contractor are being made taking into consideration the penalties on the
project..
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates 'and approved invoices for engin-
eering services, regarding the following named Capital projects:-
.
I
I
.
1. Lakewood Avenue, Pauline Street and Westbrook Avenue
Ocean Westway Construction Ltd.
Construction of Sanitary Sewer and Watermain
Total value of contract $ 123,687.75
Total work done, Estimate Number 3 113,263.80
Retention 16,989.57
Payments previously approved 45,432.97 I
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated October 19, 1975 $ 50,841. 26
2.
Greendale 48-inch Storm Sewer
Chitticks (1962) Ltd.
Supply and install 48-inch storm sewer
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 8
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated September 20, 1975
$ 88,102.00
77,586.40
75,258.80
8,
$ 2,327.60
3.
Saint John Community Rinks
(a) A. D. I. Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 13,
dated September 30, 1975
$ 130,253.06
$ 1,275.44
(b) Rocca Construction Co.
Erection of three arenas
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 9
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 9,
dated October 14, 1975
$2,913,949.00
2,888,820.00
433,323.00
2,364,829.40
$ 103,292.00
(c)
Amfro Refrigeration Systems Ltd.
Moving EQuipment from Spruce Lake Pumping Station
and Musquash to the Rinks
Invoice Number 1679, dated September 30, 1975
3,979.00
$
In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's reQuest for information concerning the above item of payment
~ Amfro Refrigeration Systems Ltd., Mr. Barfoot advised that the equipment in Question was stored at
Spruce Lake because it was delivered prior to the arenas being put up. Mr. MacKinnon added that the details
on the invoice show that the figure of $3,979.00 is made up of $1,515.00 (50 1/2 hours crane rental at
$30.00 per hour) and $2,464.00 (112 hours for two men of the said company) for moving eQuipment from Spruce
ake pumping station to the three arenas, and that the movement of equipment was delayed by bad weather -
two men of the company were involved in this moving work; the eQuipment had been stored for a number of
onths prior to installation - the City purchased this eQuipment ahead of time because of its availability
and cost. Councillor A. Vincent asked if there is any responsibility on the manufacturer, when the City
nys this expensive eQuipment, to deliver it within so many days when the City wants it. Mr. MacKinnon
eplied that this would apply under normal conditions; however, on this particular project when the City
decided to actually build the arenas there was Quite a long period of discussion on the actual contract and
contract price - it was, however, decided to go ahead and the equipment was ordered some time ahead - as he
ecalls, it was here before the wintertime and the City had to store it - the contractor, in turn, bid a
rice which was contingent upon sending the eQuipment immediately and the City had to store it - there was
o alternative. Councillor A. Vincent stated that his question is: the contractor in question, in negotiating
is fee, did he not allow a reasonable mark-up on this eQuipment and, therefore, he should be responsible
-.
I
I
.
~
,...
129
.
I
7/1l?l?:?
$,4 l?,h/.(ah
,
lVurse/"'ll?s
I ~-id.
.
I
3bo kV-df:-
meJ7-6- ,j"--6Z
lfealCrc;;
~td.
~tCl-I- ~~
1/1"-1- dn,
/l1ode Chs-(-,
.7'a,*$~~
$ClI7-1C/
Claus
rJJ~ndde
I
liP 1/ da!/
st-rf'et-
II/hi-/>>j
I
SClJ7l-e>I
Claus
~arc;lde
{I" 17J/7J ;- -cw
.
....
for taking care of it. He stated the City is building three arenas when it should have built four - he is com-
pletely in favour of these arenas and feels the City should have three more arenas" - but, he thinks that the City
has paid an awful lot of money. He asked if the" City paid ~"~ark~up"onthis"eQ~i~ent ~he ~t~ted that tttne City
did so, then this invoice should be paid by this contractor. Mr. MacKinnon stated that he did not have the
contract with him at the meeting, but as he recalls it, as part of Mr. Rocca's contract the equipment was not part
of it - the City purchased the refrigeration eQuipment separately and stored it and delivered it to the rink.
Councillor Higgins recalled that when the Council decided to build the arenas and there was a rising cost of steel
which was critical then, they said that even though the tenders came through the City would have to wait two years
to get steel - and Amfro came in ahead of time, the City having pretendered that - which meant that the City had
all this eQuipment on hand when it went out to tenders with Rocca and told Rocca what the City had at that time,
and to build around it.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
authority be granted for payment of the invoice of Sheridan Nurseries Ltd. in the amount of $3,632.50, for the
purchase of 225 assorted trees for beautification.
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's Question, Mr. Barfoot advised that the City obtains these trees
direct from the nursery at Georgetown, Ontario and sends its own eQuipment to the nursery for the purpose of
transporting the trees back to Saint John. Councillor A. Vincent raised the Question as to whether the City's
insurance covers the truck when it is outside the province of New Brunswick, and stated if it is true that the
insurance coverage does not apply outside New Brunswick he would like the person in charge of insurance coverage
to make sure that the next time this truck travel outside our province occurs, the truck is properly insured. He
asked for information from Mr. Park as to whether the present policy the City has on its vehicles provides for
such coverage, and added that unless the City has such coverage he has been informed that the City will be in
trouble if there is an accident. He stated that the information he has is that the present City insurance does
not cover all vehicles outside this province. Mr. Park replied that he will look into this Question and report
back to Council. In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's question as to where these trees were used, Mr. Barfoot
stated that it was in the fall planting programme of trees, but he does not have the specific locations. Coun-
cillor MacGowan, chairman of the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee, advised that these trees were
ordered primarily for Chesley Drive, and some of the locations they were used in are, the fire station, and at
Glen Falls School. Councillor Kipping felt that probably the rest of these trees were used for replacements for
broken trees.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, recommending that Heat
Craft Ltd. be paid the sum of $4,500.00 for the sewage lift station on the Gault Road, and explaining the details
surrounding this matter, which involves a sub-division agreement between 360 Development Limited and the City of
Saint John for development of certain lands on the Gault Road, being a portion of Monte Cristo Park Sub-division
and the fact that the developer was unable to complete the work involved in the said sub-division agreement of
February 13th, 1974, and that as the said developer has not been able to pay the above noted invoice, Heat Craft
Ltd. have requested the City to pay the amount as the City reQuires the pumping station operational in order to
service this sub-division -- be received and filed and the recommendation.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for further information.
Councillor M. Vincent voted "nay" to the tabling motion, which was carried.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that the
Chairman of the Santa Claus Parade Committee has written to the Mayor and Common Council, reQuesting that the
Council act in the early formation of the 1975 Parade Committee, and that the purpose of the Santa Claus Parade be
clarified, the involvement of the entire community be solicited, and a decision made as to the City's financial
involvement, and that the Commissioner of Economic Development recommends that the Council take early action to
make fWlds available and to appoint a Committee to ensure continuance of the annual Parade, and further advising
that the General Manager of the Power Commission of the City of Saint John has informed the City that the estim-
ated cost for the Christmas decorative lighting programme for 1975 will be approximately $12,500.00 -- and sub-
mitting information on the background involvement of the City in these two programmes over the past years -- and
submitting the following recommendations, namely:- (a) that the Chairman of the Santa Claus Parade Committee be
informed that the City is not agreeable to sponsoring the Santa Claus Parade from the general tax revenue, but
will donate its facilities through the Department of Economic Development to spearhead the work of the Citizens'
Committee, who must seek financing from the merchants and commercial enterprises of the city, who might wish to
participate in the benefits of an annual Santa Claus Parade; (b) that the City of Saint John fulfill the terms of
the March 29th, 1971 Council resolution and undertake the Christmas decorative lighting programme to the extent
advised by the Power Commission, namely, $12,500.00, funds for this programme having been budgeted for 1975 - and
that this lighting programme be in effect from December 15th, 1975 to January 5th, 1976 -- be received and filed
and the recommendations contained therein adopted.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Chairman of the Santa Claus Parade Committee, reQuesting
the early formation of a Citizens Committee for the 1975 parade, clarification of the purpose of the parade, the
soliciting of the involvement of the entire community and a decision by Council as to the City's financial in-
volvement in the said parade, and advising that the members of the 1974 Committee would be happy to assist in
setting up the new Committee and strongly recommend the continuance of this annual parade and wish the new Com-
mittee every success.
During ensuing discussion, Councillor Green commented that the Santa Claus Parade was being organized at
this late date, and stated he wishes to object if the Council intends to go along with having no Santa Claus
Parade - he expressed his support of the section of the above motion dealing with the Christmas decorative lighting
programme. Mr. MacDonald advised that there are-25 entries to date for the 1975 Santa Claus Parade and publicity
regarding the Parade is being held in abeyance until the reaching of a decision by Council at this meeting con-
cerning~he City's involvement in the Parade; there is a Santa Claus Parade Citizens Committee this year; part of
the problem of the Committee is that it feels it is charged with the responsibility of putting on the parade, but
that it should not also be charged with responsibility of finding the necessary funding to see that the parade is
a success. He suggested that the Council may wish to set up a finance committee to solicit the necessary financial
1~10
..,
SaJ'7~ cYa&?S
~l'1dde
/10 //"dag
~red-
/I)'/d-/)7.J
support from the business community. He estimated that approximately $2,800.00 will have to be raised
this year to finance the parade. Councillor Kipping felt that the City should not sponsor the Santa Claus
Parade from the general tax revenue of the City, and that the parade is a matter for the merchants and the
commercial enterprises of the city to finance. He noted that the City has been placed in the position of
taking over costs (for Christmas decorative lighting) which were never intended to be taken over by the
City, that the Merchants' Association or its predecessor were to have carried out, and now, if the City
were to listen to some speakers it would find itself saddled with the entire cost of the Santa Claus
Parade, including its organization - he felt that the City in no way should become involved with that kind
of a thing. He asked what City facilities would be donated through the Department of Economic Development
to spearhead the work of the Citizens Parade Committee. Mr. Barfoot replied that it consists mainly of
staff time involved in trying to assist the said Committee organize the parade. Mr. MacDonald advised
that the date set for the parade is November 22nd. In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's Question as to
where the letter from the 1974 Citizens Committee for the Santa Claus Parade has been since it was first
submitted by the Committee Chairman some time ago in September, the Mayor advised that the said letter
came in to his office and he set it aside for the time being and spoke to a couple of people about getting
the parade organized - on going through the file he later found the letter and then took it to either Mr.
MacDonald or Mr. Baird - the problem of holding the letter over. was the fault of the Mayor and he accepts
full blame for it.
.
I
Copies of the 1974 budget regarding the Santa Claus Parade were distributed to the Council
members by Mr. MacDonald at the commencement of discussion of this matter.
I
Councillor M. Vincent, speaking from experience with Santa Claus Parades personally, of several
years back, felt that the time may very well come for the Council to decide whether it wants a Santa Claus
Parade, or it does not want one. He stated he would rather see the matter come before Council that either
we are going to support a Santa Claus Parade as a city, or pass it back to where it belongs - that is, the
citizens. The Mayor recalled that we were in the same position in 1974 and he called Mr. MacDonald and
Mr. A. P. Gregory in and from that meeting a Citizens Committee was formed, chaired by Mr. Gregory, and
the parade was brought about. He added that efforts to have people sponsor the parade were not successful
last year, hence the formation of the Citizens Parade Committee. Councillor M. Vincent stated he agrees
there is a need for a Santa Claus Parade, and he commends those who have worked hard over the past number
of years in producing these Santa Claus Parades; he thinks that the Council should either support them, or
at. this time completely get out from such support.
.
Councillor Higgins felt that it is too late for the said Citizens Committee to accomplish the
setting up of this parade by the date above mentioned, and he felt that if we are going to make any
recommendation at all regarding a parade we should go "first-class" or not at all - because he thinks it
is too late to do anything about the City Manager's letter's reference to the parade arrangements financing
he will go along with the City Manager's recommendation. He added that out of the tax revenue the City is
paying $12,500.00 for the Christmas decorative lighting, and he feels that this is a pretty fair under-
taking on the part of the Common Council. With regard to the timing of the Santa Claus Parade, Mr.
MacDonald felt that the.parade can be ready for November 22nd. He added that many people volunteer their
services to assist with the parade, and this is very encouraging.
Councillor Green, speaking in support of having a Santa Claus Parade, noted that this event
attracts shoppers to the city from outlying areas, and he felt that the City in the interests of publicity 1
for the City should be willing to pay something towards the cost of the parade, such as the sum of $500.00,
and if parade organizers do not need that money they would return it to the City. He felt that by so
doing, the City would be showing its good faith that it wants a parade.
Councillor A. Vincent asked why the City Manager was making the recommendation that is contained
in his letter, at this late hour. Mr. Barfoot replied that he made this recommendation as soon as the
material reached his office concerning the Santa Claus Parade and Christmas lighting; the Christmas
lighting is a continuation of a previous year's policy; the Santa Claus Parade is really the recommendation
of the City Manager that this should be the responsibility of the merchants of the city, and not of the
Council. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the City Manager's cut-back programme had anything to do with
this recommendation. Mr. Barfoot made negative reply, stating it did not, explicity, not directly.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is supporting the Santa Claus Parade. He warned that the Council is
going to get what it is asking for if it continues this kind of measures regarding the parade. He stressed
that Saint John is a "boom town" of North America, and has the greatest work force presently in North
America. He noted that we are trying to bring in one of the largest national chain stores, to locate
across the street from City Hall, and he felt it is not good publicity for the City if that chain store
should get the impression that the City cannot afford a Santa Claus Parade. He asked that the Council
members consider the position it is in. Councillor Higgins pointed out that the Council in considering
this matter is not discussing the aspect of money, but of the principle involved of whether or not the
Common Council of Saint John should give money towards a Santa Claus Parade, or back a deficit regarding
such a parade.
.
Councillor M. Vincent received clarification from the City Manager at this point that the
recommendation in his letter regarding the Santa Claus Parade funding is against changing the responsibility
for presenting this parade, namely, that it is the responsibility of the Saint John Merchants Association
Ltd. which is set forth in the Council resolution of March 29th, 1971.
I
Councillor MacGowan stated that if the Council does not want to take finances for the parade
from the City coffers, that to prove that this is a community that is interested in the welfare of our
children and the joy that an event like this engenders, it is her suggestion that a certain radio station
in this city (that seems to be able to raise funds whenever the need is there) could make an appeal for
funds from citizens to finance the parade - and perhaps sufficient funds could be raised in this way to
cover the cost of the Christmas decorative lighting, as well.
I
Councillor Gould pointed out that the above mentioned March 29th, 1971 Council resolution
clearly sets forth the policy: the City took over from the Saint John Merchants Association Ltd. the
Christmas light programme, and the Association, through the co-operation of the Promotion Department of
the City, accepted the task of presenting the annual Santa Claus Parade; and this policy has not been
changed.
Councillor Davis stated he finds it hard to believe that there are not groups in the city who
will not sponsor the parade in Question, and he felt that the Council should give them a chance to sponsor
it; he is sure that the radio stations would launch an appeal for funds, but felt that is rather degrading,
to have to use such means to appeal for a Christmas parade. He felt that the Council should give the
matter over to Mr. MacDonald to see if he can raise a group to sponsor the parade, and if he cannot do
that, he would come back to Council and the Council would as a desperate measure do the parade sponsoring
itself. The Mayor stated that if the Council will leave the matter with Mr. MacDonald and himself, he is
sure they can bring about the sponsoring of the parade.
.
~
,....
1~31
.
iliJ."76 a
Cl a<< ~
?61/7dd e
CV'/7,l.M/~
I $JamlPo~
'Pc:/J'l!r ('iM)>
h~a.$e .5(d,
7(:J7deJ'lS
.z-o be
I ea//6?(i
.a~aln
.
I
.
I
I
S ttb -t:(/ (/,
a~ J'leemaJ1
/YI/Icf/;e/l
. cO/)?~
/I1/Jl7I-eO>/d.
7G1rff $l;,b-cz1
lll...
Councillors A. Vincent and Green voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould.
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letter from Mr. A. P. Gregory, Chairman
of the 1974 Santa Claus Parade Citizens Committee, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that three
tenders were received for the Shamrock Park building, Phase I (Recreation Capital Job Number 610.2) and the
lowest bid (that of W. E. Kelly Limited of Saint John, N. B.) for $360,000.00 exceeded the estimated cost of
$185,000.00, and that at a meeting of Council held on October 6th last the Council rejected all tenders and asked
the City staff to investigate other alternatives and report back to Council as soon as possible, and advising
that negotiation with the low bidder revealed a possible cost-saving of less than twenty per cent, that the
possibility of inviting other tenders was looked at but was not pursued as proper tender procedures have already
been followed using the bid depository and many contractors are fully occupied at this season, and that the third
alternative - to go to a new design on a new site - was examined very carefully and substantial cost savings can
be achieved by moving the building away from the rock and re-designing it as a single-storey building - if this
procedure is followed, new designs could be prepared in time for a March tender call when conditions may be more
stable and a better bid might be forthcoming - the cost of such a building would be more in line with the level
of services to be provided at Shamrock Park; and recommending that the building in Question be re-designed by the
architects on a new site and that tenders be called in order to permit the beginning of construction by May,
1976 -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Gould expressed his concern in the above matter because it means that once again we are not
meeting our budgeted allotment of money that has been set aside, which means really that we are going behind
again. He felt there could be a policy of having a back-up project so that this amount of money could be used
this year if the allotted project falls through, instead of projecting that amount of money into the next year
and including it in next year's budget.
In reply to Councillor MacGowan, who asked what is the projected completion date for this Shamrock Park
building, Mr. Barfoot stated that the finished product can be expected by August of 1976 but although it is
planned to call tenders for next March, the tenders may be called earlier because the staff is going to drive to
get this project done as soon as possible.
Councillor M. Vincent felt that the City is losing the continuity of expenditure in some of its pro-
grammes that were budgeted for and, conseQuently, they are deferred and deferred and sometimes are never done.
He asked if it is the practice of the City staff to re-negotiate with a tenderer on a bid to see if the tender
bid can be lowered as a result of negotiations, and then if that happens, award that tender to that person. Mr.
Barfoot stated that in carrying this out the staff was guided by the practice of the Saint John Construction
Association; according to the procedures of the Construction Association, the first alternative that should
always be explored is to meet with the architect and the low bidder, to examine the plans, to jointly see if cost
savings can be worked out which will result in sufficient cost savings to allow the project to go ahead as
originally intended - this procedure was gone through by the City staff - however, the cost savings that were
estimated to be realized on a joint basis were not sufficient for the staff to recommend this particular course
of action - it is still really too expensive a building for the uses to which it is going to be put.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for the name of the architect regarding this project, and then asked that
it be explained for the information of the Council members that we do not lose capital budget money - it is only
the maintenance money that is lost in the budget if it is not spent this year; he asked if the City Manager could
not agree that this building is over-designed, at present - and he asked what guarantee we have, if we engage the
same architect, that.that architect will not come in with an estimate of $185,000.00 again, or whatever it may
be, and that the tender price come in at $175,000.00 higher, or almost 200%. Mr. Barfoot supplied the following
answers:- the architect is Purdy & Simpson; it is correct that if the capital budget is not spent, it is not
bonded for - it is not a carryover - an item is bonded for after it is expended; the building was designed in its
present site with reinforced concrete floors and is a building of two storeys.in height to fit against a rock
bank - that location was decided upon, to serve as a central location for the major development of Shamrock Park
for a ballfield in the lower area; since this design was concluded and since these prices came in, we have looked
again at this policy and at its last meeting the Council looked at the recommendation to develop Lancaster
Memorial Field as the major ball facility - and so one of the uses for this proposed building was caused to be
over-designed for the use to which it now would be put, and a one-storey building is now being contemplated which
will be a much more economical structure.
Councillor Parfitt expressed the desire to have "teach-in" regarding the Lancaster Memorial Field and
Shamrock Park matters and the expenditures that have been made, or are contemplated, with respect to same, so
that she can be fully aCQuainted with the whole picture before voting in the matter under discussion.
Councillor A. Vincent suggested that it may save the City many thousands of dollars if all Council
members who so wished to, were to pre-view the drawings before they are finally approved by the architect,
because the Council members might be able to put some in-put into the project. He expressed the opinion that the
design of the building on which tenders were called is definitely over-designed.
Councillor Cave noted that the City is still going to have to go to the architect, in the design of a
building for Shamrock Park, and he therefore has to vote against the motion, because he is opposed to going to
the architect.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors M. Vincent, Cave, Parfitt, Gould and A.
Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that Mr.
Mitchell Carr is developing four lots on the Gault Road, involving upgrading 200 feet of street and installation
of 300 feet of services in the Monte Cristo Park Sub-division, and that this will make land available for the
construction of four single family homes, and that the developer's servicing plans met with the approval of the
Engineering and Works Department, and further advising that according to the City's sub-division policy, the City
will be responsible for the following costs:- (1) water materials (watermains, gate valves, et cetera) $4,900,
(2) sanitary sewer materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $16,00.00, (3) storm sewer materials (pipe, manholes,
catch basins, et cetera) $2,600.00 -- making a total of $9,100.00 -- and recommending that the above expenditures
be approved for water and sewerage materials to be charged to the 1975 capital budgets, and that the Mayor and
1S:2
~
IYllic/;e// {};rr
gtt}-tl/'I0a~
me ;-yC-
/1?o176'e 0:/:::-zf6
'ParA- SteP-dlJ/,
pe~r /Y7CJ)J<:!e
~oJ7d
{j~tf-d/t/,
$ erf//c!6'S ?tl~C-
{bttn,
/l V/l7eel7t-
ft/cder cr sewer>
sert//ags ; n
'(Jld~(/e/ord
land
GfJ?Pf/e 1Jd.
{/r,pgjJ1 '?eJ?t3U):>l -
:7}oa!r $-1-; dlre~,
j?rfJpfrtj''<:;cy<</
(Jo$-/.5 re~,f/'-t-
5'tel/eI1:T 1l/6-Ke
f/n$&M& 'p11f'/7//
tlh/I/9'Si"CY ~
1fl/1/ld!Je /If/es
~/f?t</o()cf-4.
Cdf?/~/ jl"oj
L7 l.
{}"tJ$Ceh'6- /7't/e,
5".,riVl/~/7!1. $ewe.
$/tnfYSe {J/lCNe
-CeilS .4 -h'[
:OMsk/it':> /
,1o;ncaS-cerAl1
(See "P,133)
Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in due course -- be received and filed
and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if there is a performance bond posted in the above matter, at the
present time, in the possession of the Common Clerk. The Common Clerk replied that this has not been
done, as yet. Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the matter be tabled
until a performance bond 'is in the 'hands of the City. Mr. Barfoot advised that on the sub-division
agreements the City reQuires the developer to buy the materials and the City retains that money as the
guarantee of the performance of the developer's obligations under the sub-division agreement and this
money is paid to the developer as soon as all his obligations have been paid - so, there is no actual
performance bond per se. In regard to this particular matter, he advised that the City has the money in
its possession. Further discussion ensued during which Mr. Barfoot gave additional explanation of the
procedure that is followed regarding the said services. In view of the fact that this explanation did not
suffice at this time, Mr. Barfoot advised that he will provide the explanation of this policy in writing,
more fully.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that some months ago, with the approval of the Council members,
he asked the City staff that we review this whole sub-division policy and bring in recommendations. He
stated he does not think the City's present policy in this regard is a good one; however, he will support
the above noted sub-division agreement, but he wants a commitment that some up-to-date policy be given.
He stated he can show the Council a place where the City put in the sewers and the water, and everything,
in the City of Saint John in 1956 and we have not got one building on it, yet. He stated that, to him,
that is not good financing, under the tight-money scheme.
Councillor Cave stated he would like to know where the sub-division is that Councillor A.
Vincent referred to, where we extended water and there are no buildings, bearing in mind that people who
have pollution problems out on the Black River Road are looking for water services. Councillor A. Vincent
replied that he did not describe it as a sub-division, but as a place where the City extended services.
He added that he will show the said location to Councillor Cave.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the joint report from the City Manager and the Com-
missioner of Finance, in reply to the reQuest made at the October 27th last meeting of Common Council for
information relating to ,property aCQuisition costs in the Urban Renewal development-Dock Street area, be
received and filed.
Mr. Barfoot advised that the above report reQuires a correction in that the reference to Grove
Construction ($2,000.00) should not be included as that item has not been paid as it has been tabled;
therefore, that item should be deleted from the report.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table for one week
a detailed breakdown of the owners of the land and buildings and of the
until the
legal
Council is supplied with
costs of negotiations.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, in reply to the
letter submitted on October 6th last by Mr. Steven J. Aitken of 63 Candlewood Lane regarding unsightly
onditions in the University and Millidge Avenues and Candlewood Lane area, which Mr. Aitken asked be
rectified, be received and filed and a copy of the City Manager's letter be forwarded to Mr. Aitken for
his information.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engin-
ering services, regarding the following named capital project:-
Sanitary Sewer Crescent Avenue
Sunrise Contractors Ltd.
Total value'of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
.
I
I
.
I
.
$ 25,200.00 I
22,680.00
3,402.00
Nil
Number 1,
1975 $ 19,278.00
approyed
payment, Progress Estimate
dated October 31,
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that
with regard to the reQuest from Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd. for permission to make alterations and improve-
ments to the building at 237 Union Street in order to establish therein a retail ladies clothing outlet,
the City Solicitor has advised Council that it is permissible for an agreement to be negotiated to allow
this construction to take place as it lies within the area covered by the Deferred Widening By-Law on
Union Street, and further advising that he has met with I~. Hamburg, President of the said company, and
recommends that the Council permit the owner to make alterations and improvements to the property in
Question, with the provision that the City not be liable to compensate the owner for the value of the said
alterations and improvements to the property after the expiration of fifteen years in the event that the
land is acquired by the City for the purpose of street widening, and that if in the event the land is
reQuired by the City for the purpose of street widening prior to the expiration of fifteen years, that the
City be liable for compensation to the owner to the limit of $30,000.00 of the original value of the
improvements at an amount which declines by one-fifteenth each and every year, and further recommends that
the Mayor and Common Clerk execute an agreement on the City's behalf based upon these conditions -- be
received and filed and the recommendations adopted.
I
.
....1
,....
.13~3
.
1
I. 1I~111~/-j~
Aid,
W#"jotl
JJ/7E'S4'hS
,(.;ync.;J~r
.t:-t-d,
:JJefr;/'f'ed
w/d~)1;l7j
.~ 31 a/Ill?
S-r:
I
L1~ III cz(',
?oll'<!eVl/f.
S.X'J)eM
~aJ4/!t,e/'s
Cp 17'1(: /1enee
$Jpd/l1;J
ihc/tle nt-I
e?,fu./12fq:~o
r;Po //aI.7Jept:
C/-6-f;!
Sol/{J/?for
I
I
.
ll...
Councillor Davis retired from the Council table during consideration of the above matter, stating he
has no interest in this particular building, but he does have an interest in:thebuilding adjacent to it and any
policy that is established regarding 237 Union Street will apply to the property in which he has an interest.
Councillor A. Vincent suggested that the City not have any liability in the above matter, but just give
permission to the company to proceed with the alterations and improvements and if and when the City wants the
land for street widening purposes, the company within one year's notice has to forfeit that expenditure. He
added that this is the policy that applied to the other applicants and there was no money involved in the other
permission that were granted. Mr. Barfoot replied that the Council has already passed a recommendation, similar
to that regarding Dreskin's, as in the case of Tri-Town Realty on Union Street. Councillor A. Vincent stated he
feels that, with regard to the Deferred Widening By-Law regulations, we should treat all citizens alike - either
every citizen repairs his property at his own risk, .or.do away with the said by-law. He recalled that when
Holtzman's on Waterloo Street got permission to make improvements to their building, the City did not guarantee
to recompense them regarding such improvements if the necessary land is reQuired for street widening, which is
why he is making the point that all citizens should receive the same treatment. He stated he will support the
Dreskin's reQuest if the permission to them uses the same wording as was used in the case of the permission to
Holtzman's. Councillor Parfitt noted that Dreskin's were forced to move from their Dock Street location because
of the City's decision, and so on, and stated she does not think the City is assuming much liability in the case
under discussion. She stated.she would recommend that the building at 237 Union Street be occupied, and the City
would get some revenue from it, in the meantime, bearing in mind it might be some time before any change would
come in the width of Union Street, at this location.
mission
with no
Barfoot
Councillor Cave stated he would like to have a report as to whether or not in the case of the
granted to Holtzman's we just agreed to that company renovating the Waterloo Street building in
cost to the City should the City take the land reQuired for street widening three years hence.
stated that at the moment, he could not recall that arrangement.
per-
the front
Mr.
On motion of Councillor .A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that this matter be laid on the table until the information reQuested
by Councillor Cave is provided at the next meeting of Council.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors Parfitt, Higgins, MacGowan and
Gould voting "nay".
Councillor Davis resumed his seat at the Council table.
Councillor Higgins reminded the Council that during the time the above matter is tabled for another
week for more information, Dreskin's are waiting another week, and he pointed out that the Council has given
several companies and individuals permission to proceed with improvements in the Deferred Widening By-Law area _
it is more or less an agreement worked out between the Council, the City staff and the person who wishes to
renovate, and there is no great problem involved. He stated he cannot see the point of asking for information,
and then taking a person's livelihood away from him. Councillor Cave stated he is in favour of giving Dreskin's
the permission, but he is suggesting that the Council reduce the number of years to seven, eight, or ten, rather
than fifteen, because Dreskin's have been in business here a long while; he does not want to hold this company up
in its relocation plans. A motion .proposed by Councillor Kipping, to lift the above tabling of the matter, was
not seconded.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Chief of
Police, advising that with regard to the Council's reQuest on October 27th last that a report be made regarding
the letter from the Saint John Defence Lawyers Conference which refers to the recent shooting incident at the
Saint John County Gaol involving the discharge of a firearm by a Police Constable, an immediate and complete
investigation was carried out by the Police Department into this matter and the Chief of Police is satisfied that
Constable Humphrey acted properly and within his authority as a peace officer, and that Constable Humphrey's
course of action led to the cessation of hostilities within the said Gaol which culminated ultimately in the
surrender of Aaron Michael Walsh, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the City Solicitor regarding the above named shooting incident,
advising that the report from the Saint John Defence Lawyers Conference complaining about the said shooting
incident seemed to be concerned with establishing whether the shooting was justified in the circumstances; that
he is not aware or familiar with the circumstances surrounding the alleged shooting incident -- and submitting
for the information of Council Quotations from the Rules and Regulations of the Saint John City Police Force,.
namely, Article 7(i) and Article 34, which relate to the use of firearms -- be received and filed.
In reply to Councillor Hodges' reQuest for an explanation of what the above noted Article 34 means,
Chief Ferguson pointed out that use of firearms by a Police officer boils down to a matter of judgement which is
why he has said on numerous occasions that a Policemen's job is a little bit different because he has to make
split decisions, and sometime they could be wrong and sometimes they are right. Councillor Hodges stated he
would like to know the definition of a "fugitive": for example, if a person were going down. the street and the
Police officer told him to halt and the person did not hear that directive and kept on running would the officer
be justified in shooting at the person. Chief Ferguson's reply was that the officer was not justified in shooting
at the person. Councillor Hodges stated that as far as he is concerned, if the person fires on the Police
officer first, the officer has the right to fire back, and to fire back to kill. He added that if people carry
guns, they carry them with one purpose only - to kill; that does not mean that he will uphold anybody who carries
a gun - he himself does not carry a gun and he travels allover Saint John. He stated that he will support the
Chief in this type of action but the Chief must tell him what happened regarding the incident in Question.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if this matter eventually ended up in the Court. Chief Ferguson made
affirmative .reply. Councillor M. Vincent asked if Mr. John MacCallum was the defence lawyer. Chief Ferguson
made affirmative reply. Councillor M. Vincent asked if Mr. William McCarroll was the Crown Prosecutor. Chief
Ferguson made affirmative reply. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the case was heard before Judge Harrigan. Chief
Ferguson advised that it was heard before Chief Judge Andrew Harrigan. Councillor M. Vincent asked what was the
end result of the case as it related to Constable Humphrey removing his revolver, as commented by the three
previously mentioned people. The Chief advised that Mr. John MacCallum, the defence counsel, a well-known
defence lawyer in this city, stated in Court that he had no criticism concerning Constable Humphrey using his
gun; Chief Judge Andrew G. Harrigan, on completion of the trial - this was the charge of forcible seizure (that
is, holding the people at the Gaol) - complimented Constable Humphrey on the action he had taken and the Judge
went on to say, by the action he had taken brought the thing to an immediate conclusion and a successful one.
The Chief stated that he as in close contact with Mr. Bill McCaroll - the investigation went on that night - the
Chief went to the scene, himself, immediately that night and determined what had happened, what had taken place,
134
",
;'pplered/e-P
$A"tJt//;ZCj /a';-
dedi L..OU/7o/
ao/
g,T2e-l"ehee
~aU/.fI6Y;$ C1/7-
-Ie ,N?hee
(/f',6a/7 ~6'fl'~ua
If <<?Ca brou J7
/YJarke6 o/~
':JJodr $-/-; 'p/t7..fi
Stud;! r e
cSe,?l/(/a//
Bpil -iesls
(Jo.tJn!/d; /73
am /?1 '
FOW1MC/OI1 o-P
Cal7ada K~)'I.9'
Cor?,];
and he made the decision then and there that the Constable had acted wisely and properly, and he backed
him one hundred per cent in what he had done - because it might have been serious he precluded it. He
stated that Mr. William McCarroll is the Chief Crown Prosecutor and everything was made available to him,
and he agreed that what the Constable had done was the right and proper thing to do. The Chief says that
he agrees, too.
.
Councillor MacGowan asked for a point of clarification regarding Article 7(i) - the Chief shall
suspend any member involved in a shooting incident or fatality - and stated she would Question the word
"shooting" because as she understands this shooting incident, the Constable discharged his pistol at the
wall; she therefore felt .that you would not call that a shooting incident. Chief Ferguson replied that
this is how he interprets it; to him, a shooting incident is if someone is injured or killed by a Policeman
using his gun; on many occasions the Policemen in this city have used their guns for warning shots.
Councillor MacGowan stated that if there is any Question that this is not a shooting incident then she
thinks that this Article should be re-written so We know exactly what it means because, to her, that was
not a shooting incident; the Constable discharged his pistol; she feels that a shooting incident or a
fatality is a little bit different, so she would suggest that the Council have the legal advisor write
that correctly to cover whatever the Council wants it to cover.
I
Councillor Cave stated that he understands that Aaron Michael Walsh was holding six or seven
hostages, and stated that in his opinion, does anyone have the right to hold people up, as the said Aaron
Michael Walsh did. The Chief made negative reply. Councillor Cave stated that he agrees with the Chief,
one hundred per cent.
I
Councillor Kipping stated that he feels that the justification for the use of the firearm in
this case is in Article 34(2) where it states that the Police officer "should only resort to firearms when
his life or the life of a citizen is in actual danger. ...but only if such fugitive is charged or convicted
of murder..". He noted that that particular fugitive was charged with murder at the time, he was holding
hostages at the time, and he was bearing what appeared to be a firearm at the time. He noted that this
permits the use of firearms only as a last resort, is what is stated also in the said Article 34(2), and
stated it seems to him that the whole incident is covered in Article 34(2) which justified the use of the
firearm in that particular case. He added that he believes that the rest is all academic.
Chief Ferguson advised that
thought was a gun, when the Constable
get it, so it had the desired effect.
Constable for doing the proper thing,
.
regarding the object that the civilians and the
gave the first blast he dropped it, and then he
He stated that, if anything, he will see about
because he made a split decision.
!
Councillor Davis noted that the Saint John Defence Lawyers Conference in their letter to Council
wanted to know if there is an automatic investigation of an incident when a gun is fired, and he asked if
such an investigation is conducted, automatically. Chief Ferguson replied that he is concerned by the use
of firearms by the criminal and by the Policeman, and there is an automatic investigation. Councillor
Davis commented. that this answers the said letter.
prison guards
tried to get back to
maybe commending the
Councillor Green, noting that Constable Humphrey has many years' service and is well liked and
well respected, stated that he feels this Constable acted very wisely and that the Chief of Police should
commend him on the basis that the Chief should give him a little recognition on this incident. The Chief I,'
replied that he has had this Constable in, and told him that what he had done was the proper thing as far
as he; the Chief of Police, was concerned.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Chief of Police -assure the Council that he will meet with
the Saint John Defence Lawyers Conference and explain what took place regarding the incident in Question.
The Chief replied that what he would like for the said Defence Lawyers to do - and he is not telling them
what they should do and should not do - this information was available and he feels that instead of the
Defence Lawyers Conference writing to the Council and the Mayor it would be very easy to contact the Chief
of Police - his office is open and the files are available - he would gladly fill the Defence Lawyers in.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the mover of the motion include in the motion that the Chief meet with
the Defence Lawyers and explain the situation to them. He felt that this will end the matter. In reply,
Councillor Higgins noted that the letter from the Defence Lawyers was addressed to the Common Council and
the Council is going to answer the question "is there immediate investigation when a firearm is discharged"
by stating that there is an immediate investigation, and the Council replies to the Question asked by the
said Defence Lawyers. He added that, as the Chief has said, the Chi~f's office is open and the Defence
Lawyers can go there at any time; he stated that he will not agree to the Council directing anything along
the line as suggested by Councillor A. Vincent in this matter.
.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that
pursuant to Council resolution of January 27th, 1975, which adopted the presentation of the Rocca Group
for the Market SQuare development subject to various terms and conditions, the City has obtained proposals
from three engineering consultants to carry out a preliminary study for alternative types of seawall on
the harbour face of the said.development, including the necessary soils investigation, and that this
preliminary seawall and soils investigation will attempt to determine the approximate costs involved in
constructing the various types of seawall which are possible, having regard to the.fact that the wall is
to serve more as a boundary of the development than as a berth; and advising that it is necessary for this
seawall engineering study to be done at this time as this is the one component for which no cost figures
have as yet been devloped, and this information is necessary now in order to complete the full evaluation
of the financing of the project; and advising that the three firms which submitted proposals on this work,
Read, Voorhees & Associates, Ltd., Acres (Atlantic) Ltd., and Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation
Ltd., are competent in this field, and, therefore, the Co-Ordinating Committee have recommended that the
low estimate received from Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation Ltd., in the amount of $19,000.00,
be accepted, (with this study to be cost-shared by the Partnership in the usual way); and recommending
that the Common Council approve the hiring of the said Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation Ltd.
to carry out the above investigation, at an estimated cost of $19,000.00, this being the lowest estimate
received -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked why only three companies were asked for proposals and why we do not
call for public bids for this work. Mr. Barfoot replied that we made enQuiries of the Federal Department
of Public Works who have the dealings with marine works, with regard to locally based consultants and
these three engineering consultants were.... Councillor A. Vincent interjected at this point, Questioning
that Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation Ltd. could be considered a locally based firm and tax
payers of this community. He felt that if this firm wants to do work for the City of Saint John it should
rent an office in this city. Councillor A. Vincent, repeating his question as to why did the City Manager
decide to only ask three engineering consultants for proposals, asked if the Council realizes what the fee
of a six million dollar seawall is going to be. He felt that we are going to spend about six million
dollars to build the se~wall and approximately 8 1/2% is gOing to be the consultants' fee. He felt that
.
~
,....
.
I
1
Ct '-f y /Il t7)'7,
'1? e (/ e'.I1 t:f e
~'I"'i/PS
C -nt-/? I
. ~(/~7d,
C/-I-ff /fa/!
/171//,(J f/e-
me,,-cs
I ~~ff 14/1
:ftu/ld/l71'
(!ON/71/-t!ee
.
1
1? t'~c/ nd/ JJ
I!J CJi-/ tJ JJ
C'1'i-;;; /!all
Y1f?nr-
I vv/~/;held
7hf10 ~
fIa;tmark.
;]7' ik.- p;l5
'pu-6//d
. . frJed/H.ff
fla:117JPJrk;.
Sf'- :rn;rff/~
fNOb/e'#;S'
ll...
~35
the Council should advertise this work in the Commercial News, and that the City as a result would receive a
large number of proposals. Mr. Barfoot explained that the subject of his letter and recommendation is a small,
preliminary study to try,to define the' scale of the co~t'of the seawall. Councillor A. Vincent felt that in
engaging the engineering consultant for this study, the City would then find that the same engineering consultant
would be expected to carry through in connection with the construction of the seawall, because no other engineering
consulting firm would undertake the consulting work regarding such seawall construction once one engineering
consulting firm is chosen for the preliminary study work. In this regard, Mr. Barfoot advised that over the
years, the City has had several groups of engineers work in this area on this particular problem, none of them
actually defining this one; the City has had preliminary engineering done by one firm and designing and con-
struction supervision done by others, for other projects. Councillor Cave asked if Councillor A. Vincent is
correct in saying that if the City gives this preliminary investigation job to Foundation of Canada it means that
the City is committed. In reply, Mr. Barfoot advised that it does not mean that the City is committed to con-
struction of the seawall or to the retention of Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation Ltd. as its con-
sultant for the seawall if it should go ahead; there is no commitment.
Councillor Davis advised that this matter was taken up by the Partnership and the Co-Ordinating Committee
first of all, Foundation of Canada is involved with the throughway and the harbour bridge; Read Voorhees did the
job on Market SQuare and Water Street; Acres does work for the National Harbours Board; of these three firms, one
is in Halifax, one is in Fredericton, and the other one may be, or may not be, in Saint John - Read Voorhees was.
He pointed out that this investigation is a very small, preliminary thing, involving putting about six holes down
to try to determine where the seawall should be; Foundation of Canada is the low tender, and that is it; we are
not involved in a design of anything; it is going to cost $19,000.00 to get a recommendation for the seawall.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, stating that' further to the
meeting of Common Council with the executive officers of Revenue Properties Central Developments, Ltd, on October
23rd, he met with officiars of the company on October 28th when details of the work to be carried out by the
company were discussed; that much progress was made at this meeting concerning improvements to the heating and
airconditioning, and the maintenance and cleanliness of the building; that several areas of responsibility were
defined more closely and action was taken on a number of items; that he will be submitting a full report to
Council in the very near future -- be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that the meeting with the building owners was changed to another date and
he was therefore unable to be present, and that he would like to be informed in the way of a report of what
transpired at the said meeting.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor E. J. Kipping, Chairman of the
City Hall Building Committee, advising that at a meeting of the Committee held on October 30th last, the members
were informed of the outcome of Common Council's meeting with Revenue Properties Limited at which unsatisfactory
conditions in the City Hall building were discussed, and that following discussion, during which the City Manager
also reported on the City staff's meeting with the said City Hall building owners, a resolution was passed
recommending that Common Council now take whatever action is necessary to cancel its decision of October 6th,
1975, which withheld the rental payments, and advising that it was the feeling of the Committee meeting that in
view of the obvious remedial actions taken, as well as the stated intentions of Revenue Properties Limited, along
with the new channels of communication opened up with their top people, the City's good faith should now be
demonstrated by this move -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for information on what the building owners decided to do, because the City
Hall heating system is not working, the place is in a filthy condition, and everything else is still wrong. He
asked if the Chairman of the said Committee could give him one thing that is right about this building. Councillor
Kipping, in reply, pointed out that the Committee's report states that there has been some obvious remedial
action taken, as well as the stated intentions of Revenue Properties Limited; the remedial action consists of
repair of the tiles both inside and outside of the building, the painting of the hallways and various offices;
the cleaning may not be up to par yet but the building owners have a very great problem there and they are
working on that problem - it involves some drastic changes - he thinks we have to allow the owners a little time
in order to get that problem straightened out; the airconditioning is being worked on - last week, they were
measuring the airflow in the building on the eighth floor with fairly complicated instruments - so, they are
working on that, and they told the Council members at the meeting with the owners that there are certain things
they can do and will be experirmenting with; the other matter is personnel changes - the owners are making some
changes in personnel of which the City has not been advised. Councillor Kipping advised that things are under
way, as the Committee has said, and in view of that the Committee felt that, along with the new channels of
communication opened up with their top people, the City's good faith should now be demonstrated by rescinding the
motion which withheld their rent.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the following resolution which was adopted by Common Council
on October 6th, 1975 be rescinded, namely, "That the rent payable by the City of Saint John for premises occupied
in the present City Hall building in the future be deposited into a trust account until satisfactory arrangements
can be made regarding the defects in the said building - satisfactory to the City's lease and to the City Hall
Building Conunittee".
Councillor A. Vincent stated that in ninety days' time, if these defects are not completed, he is going
to make that motion to withhold the rent, again.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, stating that the meeting
in public regarding the Haymarket By-Pass, referred to by the Rockwood Park Area Preservation Association, has
been scheduled for 7.30 o'clock p.m. on November 12th next at the Holiday Inn and that representatives of the
Department of Highways of New Brunswick will be in attendance, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he had asked that the City's public relations staff do something on
the matter of Haymarket Square traffic problems, but they have not done so, to date. He stated that the City has
to do something about the terrible trraffic conditions there, and he felt that in view of the above mentioned
November 12th meeting, some form of newspaper advertisement or radio and television press release from the City's
136
..,
1?e-;Zol7i 11:1
IJ1t'1/1hrd ;1f
7ho/?l~.$ PI?
{} fJl7 s~r cU:/-/O/1
{> tb, A- -6-d.
1?e-.zon/ng
:5'ef/.24!; - .7J .;; y
Ild.J;/ 6' 11~ Is -r
dare/;
pUblic relations department should be carried out. The Mayor replied that it will be done. Councillor
Cave advocated that such press coverage be obtained through the means of television.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning a parcel of land on the
west side of Molson Avenue commencing at the rear of the lots which front on Sand Cove Road and running in
a northerly direction with a frontage on the said Molson Avenue of approximately 315 feet and a depth of
approximately 207 feet on the north sideline and 127 feet on the south sideline, from "I-I" Light In-
dustrial district to "RM-l" Multiple Family Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
I
Councillor Green felt that the above site should be retained in Light Industrial zoning classifi-
cation. Councillor M. Vincent asked that the Council members bear in mind that in voting on this re-
zoning they are voting on the size of these townhouse lots of 20-foot frontage.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Cave, Green, Pye, M. Vincent,
MacGowan and A. Vincent voting "nay".
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments 1
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on the
south side of Woodward Avenue at the intersection of Boar's Head Road with a frontage of 860 feet on
Woodward Avenue and 900 feet on Boar's Head Road, containing approximately 5 acres, from "R-IB" One-Family
Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
/'7 {' / ~ RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, advising that
0/tfy -.Jo//C/- V; aCQuisition of the property belonging to Norman A. Lockhart and Alma L. Lockhart is necessary to complete
~ r~r construction of the Milford-Randolph-Greendale Sewer Project, and that further to Council's authorization
Al\flI"O;P/"I 70. on July 17th, 1975 to commence proceedings towards the expropriation of this property, the necessary steps
A~ 11? ~ were taken, and on October 21st last the Hearing was held before the Expropriations Advisory Board, whose
IfP/?~~)7. report of October 28th, 1975 is submitted with this letter, and further advising that under statute, the I
;,f~l?1cY~. Council is now required to confirm its Notice of Intention as the first step leading to registration of ,
/ L,~ this Notice of Intention in the Registry Office for the County and City of Saint John, following which ,
/lo~~r/~/7~ registration, title in the way of an easement interest will vest in the City; and further advising that,
N? ,/~ ~ ~t1 however, possession by the City will not take place until the City offers full compensation based on the
f'lll TO/1 f c::', market value and it is tendered to the owners, and other procedural steps are required to take the matter
~e~t?J1 J?~~;9~~ towards a settlement of compensation; and noting that in its report, the said Board has recommended that
1- the Common Council pay to the owners a fixed amount of $200.00 with respect to their expenses in objecting
to the expropriation - and pointing out that this is a matter in the discretion of Council because ~
Ithough the Board has recommended payment to cover expenses, Council under the statute, is governed by the
word "may", which means that the payment of $200.00 to the owners in connection with their expenses is in
the discretion of the Council -- be received and filed and the above noted confirmation of Notice of
Expropriation be filed in the Registry Office.
~l\flrofl!' ('aI/a
~//I of' Cs-cs
Councillor Gould proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the City not pay the above
mentioned amount of $200.00 to Norman A. Lockhart and Alma L. Lockhart. .
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter of payment of the recommended sum of
$200.00 to Norman A. Lockhart and Alma L. Lockhart with respect to their expenses in objecting to the
expropriation by the City of property belonging to them that is necessary to complete construction of the
ilford-Randolph-Greendale Sewer Project, be laid on the table, to receive the legal fees in this regard
of Norman A. Lockhart and Alma L. Lockhart.
I
_ "nayll.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors Cave and Gould voting
Councillor Kipping asked that the Council be provided with some information on precedent, as to
hat has been done either here or elsewhere in this kind of a case, because there are two sides to the
Question of whether you should pay people to fight you in a matter such as this. The Mayor replied that
the legal advisors will provide an answer in this regard.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
4i. SO/;C!/~Clr RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor on the Question
:Y ,/7/. L , T_ of legal non-conforming uses as it relates to the operation of the Ace of Clubs Incorporated on the
1gee fJf?~/~t7~-Gr~ Narrows Road, noting that if the private club use existed at the time of the enactment of the Zoning By-
tPe-;z nina Law "RS-2" classification, it is important that this matter and the Question of continued use be established
6 .I ecause if a legal non-conforming use exists, re-zoning is not necessary and the applicants are entitled
~:r.- C:o~~il7 0 carryon their operation as of right - if a dispute exists over this matter, as stated in his report to
~. ~ ~//?101\1 Council on October 27th, it is his opinion that the Planning Advisory Committee must make a decision; and
advising that' with regard to the various definitions and their uses under the Zoning By-Law, he would
~!c9I.7I1, ;?~t//~, state that if it is established that a legal non-conforming use does not exist, re-zoning will become
~ ecessary in order for the Ace of Clubs Incorporated to operate as a private club - he has examined the
t?~n1. said by-law and if re-zoning is necessary and the Council does re-zone, the use is then permitted only if
pproved by the Planning Advisory Committee and only on compliance with such terms and conditions as may
e imposed by the. said Committee - it is his opinion it is not necessary to get into the question of
.
.....
JI""
137
.
1 CO/17I11/d-ee
Whole
IblMJ?6S
reCCl/erles
Ca 17 iJ P{a
l1$s/$f-,;JJ?ce
?J16/n
p. 3.110$$0/-
7/<>1 r-b1er.
.
/Y~IJ; f J1Ci1-t/I7j1
(!r;?h7I?1,
1f(Jj?o/a-hJti
GAj/?t. re
1f}{U176/C ;Ydi
FKh/b,
{J,utJ.1t (/r~
1(./lIdAeI7<i!/;1.l/1
.<:. AawstJJ.1,
l{;'e>~ f-fotPa
:Or./I/f1./Y PIt
M,/J1c.Gee
1(. <j), 517?iM
tY; jClO.f'Sol7
/lJ. Cn;;H40
6t{J?C!//
. t?o/17/1?i&$
r;r;;;n~e
t(J;;.rli .5
l'er>.st?f7/1e/
A~
'Proi ed/ t?11
{! "P1,b/eI'Ve
I,
I
/15'$e;%--6t?
.s~j-a/'Y., f'/d/J
e~d/11fJ/c; 1I1!1t
Scdrdll/,
{f(af1ce?<<r6- or
/1;'adre .s:d>-tfi.
IV.:B fls3'-
~f1F
....
discussing the restrictions on cabarets or taverns except to say the following: while the definition of cabaret,
under the Zoning By-Law includes a club, the definition does not include a private club - his opinion on this
point is based on the fact that Section 109 of the Zoning By-Law permits a private club to operate only with the
permission of the Planning Advisory Committee, while a cabaret, subject to certain conditions, is permitted as of
right - conseQuently, the fact that cabaret includes a club which is permitted as of right, must mean something
different than a private club which is treated separate and apart can only exist with the approval of the
said Committee; it is his opinion, from the information in his possession, that the Ace of Clubs Incorporated
falls into the category of a private club, and if re-zoning has to take place, the company must still obtain the
permission of the said Committee -- be received and filed and forwarded to the Planning Advisory Committee.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, October 20th, 1975, when there were present
Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Cave, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt and Pye, and
your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
1. That with reference to the proposal made by P. S. Ross & Partners, Management Consultants, to assist
the City of Saint John in obtaining monies under the Canada Assistance Plan as a recovery for grants paid by the
City to various local welfare, social services, educational and community services organizations, the Common
Council refuse the proposal at the present time with the advice that the Council would appreciate any assistance
or help it could receive gratuitously in the Council's long, frustrating effort for Canada Assistance Plan cost
sharing of such grants monies.
Saint John, N. B.,
3rd November, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recommendation
contained therein adopted.
Councillor Green voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Nominating Committee, the following
appointments be made to the Committee regarding the Atlantic National Exhibition:- Councillor M. Vincent, Chair-
man, and Messrs. Ralph McLenaghan and Leonard Lawson, Mrs. Rhoda Flood, Dr. H. M. Watts, Mrs. Marjorie McGee,
Messrs. Ronald B. Smith and Norman Jackson, and Mrs. Mildred Crawford.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Nominating
Committee, changes be made in the membership of the Council Committees, which results in the following:-
ENGINEERING
& WORKS
WORKS
PERSONNEL
FINANCE
Chairman
Vice-Chairman
Higgins
Pye
Parfitt
Kipping
Cave
Hodges
MacGowan
Davis
Green
Parfitt
Hodges
M. Vincent
PLANNING & POLICE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT & FIRE DEVELOPMENT
LAND PROTECTION COMMERCE
Chairman Davis M. Vincent Kipping
Vice-Chairman A. Vincent MacGowan Gould
Green Gould A. Vincent
Pye Higgins Cave
The schedule for meetings of the said Council Committees is as follows:-
Finance
Engineering and Works
Personnel
Planning & Development (Land)
Police & Fire (Protection)
Economic Development
- 1st and 3rd Wednesdays at 12.15 p.m.
- 1st and 3rd Thursdays at 12.15 p.m.
- 2nd and 4th Thursdays at 12.15 p.m.
- 1st and 3rd Mondays at 9.30 a.m.
- 2nd and 4th Wednesdays at 2.30 p.m.
- 2nd and 4th Mondays at 2.30 p.m.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED tha the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, submitting a
print of part of the Champlain Heights Subdivision, Phase II which has previously been known to the City as the
proposed Harcourt Subdivision or the proposed Andave Subdivision, and advising that the City aCQuired this land
from Mr. David Reevey and later sold it to the New Brunswick Housing Corporation and the said Corporation has
revised the subdivision somewhat by enlarging the proposed lots and the establishing of a larger area for recre-
ational purposes (Parcel "B") and the result will be 42 lots, each suitable for either one or two family dwellings;
nd advising that Parcel "B" would be vested as land for public purposes and a similar vesting of the lands about
1:3'8
~
, I
fl-~$el7-6- -Co Ih
ejaPlfl/o,l11 /I.Cs-
$u,b-d'/r
;11;$,/1$3' Cb;/"
S-t-,:06JV;~S %e
IJ1c/1///ster
.lJ/1/f'e eKe,
IlS5e'1lC- c-o
-su6-ct/I/, 1/';:;17
,1j l/Ii fo/ e 1/ /I/e
K5f.;;>te $
CeJlcio .fill.
PCJymeoe- II1/reu
of ,?t(..P/r.~ f>.u-r
f?t?S e /,;;ma
.stIver /:; /Is
'/?;; /11r .f'a~ - a'll/.
!/arf?(d ~;1/OJ'W1.!.
/(o!ld %ul
'//o/7ld e17 S~/1tlC
r ; fJI? ,( frL
Il sSe'l7f .fo
Stt;-c(/J'r f?J;11
{J,tt-IJd( l'e'so/rL -
15/017 a17;611d'ed
.#a/1k JJr/ve
JJ!t7/? f 15-.q If t/e.
;J1/~~c'}el Ces.
the brook would occur; and advising that Parcels "X" (at the junction of Murdoch Avenue and Champlain
Drive) and "y" at the bottom right-hand corner of the subdivision, are surplus lands and are intended to .
be conveyed to the City either for such uses the City may see fit, such as in conjunction with adjoining
lands, or for disposal; and recommending that the Common Council assent to the said subdivision plan,
thus clearing the way for its approval by the Planning Department -- be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
Councillor M. Vincent asked how close the rear of the property lines on St. David's Place will
come, approximately, to McAllister Drive extension. Mr. Zides replied that the lines at the rear of the
lots on St. David's Place are on a common line with the right-of-way of McAllister Drive extension; these
lots are about 25 feet deeper than the lots across the way - also, the right-of-way will accommodate the
road there approximately in the middle, so you are talking between houses, for example, of about 125 feet
from the road to the back of the houses - actually, it is a little more than that; a lot will depend on
whether the road is going to be right in the middle - he believes that the right-of-way at that point is
approximately 200 feet, so you are talking about 75 feet from the back of the lots to the edge of the
actual travelled surface. Councillor M. Vincent asked, regarding the recommendation that is contained in
the Committee's letter in this matter, what consideration was given to the recreational needs of that
community as it presently stands in relation to land that is set aside for public use. He asked for an
explanation in this regard. Mr. Zides advised that as far as recreation goes, there are two possibilities
here: the first one is regarding Parcel "B" which is a recreation area - the shape of the land that the
City is aCQuiring for McAllister Drive at this point is going to have a considerable wedge beyond Parcel
"Y" - Parcel "Y" will be City-owned and could be merged or assembled with adjoining land and make a
recreational area there, as well. Councillor M. Vincent pointed out that the periphery of the circle at
the end of St. David's Place, which would be a roadway, abuts on the back of the properties fronting on
Champlain Drive. Mr. Zides 'replied that the key thing there is to prevent some access point and this
could be 'done physically by the way the road is constructed; the right-of-way off the actual physical
roadway will be well inside of this - he will make this point to the Commissioner of Engineering and
Works to make sure that this is so.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
recommending that the sub-division plan for Millidgeville Estates, Phase 3, be assented to by the Common
Council, and advising that the Council has already approved the entering into of a Sub-division Agreement
for this sub-division which lies north of University Avenue and includes an extension of Woodhaven Drive
to University Avenue, and that also included are 55 lots for one and two family dwellings, five parcels
for apartment development, 3,050 feet of new street involving two new street names (Clovelly Drive and
Noel Avenue), which have been approved by the Planning Advisory Committee, and four parcels for vesting
as land for public purposes - the parcels of land for public purprnes,on the easterly side of Woodhaven
Drive to be held in trust by the City until land in a more suitable location is provided in 'later sub-
division of the adjoining lands; and further advising that an agreement made in 1963 between Turnbull
Real Estate Company and the Board of School Trustees reQuired that two 66-foot street connections be
provided from Woodhaven Drive to the property to the west - now owned by the City, that the developers
are not now resolving the location of such roads as might be reQuired but, instead, are vesting in the
City two parcels as land for public purposes on the westerly side of Woodhaven Drive, that when the
City's reQuirements for access are resolved the developers wish to purchase any surplus lands from the
City at a price reflecting the value of the land before the sub-division (as might be appraised by the
City's property management branch); and further advising that the Committee has reviewed the 'plan and
approved the street locations, the lands for public purposes to be held in trust and the street names
above mentioned, and recommends that the Council now assent to the plan so that it may be approved by the
Planning Office -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Caldo Ltd. with reference to the
sub-division plan for Millidgeville Estates, Phase 3, advising that Parcel "F" thereof is being held
solely as land for public purposes, and that Parcels "A" and "E" are being held for'future access by
agreement Number 193749 and Plan Number 122, File 38, registered September 3rd, 1963, and that the terms
of that agreement state that there will be two 66-foot wide access roads to Woodhaven Drive through the
said Parcels "A" and "B", and that the balance of the land not covered therein is being allocated as land
for public purposes, and that the company proposes to give the City of Saint John monies in lieu of land
held for public purposes in the said Parcels "A", "B" and "F" and also for the land allocated to future
access, and that this thereby fully eliminates the access roads mentioned above, and requesting the
Council's consideration in this matter, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by 'Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee
advising that a 120-foot extension to Michael Crescent, a 750-foot section of street to be named Nason
Road and a 330-foot section of street to be named Martha Avenue, with 11 lots for twelve-unit apartment
houses, are planned as Phase 8 of the Silver Falls Park Sub-division, and that also included is a 62,806
sQuare foot parcel of land for vesting in the City as land for public purposes; and further advising that
when Phase 7 of this sub-division was being processed last spring, the Committee recommended to Council
that no further extension of the sub-division be approved until the following conditions are complied
with (Council adopted these conditions by resolution at its May 26th, 1975 meeting):- (1) that Mark Drive
be extended to Loch Lomond Road by development to City standards and vesting in the City as a public
street, (2) that, in addition to Bonita Avenue and Michael Crescent, a third street be developed to
intersect Mark Drive to reduce traffic through the existing low density residential development and
provide needed access to the apartment development; and further advising that in a letter dated August
25th, 1975, Mr. Harold McNamara stated his intention to rough grade and chip seal surface Cindy Lee
Street and Mark Drive to Loch Lomond Road in the fall of this year, and he stated, however, that, to
bring these streets to full standard - that is, paved surface with services installed - would not be ,
economically feasible - the approximately 3,000 feet of street would cost nearly $380,000.00 to develop,
and to pave these streets without installing services would not be practical because it would be neces-
sary to break the paved surface in order to dig the trench - and the Committee feels that Mr. McNamara's
proposal is acceptable provided it forms part ,of a written agreement; and further advising that last
week, Mr. Lloyd Paul of Lloma Construction took an option on the remainder of Mr. McNamara's land and the
Committee has spoken to him about this and he is agreeable to the following, which the Committee therefore
recommends:- (1) that the Common Council assent to the sub-division plan being proposed by Mr. Paul, a
copy of which is submitted, showing the streets and the land for public purposes, and (2) that the Common
Council amend its resolution of May 26th, 1975 to read that (a) Mark Drive be extended to Loch Lomond
Road with rough grading and chip seal finish, (b) in addition to Bonita Avenue and Michael Crescent, a
1
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
.....1
JI"'"
1:39
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's reQuest for an explanation of the last paragraph in the above
mentioned letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, Mr. Zides advised that there were really two possibilities
here - the first of which is that the City accept from Mr. Jowett the sum of $2,680.00 in lieu of land for public
purposes - the other option involves the aCQuisition of the reserve area for the Eastern Arterial and that would
be a decision that the Council aCQuire it and authorize the Land Committee to have it appraised, and negotiate,
and so on, and offset the two costs. He pointed out that the decision in this regard is that of the Council. He
added that there is something unusual about this matter because not only is the Council accepting money in lieu
of land for public purposes but there is land nearby which is owned by Mr. Jowett who the City is asking to
reserve a strip for a proposed future road in that general area. Mr. Zides advised that if the Council wanted to
make the decision now to aCQuire some of that land, keeping in mind that Mr. Jowett owes the City $2,680.00, that
there is a value that would be placed on this land through the Land Committee, negotiations entered into, and so
on, and some arrangement would be brought to Council again for a decision. He added that the Planning Department
/1 has had no discussion in this matter with the Land Committee, to date. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the City
~ftP( LA9~Jn has the right to exchange land in lieu of, that is not involved in the actual parcel that Council is concurring
with. Mr. Zides replied that there appears to be the machinery in the Planning Act that even when you have the
land there you can dispose of the land again for public purposes; he thinks that the question that maybe warrants
a legal opinion as to whether or not the land that is being considered to be aCQuired for road purposes is a
legitimate public purpose.
!lfanf-hOl t9f/
.ll1arff J)r,
c?t';;a'f fee
$~
Ilftl'&l1M e /1
A/pf/ %~
,((e>/nCJ. Co/?-
Slfrad/oJ?
I L-6cL,
/l$$CI7~.{O
Set),t?"" t,{;/1
:8r?f1I11~e
fie{ ppard
$ ti~ -a/v-
t1lr;ster.9' ,4
l~u.6I/t!jlt(r-
f?ose rahd
lbyp? el?~s
/f? (/eu. t1-/'
puil/~
pUf1'pflse
/OJl7ds
. /J!f1$ ,4J,
.l3 eJ?J-? eCt- -
.7l:;;,v / tt/l,
/Yl (/"7 ea J-?
/l!rs.Gm.;J,/d
/ilC!urmaok
I
RC'/761M ~
~
../ r7W ei-t-
(J'ee lekt</)
.
I
1dymB17f II?
II eu of' fwj
I/c ?kr (;lose
; al.d
I
'P/";m 11, 1lcI~1
Ct?w/n,
JJul//c
Pi( I';7O.$e
/CJjd
. kdS6eI':I1;
cgf?6-erl.d:/
~i-!I ~;;erW.
lrl...
third street, Martha Avenue, be developed to rough grade and chip seal surface to Mark Drive to reduce traff~c
through the existing' low density residential development and provide needed access to the apartment development,
and (c) development along Mark Drive, Cindy Lee Street and the portion of Martha Avenue from the present sub~
division to Mark Drive be undertaken, with streets and services to full City standards before further development
south and west of the present sub-division (on extensions of Michael Crescent and Martha Drive); and (3) that the
Common Council authorize the signing of an agreement between Mr. Paul and the City placing a restriction on
further sub-division or building until the conditions in (2) have been fulfilled -- be received and filed and the
recommendations adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee recommending
that the Common Council assent to the Bernice Hubbard Sub-division, and advising that the reason the Council is
being reQuested to give this assent is that a strip of land along Mystery Lake is proposed to be vested in the
City as land for public purposes, and this is in keeping with provisions in the Municipal Development Plan which
would result in an open space area about the lake and stream system between Loch Lomond Road and the Golden Grove
Road at this location, be received and filed and the recommendation a.dopted.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the
following sums of money be accepted by the City of Saint John in lieu of land for public purposes with respect to
the following sub-divisions - in both cases, the figure is at 8% of the value of the proposed lots as estimated
by the Property Management Branch of the Department of Community Planning and Development, and the monies are to
be deposited in the City's trust fund for the aCQuisition and development of land for public purposes:-
1. from Mrs. M. Bennett to David A. McLean, S-35 - the sum of $256.00 (a 100 by 325-foot lot is proposed to be
severed from Mrs. Bennett's property on the westerly side of the Norris Road about 1,200 feet north of its
intersection with the Morrison Road; the Property Management Branch has appraised the proposed lot at $3,200.00
before sub-division);
2. from Mrs. Gerald McCormack, Mellinger Crescent, L-IOl - the sum of $80.00 (this proposed lot would have a 76-
foot frontage on the south side of Mellinger Crescent in Martinon and extends to a depth of 200 feet and is part
of a larger parcel of land owned by Mrs. McCormack; this land is very rough and would reQuire extensive pre-
paration if it were used for building purposes; the use of this land is further hampered.by a stream that cuts
across at approximately the middle of the lot; there is also evidence that the land around this stream is subject
to flooding, which results in the size of the usable land in the front being even smaller - it is not likely that
the land in the rear would be utilized for building purposes; the overall condition of the land was considered
poor and along with the high cost that would be involved in preparing the site resulted in an estimated value
before sub-division of $1,000.00 as of October 2nd, 1975).
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED.that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, submitting
a copy of a letter received by Council from the Committee at the August 11th, 1975 meeting of Council regarding
the request from Mr. Ronald E. Jowett for a variance to permit the erection of single family dwellings on property
on the westerly side of Lakeview Drive, advising that Mr. Jowett is now in the process of sub-dividing his
property and the question arises as to what should be done in regards to land for public purposes, and further
advising that its August 26th last meeting the Committee granted variances in lot sizes to allow the creation of
five 80 by 80-foot lots, one 80 by 100-foot parcel and one 80 by 120-foot lot on the condition that the 80-foot
lots be used only for one-family dwellings (the 80 by 120-foot lot contains Mr. Jowett's residence and the 80 by
100-foot parcel is a right-of-way for the Eastern Arterial), and advising that an appraisal from the Real Estate
Department estimates the market value of the five 80-foot lots to be $33,500.00 - Mr. Jowett would normally be
reQuired to pay 8% ($2,680.00) of this amount to the City in lieu of land for public purposes or set aside 6% of
the land, which, in this case, is not practical - and further advising that the parcel of land reQuired for the
Eastern Arterial right-of-way can remain in its present state, or, if Council decides it is desirable, the City
may aCQuire it; and recommending that the Council either accept the sum of $2,680.00 in lieu of land for public
purposes with the money thus received deposited in the trust account for the acquisition and development of land
for public purposes, and Mr. Jowett be approached concerning the aCQuisition of land necessary for the Eastern
Arterial, or, alternatively, that the City and Mr. Jowett negotiate an exchange of land and/or money with respect
to the land for public purposes and the provision of a right-of-way for the Eastern Arterial -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table pending some
in-
put from the Legal Department.
Councillors Parfitt and Gould voted "nay" to the above motion, which was carried for 'tabling.
'.. .:j
140
,.,
II/d-t'''''/c $/6es
Kt//!?/1r5s {b/77/n
lI1ar~ef- ~h?h?r
/1(3/"lre6 /e>d"J;
d f1 J7 /1/ <?" :;.;;; r'y
:3udfleE
hdeM/ Co
G?tel Y7 t-
/)y,nee/?len r-
s. T ;:-~/7d!:l
'1? o//ol/Cll
JJ.etCrm8h-C-
('.5 e~~;;()(lj)
{] 'f-y /If 8J7a1:e
C 'if:! So It "0,'60
;(dl?L (;/nh?,
e. P.. 'Ra//
Sf-red C?/osiJ7
/: oU/e// $,!;
On motion of Councillor Higgins
"
Seconded by. Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Historic' Si te's"andEvents' Com~
mittee, outli,ning ;the,'plans that .,are being formulated 'with the Market Committee' for the observance of, the
100th anni~ersary~of"the construction and'opening'of the Saint John City Market.in'i976, advising that
the G6rmi1ittee, propos.es, toc.implement these programmes which :will not reQuire any extra budget expenditure;
arid f6r,,:thenprogrammes~ which2require ,an extra .budget,'expendi ture, the Committee will preseBt .a cost"
est.imate,:for:.,approval~before taking. any',action' reQuir,ing such 'expenditure, and"also ,advi'singcthatthis
report is.;submittedcto,.Council :on the'basis'that unless otherwise ,directed by Council the ,Committee ,will
be ,;proceedirig:ras ',set ,cmt,in' thcisc.letter" ,bee'received. and"filed. : . ,"" ~-",
-:'.:.- }..."'.-:_:
,
I) __
The Council members concurred in Councillor A. Vincent's view that the Council encourage the
above named ,Committee tJO.work closely"with the Market Committee in the said observance programming.
Councillor Pye, Chairman of the Market Committee, advised that to date, the only contact the Market
Committee has had with the Historic Sites and Events Committee was a short meeting in mid-May of this
year at which it was reQuested that he, 'as Chairman of the Market Committee, appoint a committee of three
to meet a committee of three from the Historic Sites and Events Committee and they were to discuss ways
and means to improve the centennial year observances. He stated that the Market Committee independently
has prepared new postcards, pamphlets - and has asked for a $3,000.00 budget with which to purchase a tape
which will be inserted in a machine and will be attached eventually to a loudspeaker and any individual
visiting the Market will be able to press a button at the entrance to the inner portion of the Market and
the history of the Market will come over the loudspeaker and other information concerning the building;
also, the Committee plans on doing a complete window cleaning job for the centennial observances - all
this will occur after January 1st, 1976. He noted that the Historic Sites and Events Committee letter says
that that Committee is desirous of producing a mock trial in association with Market history and that
could be released by way of radio, television, et cetera - and he stated that that was proposed to the
Market Committee by the said Committee and Councillor Pye asked them to afford the Market Committee costs
before it would consider recommending same to Council. He stated that the Market Committee has had no
contact with the Historic Sites and Events Committee since the mid-May meeting already referred to, and in
relation to costs, the Market Committee knows nothing about the costs - they may be prohibitive and no
doubt the Council will find them on the prohibitive side, he felt. He pointed out that when the Historic
Sites and Events Committee submits a report in this regard, the Council knows therefore that it is doing
it independently and it is not with the Market Committee's blessing, up to date.
Councillor MacGowan asked if any steps have been taken to receive some funds from the Federal
.Government as of 1976, and stated she thinks the City should start now to apply for same because, ap-
parently, the City becomes eligible next year for funds for renovation on the 100th anniversary. She
asked if the Market Committee has done anything in that respect. Councillor Pye replied that the Maket
Committee had not ,been aware of that information. The Mayor noted that this is information we can pass on
later, from one organization to another. Councillor MacGowan stated that the City staff knows this in-
formation (and she was there when we were told this information) and she is wondering if anyone has taken
the necessary steps for receiving such funds, as noted.
Consideration was given to the letter from Mr. Patrick D. Darrah, Chairman of the Saint John
Fundy Region Development Commission, enclosing one copy of the agreement proposed between the municipalities
participating in the said Commission, and copies of correspondence relating to the matter of incorporation
of the Commission, and advising that the Commission recommends the agreement for the approval of the
Councils and asks that consideration be given to the matter at an early date, and further advising that
funds will be made available for the operations of the Commission from the Department of Economic Growth
of New Brunswick only after the proposed agreement is signed or after appropriate incorporation of the
Commission; and further advising that since incorporation does not appear proper until after the legis-
lation has been changed, the Commission has recommended action on the agreement. Councillor A. Vincent
proposed the following motion.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the recommendations contained in the above noted
letter from the Chairman of the Saint John Fundy Regional~evelopment Commission be adopted.
Mr. Barfoot stated he thinks that this should also be referred to the City Solicitor for study,
before adoption. Councillor A. Vincent stated he would not include this proposed addition to the motion.
The Mayor noted that this was the request of the author, who would like more time to study it himself,
after having prepared it, and to have legal advice on it. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is a member
of that Commission and he is tired of being run rough-shod over, and every other Council member is on a
committee and we give them all the courtesies. He stated he will withdraw the motion, and he will get off
that Commission right now. He stated he wants the Council to accept his resignation as a member of the
Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission, publicly. Mr. Barfoot advised that he understands that
the document in Question has not been examined as yet by the City Solicitor and there are certain things
in here which probably should be clarified and reported back to Council on. Councillor Davis confirmed
that there are several things, in that regard. Mr. Barfoot added that this document has not been examined
as yet by the Commissioner of Economic Development, either.
On motion of CouncillOr Cave
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table and the City
anager and the City Solicitor confer together and bring in a recommendation to Council regarding the said
proposed document.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the
City has to aCQuire 1.06 acres of land from C. P. Rail for use in connection with the Lowell Street arena
and the said company agreed to sell this land to the City and the resulting survey showed the company did
not have the desired 25-foot clearance between the tracks and the property boundary and the company has
therefore reQuested a portion of Lowell Street Extension, with an area of approximately 8,125 sQuare feet,
be deeded to it so it may have this desired clearance; and further advising that the said company pur-
chased a large parcel of land in 1901 from the McCarthy Estate and a plan at that time showed the property
divided by Bay Shore Road that ran to the tracks for many years but the company does not have a clear
title to it, and it therefore reQuested that the City relinQuiSh any interest it might have in this
approximate 59,565 sQuare foot parcel, thus giving the company a clear title; and further advising that
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
'-.::"
.
....1
,....
141
c?, ~ 110;//
. $-C-reet-
I! (0:;1 nj
,;{OIPe (I 'S'~
:Ea!! c$ho/C
RL,
C~
a?oZ/~or
1
~af7L {J;l1tht
/l, T:1f/
'<oM~om~/1.
1 ft/6;-lel"s,fe,
/an/
1ft; !jCJr
~(A.5il7!l
J?en-f- .
. C'tJl7-i-rtJ/-.?
f/p<< SIJ?j
.s6:Ind:SJ1d..
!lccomm odJ
tfltln $t-0717 ~
r;&t>d s :fla.
1$, T I/sfI'
(?CJ/7lI??,
C; 't-!f
.) c;7/e/'ifo Y'
S-t6JI7c:tard>:
Ol+/cer
.
Je,hh ~
1?/leq
St-f1ee.t-
c(~~/I7.f1l
11 ep6tt&' {/
I UI Jf1, //afflC,
,{ahd Cc5'mm
GlnH7-t-
;V; :EJ. ;P~$e.
.:B tu;c~ec-
l1?e-.zOI7IJ?t1
11f,Pl;a Jht/eJl
l"lje/16s 4-
IJqe/7c!/es4
'P/tJI7I1,/lt:t:v/S -
~h:(
. I1caL/a
{'",;,?6rdl~
~6d,
1?e-70171~.7
...
the Recreation and Parks Department also reQuires a further portion of Lowell Street Extension to be used as part
of the arena development, and reQuested the complete street closing be carried out by the Land Committee so the
Committee at its meeting of October 27th last resolved that the portion of Lowell Street Extension needed for the
arena development and the unused portion of Bay Shore Road be advertised for closing - and the Committee made the
stipulation that the public be allowed free and unobstructed use of a portion of the parking lot as a means of
travel between City Line and Bay Shore Road; and further advising that both these closings are recommended as a
preliminary step to the deeding of the reQuired portion to c. P. Rail at the time the City aCQuires title to the
reQuired 1.06 acres; and recommending as follows:- (1) that the portion of Lowell Street shown on the submitted
map, both the right-of-way and the existing road, be advertised for closing; (2) that the portion of Bay Shore
Road commencing south of the existing Lowell Street Extension at a point shown as Number 23 on the submitted
surveyed plan and running southward to the Bay of Fundy be advertised for closing if considered necessary by the
City Solicitor's Department -- be received and filed and the recommendations adopted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, Mr. A. T. Ricketts
be paid the sum of $5,000.00 for 3.5 acres of his land at Second Loch Lomond and that the City pay for the legal
costs and survey costs, if any, on the understanding that the legal costs and survey costs will be deducted from
the said sum of $5;000.00 and that the resulting figure is to be in total satisfaction of Mr. Ricketts' transfer
of the property in Question to the City.
-9hJehtlOrl /'y {', CO. /Yo V-/5; /"176 (P.'73, :73004- 71/-)
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mayor Flewwelling calling attention to the
severe housing accommodation shortage that exists in this city, particularly for our people with fixed but
limited income levels, and to the fact that much of the existing housing accommodation in the city is below
reasonable accommodation standards, so that, because of the shortage of housing accommodation, some tenants are
being exploited by landlords, who cannot or will not provide accommodations meeting such reasonable standards,
and stating that while it would be impractical for Common Council to attempt to close all housing accommodation
in the city which does not meet this reasonable standard in view of the housing accommodation shortage, until
such time as a reasonable standard is obtained it would be of benefit to control rents for housing accommodation
which does not meet the desired reasonable living standards, and proposing a resolution for adoption by Council
in this matter, be received and filed, and the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"RESOLVED Council investigate the feasibility of establishing an Accommodation Standards Board which
could control rent for accommodation which does not meet desirable or acceptable standards, on the basis that
landlords who meet established standards considered for accommodation would be entitled to operate on the free
enterprise system, but landlords who do not provide accommodations which meet the standards criteria would be
limited in the amount of rent they could receive for such sub-standard accommodations in proportion to the degree
their accommodations fail to meet the standards criteria:
I
AND FURTHER that this concept of accommodation standards control of rent for accommodation which does
not meet specified standards be referred to the Housing Commission with a reQuest it seek the view of the public
and submit a report to Council as to: (a) the feasibility of such controls, (b) the views of landlords, (c) the
views of tenants, (d) the views of other interested persons, and any recommendations respecting the same as to
how such a concept could be implemented, (e) that the proposed concept of Accommodation Standards Control of Rent
be referred to the Housing Commission for the same purpose: AND FURTHER that the City Solicitor be asked for an
opinion as to whether the City of Saint John has the right to create rent controls, or is that a Provincial
responsibility or authority.
Councillor Kipping stated that while he thinks that the above proposed move is a well-intentioned one
and one in the right direction, and we do have two Standards Officers already, he is a little worried about the
Housing Commission itself. He asked what staff that Commission is going to have to work on this, and he noted
that it is obviously going to reQuire a fair bit of work and research, and we have heard from that Commission in
the past that it cannot do anything because it has no staff. The Mayor replied that he was told today that the
City's Standards Officer could work with this programme to get it started, as they do in the Neighbourhood
Improvement Programme - the Standards Officer would be an advisor to the Housing Commission - they will work this
out.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. John G. Riley of Messrs. Riley, Mosher &
Stanton, Barristers, submitting a description and a plan for a partial closure of Rebecca Avenue in Saint John
West, and advising that it is ne~essary that this portion of street be closed as Mr. William Haggerty, who is
reQuesting this street closure, has properties fronting on Main Street and these encroach upon the said Rebecca
Avenue and partial closure of this street is the only alternative for a clear title to Mr. Haggerty's properties,
be referred to the Land Committee.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from The New Brunswick Museum, submitting a reQuest
for a grant of $25,000.00 from the City of Saint John during the fiscal year 1976-1977, be referred to the
Committee on Budget and every consideration be given.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the application from Alpha Investments and Agencies Limited
for the re-zoning of 5 acres, more or less, of land at University Avenue and Royal Drive .to permit the construction
of apartment buildings, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that the neces-
sary advertising be proceeded with.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the application from Acadia Contractors Ltd. for the re-zoning
of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 on Forest City Street and part of Lot 10 on Pleasant City Street to permit the construction
of an apartment building, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that the
necessary advertising be proceeded with.
142
",
S'tfe;:J;el7 ;%
;?foJ/1e ~OMe
,(If?ttJ)'1 !leel7se
d ~,flt'a:>;.c-Io /-?
Ket/~; f!lo-6o)"
J./7h
If; ~jjf'<< tN'
C?& ITiI' 0 I (?t?/77/11
{!/tf/;<ehS Ckm
(p.f1 /!U/?1ah
1f Iff/re- s
t'c>mm/tZ1?e p/7
.z;; S~/tf/ (J?l,i;l/
'PS;/C///d-6r)'
ffuma 17, ex. r~
~ me/1~/
~.,;;;tf-;el1~s
('i<<rei o-P
3d e/7t-o log;!
;Y; ':13. t1!e>>c-a/
II e&l /.c-h /l c--f-
(~rl-l-/'1ue)
Pf7(JJ/. &:of/t!;
11 d// eaL- /firs;
Pn>j7e~ Prv-
t-u6lve I9ssoe.
?&I/<<-f-Iol1
W't?od(a.w'l
S tv" -v('/I/. .9.
-t/1ea6-me'/l/~
(?lal1e-
L?rij1Il1Cl17d.1'er
/Vat! f4rbac,;-s
23d:
t?'(()f/le oFf-fee
611tg.
,(o/Z.f fII,iar-P
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Stephen Mosher, asking for an
extension of permission for the location of his mobile home on the new lot in Lakewood to the west of
Karen Street, just north of the end of Asied Street, in the T. E. Desmond Subdivision, so that he may
complete the work he has started on the house he is building on this lot, and advising that at this time
he can guarantee that he will be completed within an eleven-month period and will remove the mobile home
by June of 1976 at which time his family can move to his father-in-law's summer place, be received and
filed and the requested extension of permission granted.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the notice from the New Brunswick Liquor Control
Commission that an application for a cabaret license from Keddy's Motor Inn for premises located on Main
Street, will be heard at a public hearing of the Licensing Board on the 7th day of November, 1975 com-
mencing at 10.00 a.m. in the Hearing Room, Head Office, New Brunswick LiQuor Control Commission, Wilsey
Road, Fredericton, N. B., be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Citizens Commission on Human Rights,
(National HeadQuarters, Toronto) of 15 Charlotte Street, Saint John, N. B., advising that for many years
the Commission and its affiliate, the Committee on Institutional Psychiatry, have been campaigning for the
human, civil and legal rights of Canadian mental patients, and stating that they are a non-governmental
group sonsored by the Church of Scientology with local offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Ottawa, Montreal,
Quebec, Saint John and Halifax, and have visited every major psychiatric facility in Canada several times
and in their research, have found that protections afforded the mental patient under provincial mental
health legislation are on the whole few and inadeQuate, and, as a result, they have written a' critiQue of
the New Brunswick Mental Health Act which includes legislation to safeguard those in institutions, and
that since they feel this matter is a concern to all of us, 'especially here in Saint John, they are
ubmitting a critiQue from the Commission and the proposed legislation, asking for the Common Council's
support of amendments to the said Act, and would appreciate the Council's reply after reading the critiQue
be received and filed.
Councillor Kipping asked when the proposed legislation referred to above is to be presented to
the New Brunswick LegislatUre, or the Government department involved, stating his reason for asking that
is that he would really like to see this tabled for an opportunity to study it and discuss it with interested
groups 'in order to find out what the implications of this kind of legislation are. He felt that receiving
and filing is not good enough treatment for a matter which has been brought before Council by a group like
this which has obviously put a lot of work into it. He noted that this group is asking the Council
whether or not Council is going to support this group's submission, and he thinks that the Council should
say whether or not it is going to support it, rather than just receive and file it. Councillor Gould felt
that this subject is more properly the realm of the Provincial Government anyway, and it is to that
government that this brief probably should go. Councillor Higgins noted that he is not familiar with the
above named organization or with any of the organizations with which it is affiliated, and in receiving
and filing the brief, he can read it and if he wishes to make a private submission or express his opinion,
he thinks we should do so - he thinks that for the Council to get involved with something unless maybe the
City staff or the City Solicitor say they think it would be an excellent idea for the Council to make a
stand on this matter. He stated he would like to read this presentation, check with a few people to find
out who this organization is, and if he wishes to make a private submission, that is his own business.
Councillor M. Vincent felt that in the caSe of an item such as this brief, which is in from a group
perhaps unknown to Council with no staff recommendation, it is the responsibility of each Council member
to read the said brief, individually, and to pursue it as he or she wishes, and other than that, he thinks
that receiving and filing the said correspondence is the appropriate action to take.
Councillor Kipping voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the correspondence from the Red Head-Mispec
Property Protective Association regarding the sewage treatment facility for the former Woodlawn Sub-
division, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Red Head-Mispec Property Pro-
tective Association, advising that a potentially serious pollution problem is about to develop in their
area in that the sewage treatment facility for the former Woodlawn Sub-division has, or is about to have,
its capacity exceeded, and giving details in this regard, and asking that the Common Council take ap-
propriate action regarding this situation, be referred to the City staff for a report at the next regular
eeting of Council.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager with regard to ap~
plication from the National Harbours Board to place a temporary mobile office at the entrance to Long
Wharf, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development, authority be granted to the National Harbours Board to place a
temporary mobile office at the entrance to Long Wharf, the said Board having advised that the said tem-
porary mobile office is intended to house a stevedoring company, who are processing knock-down or un-
assembled automobiles through the port, and it is hoped to develop the volume of this business to the
point where permanent accommodations will become feasible.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
14J
fl~reelneh
..5:-:r /aM~
1? ty.JJef/d
~n;/?l.
G<</l, 4,
f//r;eel?
I
LEG A L
~'&y JC,1/fr-
I~UI<<fj::1-t-
::8'/6Per .;1+
,K"(ed-r/ C".
.<-t-d.
II //1f1tlrC
eKpSSWOJ
.7JefJ.-h ;k56c.
e' 6-;1 /Y1.fJ1.
.COMn7. of
~oml?lal7 '
?flail/? -1--
:Def/e/o(?
pro//. &bYE.
c'm/??$Ao
;z:: $ruhie
I
f(('(>/7s0L
f'J1o~h/c
/f;me~
1
.
....
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to have the City staff prepare a written report for
next week on the action of the Council (laying on the table at this meeting of Council the recommendations
contained in the letter from the Chairman of the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission which submitted
the agreement proposed between the municipalities participating in the said Commission, and correspondence
relating to the matter of incorporation of the said Commission - and asking the City Manager and the City Solicitor
to confer together and bring in a recommendation to Council regarding the said proposed document) - whether we
lost $90,000.00 or not. He pointed out that we have not got any money for our Development Commission, and unless
certain things are taken care of we are going to diSQualify ourselves - that is why the .matter is an urgent one.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor on the subject of the
issuance of a building permit for the construction of a building by Battery & Electric Limited on Rothesay Avenue
on "the exact alignment of the future Airport Expressway", advising that, for the reasons as spelled out in his
letter, he is of the opinion that possibly no human error was committed in this case and that if this company had
been refused the building permit it might very well have been successful in obtaining one if it had demanded it,
and further stating that as a result of the uncertainty in this matter, and the legal Questions he has raised,
which he believes should be examined in some detail by the Department of Justice in relation to the Provincial
Highways. Department's future plans, he is recommending the City Manager, the Commissioner of Planning and any
other appropriate staff the City Manager believes necessary, meet with the Provincial officials to discuss the
problem from a legal standpoint of what the Province is expecting the City to do in connection with land ac-
I
Quisition for the purposes of co-operating and assisting in the construction of the proposed Expressway -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Mr. Rodgers, in discussing the above matter prior to the making of the above motion, noted that his
letter to Council resulted from a report presented to Council in Committee of the Whole by the City Manager in
this matter, and stated that upon looking into the matter he is pleased to say that in his opinion, Mr. I.
Bruhier did not make an error, and he says that on the fact that it is very unfortunate that he could have been
labelled as making this error indefinitely if the matter had not been examined; it goes a little deeper than
that, in that if there are other citizens in the city who have legitimate right to building permits they should
not be refused on the basis of some plan that the Province has for the future unless the plan is properly tied
down, and that is why he made the recommendation that is contained in his letter. Mr. Barfoot stated that with
respect to that particular area of the Airport Expressway, there is a meeting set up for the afternoon of Nov-
ember 4th next with officials of the Department of Highways and land owners in that area to look at the plan and
to help to try and define the exact right-of-way required for the Airport Expressway between Rothesay Avenue and
McAllister Drive. Councillor MacGowan suggested that this subject is what she has been talking about on the
western part of the city, and stated she would like to see some steps taken to find out where we propose to put
the Northern Expressway, to protect that land.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Solicitor, the Council authorize
the commencement forthwith of legal action against MacLaren Atlantic Limited and Beaver Maritime Limited in the
matter of the collapse of the water intake system at Spruce Lake in Saint John West.
The Mayor asked that the City Solicitor clarify the problem that existed over the past week-end that
created a lot of problems for many people at the Kierstead Mobile Home Park, and to explain the legality of the
matter and the actions that can be taken and the time limit involved. Mr. Rodgers advised that notice that was
served on Mr. Kierstead was for the purpose of advising him that he is violating the Mobile Home Parks By-Law by
not being in possession of a license as required and asking him to cease that operation within seven days if he
does not obtain a license; Mr. Kierstead or the owner of the park can come to the City and get a license, but to
get a license he has to meet the requirements; if, in seven days, he does not have a license provided he gives
the proper notices to his tenants he can close his operation at any time - as he understands it, the earliest Mr.
Kierstead can do that is January 1st, 1976, if he wants to give notice to the tenants to get out - he is still
governed.by the Landlord and Tenant Law; assuming he does not do that and he does not have a license, then the
City's next step is to lay an Information in the court in about two weeks charging him with operating the park
without a license; if Mr. Kierstead comes to court and pleads guilty then the Judge can levy a fine against the
owner and it can be an on-going daily fine until he complies - also, we can ask the Judge for an Order after so
many days, that the park be closed. He stated he believes the Council should realize that we are not going to
ask for it and he is sure the Judge is not going to summarily take the responsibility of putting 200 people on
the street. He stated he does not know what the final outcome of the matter will be. He stated that if there is
the on-going daily fine, Mr. Kierstead is going to have to make a decision: can he afford to pay the fine - will
he go out of business? He stated that, indirectly, it certainly can lead to these people being put out of the
park, but while you have the Mobile Home Parks By-Law written the way it is and the processes started, then he
thinks the Council has got to be prepared for eventually something like that happening; but if some arrangement
is made that, for example, so many months be given - and so on and so forth - he thinks that would have more
sanction on Mr. Kierstead doing it than if the Council got involved and started saying it would not do anything
now but would give him a few months to do something; he believes that the system breaks down completely with
respect to other people standing in the wings, wanting to start mobile home parks, or even people in existence
now - what will they do with their mobile home parks if for some way the Council gets involved on the point of
attempting to take care of the people in the park, when, really, the Council is dealing with an operation that
could have the most up-to-date park on this continent and be complying with the by-law in every respect, and
still decide to go out of business. The Mayor felt that the City Solicitor should guide the Council members, who
no doubt will be receiving telephone calls in the Kierstead Mobile Home Park matter, on the extent of the con-
versation or information the Council members should give such callers. Councillor Higgins asked if Mr. Kierstead
can shut off the lights and water in the park. Mr. Rodgers replied that he cannot because he has to give the
proper notices to these tenants, the same as any landlord, but he could shut off the lights and water after
January 1st, 1976. He added that he is concerned that the Council not tell the tenants in this matter that there
is nothing for them to worry about or that alternative accommodations will be provided -- the Council cannot do
that. At this time, Councillor Kipping reported on the attendance of himself and Councillor Green at the meeting
of the tenants of this park that was held on October 28th last.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~,
I....
/144
,.,
Pia!?/!, /ld ws
COM/??, .
l(-e-Ao/?/I?:J
7Ose~
:.:7J t( 17 ,{ 6l/?f
ffe-XoI7 /17j"
.zle>y ~ J),
~e~e
.,(fe:,y-t:t's 4€aBh
Serf/I'c!'e ~
Ct1'1//a~
/'l1//7-cer;p
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the tenth day
of November, A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, ESQuire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
ROdgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development, D. French, Director of Personnel
and Training, and G. Baird, Commissioner of Economic Development
1
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was completed regarding Mr. Joseph I
Dunham's application for the re-zoning of civic number 2435 Ocean Westway to permit the conversion of
this property to a four-family residence, and that no written objection had been received. No person was
present to offer comment regarding the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee
stating that Mr. Joseph Dunham obtained a permit in 1963 to erect a home and four motel units at 2435
Ocean Westway, two on either side of the building - in 1968, he approached the Planning Commission
stating that the motel business had turned unprofitable for him and he would like to convert the two
wings into apartments - this meant an extension on each side towards the front of the building so that
the new wings could each be converted into one bedroom apartments - the Planning Commission approved the
proposal subject to the reQuirements of the Department of Health and the then Parish of Lancaster Building
Inspector - at that time, Mr. Dunham received a special concession due to the circumstances on the
property - the zoning then, as today, did not permit more than two family buildings on any site; and
further stating that Mr. Dunham's three family building was one storey in height - earlier this year, he
applied for permission to add a second storey above the portion which he was then occupying - after
obtaining this permit he extended the building on one side to add a fourth dwelling unit and began to
construct a second storey over the full length of the extended building - he received a stop work order
and as a result, applied for the re-zoning; and further stating that Mr. Dunham also has received from
time to time permission for the temporary placement of mobile homes or travel trailers on this property -
this is a rather involved storey, but Council's May 5th, 1975 meeting referred a Planning Advisory
Committee recommendation to the Legal Department to take appropriate action on such units that were there
at that time - at the time of writing this letter from the Committee, namely, November 5th, 1975, there
were three such units on the property; and advising that the Committee believes that Mr. Dunham should be
allowed to complete what he has started, but that it should be redesigned and used solely for three
families, even though it might be necessary to use the extension of the building as a garage with storage
or living accommodations above it related to the adjoining apartment -- be received and filed and the
proposed re-zoning not be proceeded with, in conformity with the opinion of the Committee, namely, that
!~'. Dunham should be allowed to complete what he has started, but that it should be redesigned and used
solely for three families, even though it might be necessary to use the extension of the building as a
garage with storage or living accommodations above it related to the adjoining apartment.
.
I
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
The Common Clerk advised that with reference to the proposed re-zoning of land on Brown Street,
adjacent to 635 Brown Street, for Mr. Lloyd D. Pierce of Lloyd's Heating Service Ltd., the necessary
advertising took place,. and one letter of objection has been received, namely, that from Mr. William M.
Mintern for the following reasons: (1) if the said land (Lot D) was re-zoned and the proposed office .
building erected, there would be a traffic congestion in an area in close proximity to the adjacent
school, and (2) property values in this residential area would decrease in value. Mr. Mintern's letter
states that he believes that work has been started on the said proposed building, and that he believes
that in the interest of all concerned this work be suspended.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that Mr. Lloyd Pierce has applied for the re-zoning of a 50-foot by 135-foot lot located west of
635 Brown Street, from "R_lB" One Family Residential to "B_2" General Business classification to permit
the establishment of Lloyd's Heating Service Ltd., and that at its last meeting the Committee was concerned
that work had been started on the premises before a building permit had issued and that a sign erected
also alluded to a backhoe service, and that the Committee members felt they would like to investigate
this matter a bit further and they expect that a report could result from the Committee's next meeting
that is to be held November 12th, and that the Common Council is reQuested to extend to the Committee
additional time beyond the public fre8.l:il1g in order to submit its report -- be received and filed and the
reQuest complied with.
I
I
It was noted that no person was present to speak either for or against this proposed re-zoning
for Mr. Lloyd Pierce.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the above noted letter of objection from Mr.
Wj.lliam Mintern, be received and filed.
The Common Clerk advised that the proposed re-zoning of property at 770 Bay Street was advertised
for Scholten Properties Ltd. and that no written objection was received. No person was present to offer .
comment regarding this proposed re-zoning.
~
r'"
14~
J>4h/7. /J;(v/
. (! t?h'7J?1 '
J?e-zon/Yl
St:~t?/HJ7
Prt>f?'6'I1"fIC 5
/-1-/(
I
I
Lltl/??.il
t$JJs-truc-
-t/M .ilL
. Re- :ztmlJ1f
I
P/';;Ml. fld't//
Cflmm,
.
Jie-;zont'17!
I
I
A~,J?1c;
et>JJ slNe-
i-;r711 ~-I-d
th/1:?11 .s-h
. 7Je-f'err eFt
. w/~~/1/n.f
/9'1t/1?/~J7s.
Idea/SUA
,,( ~d'.
ll.....
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt.
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising
that Scholten Properties have applied for the re-zoning of a 250-foot by 240-foot lot at 770 Bay Street from "RS-
2" Suburban Residential to "B-2" General Business classification to permit the construction of a building to be
used for a food store on the ground floor and apartments on the second floor, with the site to also include a gas
bar, and further advising that at its October 28th meeting, the Committee heard the proponent and from objecting
nearby residents and that also presented was a petition in opposition to the proposal, and that the Committee
will require more time to determine the validity of some of the statements made at its meeting and requests that
the Council grant additional time to present a final report, and that the Committee would hope to be able to
complete its investigation report not later than immediately following its November 25th meeting and, if possible,
even before that date -- be received and filed and the requested extension of time be granted to the said Com-
mittee in this regard.
The Common Clerk stated that the necessary advertising took place regarding the proposed re-zoning for
Lloma Construction Ltd: of an area of land on both sides of Thornbrough Street, between the properties On Anglin
Drive and the properties on the northerly side of Parks Street Extension containing an area of approximately 32
acres. He added that no written objections had been received in this regard. It was noted that no person was
present to offer comment in connection with the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the letter dated November 6th, 1975 from the Planning
Advisory Committee, be received and filed and as recommended in the said letter -- which recommends that the area
indicated on the submitted print be re-zoned to "RM-l" Multiple Family Residential classification, pursuant to a
resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act tying the development of part of this area to a layout
shown on a plan to be filed with the Common Clerk, and which advises that the area proposed to be re-zoned
includes the Lloma development area and a strip of land across Thornbrough~treet and another directly across a
proposed street at the lower edge of the area for re-zoning and that it would be incongruous to allow apartments
on one side of the street and restri~t the other side to one family residences only -- and which further advises
that Lloma Construction Ltd. has applied to Council for the re-zoning of approximately 32 acres of land located
mainly on the south side of Thornbrough Street, and that the proposal calls for somewhat upwards of 500 units in
three-storey apartment buildings containing 12 and 14 units, and that Lloma Construction is the same company that
has been building 12-unit three-storey walk-up apartments on Michael Crescent, and that the plan of development
which is to be filed with the Common Clerk is not quite completed and has been the subject of consultations
between the developer's architects and various civic and utilities' staffs, and there is some question of pro-
perty ownership at the fringes of the area, including the possibility of a sliver of City-owned land along the
easterly portion on Thornbrough Street (the re-zoning is of little consequence to the ownerships and the land
ownership issues are currently under investigation by the proponents' SOlicitor) -- and further advising that the
site adjoins the Princess Elizabeth School property and the Committee is advised by the Deputy Superintendent of
Schools that the schools in the area have capacity to absorb the children who might be expected to reside in this
proposed development; and also advising that provision will be made for two public areas for tot and playground
purposes, respectively, and that within the development, walkways will be provided for more direct access to the
said School; and further advising that there are questions of servicing, the final design of the necessary sub-
division and possible closing of part of a reserved street within the development area which will have to come to
Common Council and/or civic staff after the re-zoning - and that, however, the developer proposes to place at
least the footings for some of the buildings before the year's end and staff is attempting to help -- the area
advertised for re-zoning be re-zoned to "RM-l" Multiple Family Residential classification, pursuant to Section 39
of the Community Planning Act tying the development of this area to a layout shown on a plan. to be filed with the
Common Clerk.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
November lOth, 1975, submitting the re-zoning plan to accompany the above named re-zoning, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on both sides of
Thornbrough Street, between the properties on Anglin Drive and the properties on the northerly side of Parks
Street Extension containing an area of approximately 32 acres, from "PD" Planned Development district to "RM-l"
Three-Storey Multiple Residential district, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on both sides of
Thornbrough Street, between the properties on Anglin Drive and the properties on the northerly side of Parks
Street Extension containing an area of approximately 32 acres, from "PD" Planned Development district to "RM-l"
Three-Storey Multiple Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay", stating he did so because at a recent meeting of Council he was
unsuccessful in endeavouring to have two readings to a Zoning By-Law amendment - he was not voting against this
particular re-zoning. He added that he thought that the Council in the future was going to give only one reading
per meeting to Zoning By-Law amendments; otherwise, if two readings are to be given at one meeting, he feels
every Council member should have the same right to do it. The Mayor pointed out that one reading only is some-
times given at the time the Council authorizes the advertising to re-zone, and not at the time of the public
hearing.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Community Planning and Development, advising that the Ideal Stores Ltd. has applied for a building permit to
repoint the westerly end of the company's building at 199 Union Street which is located on the side of Union
Street which is the subject of a deferred widening by-law, and recommending that Ideal Stores Ltd. be permitted
146
Flee-/-
Z; sur.;! 17 ~ e
?t9/;~ C'OI/t?,
tttt-f.s/de IV-
/l'pft'iJ1rm eJ7-C-
J)e;y,23uJIL/n
In sj?i?C-cpr
fl-, 7-: !/e#erna
Sa/OJr'1
:t3u/ld/i'7f'
J3!:1- /i>/W
S.;;J/<>Irj
1?5'J?6'f!7/?/ ed-
5_ T FUl1dy
7? e~/(Jn .2Jevel
t:rJh1Jn.
{j '-i!J /l!!Jr,
(!/ 'i-!f J -;; /; d/-It?r
? 7J.2Jarrdh
,.,
to carry out its repairs and that the agreement referred to in the Community Planning Act is not necessary
in this instance, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
.
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Finance, stating that in reply to the question asked at the Common Council meeting of November 3rd
last, as to whether the City fleet insurance applies when automobiles travel outside the Province of New
Brunswick, the City's fleet insurance policy applies only while the automobile is being operated, used,
stored or parked ~ithin Canada, the United States of America or upon a vessel plying between ports of
those countries, and that although it is not a requirement of the policy the City follows the practice of
informing the insurance broker of any intended trips of City vehicles outside the Province, the purpose I
being to supply information that could affect the premium rating should the number of vehicles or frequency
of such travelling rise to a significant extent - and further advising that of recent years trips of this
kind have been very infrequent -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
Building By-Law requires that either the Building Inspector or, in his absence, the Deputy Building
Inspector, exercise such powers and duties as are provided in the by-law, and that since Mr. A. Ellis'
appointment as Building Inspector in 1972, there has been no one designated as Deputy Building Inspector,
and that, however, when Mr. Ellis was absent through illness this spring, Mr. G. P. Heffernan, Plans
Examiner, was appointed Deputy Building Inspector to act in the absence of the Building Inspector for
medical reasons; and recommending that Mr. G. P. Heffernan be appointed Deputy Building Inspector to act
as Deputy Building Inspector during any absences of the Building Inspector -- be received and filed and
the recommendation adopted.
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the above motion means that Mr. Heffernan would be recelvlng an
increase in salary. Mr. Barfoot advised that Mr. Heffernan would be receiving appropriate compensation
during the time he is acting as Deputy Building Inspector. Councillor A. Vincent noted that this man is
being promoted.to that position, which would mean he is definitely going to get a salary increase. In
reply, Mr. Barfoot stated that the purpose of the above resolution is to authorize Mr. Heffernan to act as
Deputy Building Inspector in the absence from the city of the Building Inspector. Councillor A. Vincent
stated that the point he is making is that if we need a Deputy Building Inspector, why don't we make it a
permanent appointment. Mr. Barfoot stated that there are a number of changes going on in the Buildi~g
Department, and in all parts of the City organization, as part of the reorganization under the various
reorganizational studies, and it is intended to make several changes in the Building Department; this
particular change is to cover the City under the Building By-Law which requires either the Building
Inspector or the Deputy Building Inspector to be the official of the City designated in certain instances.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that the City lost one case in court within the last two years because it
was not properly constituted. He stated that there is a difference between an Acting Deputy Building
Inspector and a Deputy Building Inspector, and he maintained that the Council should decide whether it is
going to have a Deputy Building Inspector or have one sometime, to cover the law. The Mayor noted that
this will be checked on. Councillor M. Vincent noted that the recommendation in the City Manager's report
does not say to appoint this man in an acting capacity - it says to appoint him as a Deputy Building
Inspector, and then to act. He asked if the City Manager is in, fact, appointing-somebody in an acting
capacity, or is he filling the position with a Deputy Building Inspector. In reply, Mr. Barfoot stated
that this is actually the position of Deputy Building Inspector and he is authorized to act in the absence
of the Building Inspector. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the City Manager is recommending to Council at
this time that Mr. Heffernan be appointed Deputy Building Inspector, or is he appointing a Deputy Building
Inspector, then to act as Deputy Building Inspector during absences, et cetera. Councillor Davis stated
that the way he reads the recommendation is that it is a permanent appointment and he acts as Deputy
Building Inspector in the absence of the Building Inspector, and when the Building Inspector is not absent
the Building Inspector is the authority; the position of Deputy Building Inspector is a permanent ap-
pointment - when the Building Inspector is absent, the Deputy Building Inspector is the Deputy Building
Inspector and acts as Building Inspector. Mr. Barfoot explained that the recommendation in his letter is
to appoint sr. Heffernan as Deputy Building Inspector to act as Deputy Building Inspector during the
asence of the Building Inspector; in other words, when Mr. Ellis is away, this is the man designated by
the by-law to act on his behalf.
.
I
.
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
Councillor A. Vincent asked what position does Mr. Heffernan hold in that department when the
Building Inspector is not absent. Mr. Barfoot replied that he believes this appointment would have to be
an official title (namely, Deputy Building Inspector). Councillor A. Vincent stated he has no objection
to Mr. Heffernan receiving this appointment, and he feels he is doing an excellent job, but he does object
to this matter coming in to Council in a two-pronged definition; he will support this man being appointed
Deputy Building Inspector and so on, on the City Manager's recommendation, but he does not want the City I
Manager to be coming in to Council in this matter saying this man is only going to be Deputy Building
Inspector when the Building Inspector is absent, because we still do not have a Deputy Building Inspector,
and the title has to be the Deputy for Mr. Heffernan. The Mayor replied that the title will be Deputy
Building Inspector.
With regard to Councillor A. Vincent's question as to what remuneration Mr. Heffernan would
receive in view of this appointment, the City Manager stated that he would have to obtain that infor-
mation. The Mayor added that the information asked for by Councillor A. Vincent in this matter will .be
provided.
I
Consideration was given to the following letters:- (1) from the City Manager, further to the
proposed agreement between the municipalities concerning the matter of incorporation of the Saint John
Fundy Region Development Commission, advising that the City staff are still studying the proposed agreem-
ent and the various powers contained therein and will be meeting with officials of the Department of
Economic Growth on November 12th next to attempt to clarify some of these matters, and he will be making a
recommendation to the next meeting of Common Council; (2) from the City Solicitor, advising that he has
examined the said proposed agreement, and submitting comments regarding same and the course of action to
be followed to vest the Commission with other than administrative powers, and to create the Commission;
(3) from Mr. P. D. Darrah, Chairman of the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission, noting that the
above noted proposed agreement contained in Paragraph 2 a list of specific purposes of the Commission, and
stating that he understands that those specific purposes can only be given to the Commission if the
Commission is created by private legislation or incorporated under the Comapnies Act, and cannot be given
to a Commission created by a municipality, and that he understands that the City Solicitor is advising the
Council that the municipality may create a Commission and delegate administrative powers to it -- and
stating that in view of the foregoing, he is recommending that all of the words immediately following the
.
~
".
147
Mrs. Betty Sleep of 30 Carmarthen Street, gave a summary of her presentation to Council on July 21st,
L975 on the problem of the non-stopping of cars before crossing the sidewalk when exiting from or entering the
ramp which leads to and from the underground parking at the Prince Edward Square shopping mall on to Prince
~dward Street between St. Joseph's and Prince Charles Schools, opposite Richmond Street, thereby creating a
dangerous and potentially fatal traffic situation to both motorists and pedestrians. She reminded the Council
;i~_ ul7~ep- that she herself had been a victim of this particular exit, when she. was hit by a motorist while she was crossing
~rp~~~r4'lh this exit on the sidewalk. It was noted that Mrs. Sleep was still using crutches as a result of the injuries
~ -/r?b' ~She sustained at that time. She recalled that at the July 21st meeting, the Council referred the said problem
/?tJ.Il- ::>v~;1-r 17'1
cars ex/I/Il:!
it? '?rij1(:~ c.
Kdtl/~ ..?i.
.
/l~/'eeP1en
$.:T FUIld':f
Rej'Joi'7
:De vel C'o//7/?!
ft '-1:1 ~r-
I
:Bull tfI/.I7;!
I :l3!f -.La fY'
.il17J't'lldmed:.
~ f!J.
$ol/c/ftJr
· "Fx I i -fro/>?
,6ul/ 1i/I?1 s
1t(;;-f/t'I1c;; /
:Bldf' Co/c
'P/~hn. ffdt//
{!t?h?m.
['Ii:
S;J!e/-/-tJr
I
.
I
1Yd1/lltJal
f-/'r>e C?Jde
I
/i1rs, 73et6
. $Iee';tl
Jhl7ce ;atle,
...
word "parks" in Paragraph 2 including sub-paragraphs (a) to (0) inclusive be deleted, and advising that with the
deletion as recommended, the Common Council may then authorize the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute the agree-
ment and together with the other four municipalities as listed create the said Commission.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above named letters be received and filed and the
subject matter be laid on the table until the Council receives the anticipated report from the City Manager in
connection with the subject.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
reason the matter was tabled is because the other municipalities
Councillor Kipping advised that the only
involved have to deal with it, as well.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the Building By-Law be
amended by adopting Parts 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 of the National Building Code of Canada and Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4
and 5 of the Supplements to the said Code, and that the said Building By-Law be further amended by incorporating
therein the following paragraph, "That in all existing and future buildings, two storeys or over, including
rooming houses, it be mandatory that a second means of egress, or exit, be installed from each individual unit
or apartment, unLess served by a hallway exiting to the outside, described by Parts 3 and 9 of the National
Building Code; to become effective immediately, and the owners of property be given a period of up to twelve
months to comply with this By-Law.":
AND FURTHER that the above matter be referred to the City Solicitor for drafting of the appropriate
amendments to the said By-Law.
CouncilLor M. Vincent asked if the above proposed amendment to the Building By-Law, to provide a
second means of egress, or exit, from each existing and future building that is two storeys or over, including
rooming houses, is in contradiction of the National Building Code - and if so, which will supremacy over the
other, the National Building Code, or an amendment to the City's by-law. Mr. Zides replied that this is purely
a legaL question - as to whether the Council is on sound ground in doing it in that manner; he added that the
PLanning Advisory Committee's belief and intent is that it is supreme over the National Building Code. In reply
to the said question, Mr. Rodgers stated he would have to look at the matter from the point of view of other
areas of the Building Code and see what the effect is of adopting the Building Code with respect to the terms of
reference - he would want to look at it and study it. Councillor M. Vincent stated he knows that other Councillors
and himself are interested in having this proposed amendment included in the City by-law and he wants to make
sure that if we are going to have a by-law which states there has to be secondary means of exit or egress from a
building of two storeys in height or over, that our by-law is enforceable; he questions that if the National
Building Code says such regulation is not necessary, if the City's by-laws are strong enough to make it mandatory
in Saint John. !4r. Rodgers advised that his purpose in studying the said Code is to determine whether its
wording is permissive or mandatory in its own statements.
Councillor Gould discussed with Mr. Zides the question of what kind of fines are to be levied (and how
to enforce the imposing of such fines) against people who do not bring their properties up to standard in the
time Limit allowed. Mr. Zides explained that we are not changing the legislation in the city's by-law - there
is an administrative section which sets out the fines and those are not being touched - all that is happening
regarding the proposed amendment is that we are amending by reference to the 1975 Building Code and also pro-
viding this new regulation on exits. He explained that you are limited by laws as to how much you can put in
for limitations on penalties - it has to be in accordance with the Municipalities Act or the Community Planning
Act, depending on which Act you enact the Building By-Law.
Councillor MacGowan noted that on page 9 of the National Building Code it is essentially a set of
minimum regulations, so that should answer the question that was asked - because it is the minimum, and we can
improve it if we feel we need to, and this is what a lot of people have suggested for years. She stated that
she is not satisfied on the matter of exits being required, even with having that regulation in our own by-law.
She noted that on page 118 of the Code a single exit is permitted from a dwelling unit not more than two storeys
in building height with an exit at or near ground level, so they must have taken into consideration what we did
say, because the regulation previously was three storeys. Mr. Zides advised that the whole question of exits
has been very controversial and this is one of the major reasons why some jurisdictions in Canada have not
adopted the National Building Code. She asked Mr. Zides if he thinks that they really took into consideration
the presentation that was made by us to the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities and got some
action - that is, is this the extent of the action. In reply, Mr. Zides stated they have not gone as far as we
would like to them to go, otherwise we would not be making the recommendation. Councillor MacGowan, returning
to the recommendation in the City Manager's letter, stated she is not sure that it goes as far as she would like
to see. She asked ,!hat "unless served by a hallway exiting to the outside" means in the said recommended
amendment. Mr. Zides advised that Part 3 of the National Building Code is very similar to the old Part 3 on the
use and occupancy - he thinks it is a question of being able to get into a hallway which has direct access to
the outside - in other words, not upstairs but two exits outside.
Councillor Kipping stated that because of his interest in self-service gasoline stations he would like
to know whether the National Building Code has anything to do with the National Fire Code. Mr. Zides replied
that they are two separate documents and are not interconnected. Councillor A. Vincent asked whether the
National Fire Code is a long way off yet. Mr. Zides replied that he is told that there are copies of that Code
available, but he does not have any copies. He recalled that the Code was supposed to have been brought in
about this time last year, and he felt that the delay probably lies in the fact that the National Committee did
not complete the Code.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he does not know how the Council can adopt the above motion in view of
the fact that the City Solicitor has informed Council he does not know which would have jursidiction _ the
National Building Code, or a City by-law amendment. Noting that the National Building Code is in contradiction
to the recommendation under discussion, Councillor M. Vincent felt that the Council should not act until it
receives the City Solicitor's report in this regard.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors M. Vincent and A. Vincent voting "nay".
148
/J1f>~,:B eH!f
Slay .
Cdrs (xrt-/nj'
/J..oJ'l Pr,Ed 5:J,
uh~e/7fl)7MAd'
pdrJr /nj tnJt-
sitlj///f7j .;; i-
Fr,;;:,/, Sf-,
s/l{etUallr
Tr.;:Jm'e<l-
8;;;tei!f CVo/n
,......,.
hflrtJ /rt~-t/()
;J.ibrmall /1-
A ock f; d )'rr
~m,d3e$
/il1/roN( etc,
co/!. 56?tt1er S.!f
~/II o-f Los-t.s
,(-<jJrtJ ;;riat/t?JJ
/JIbrm.;1J7 /1-
~ock /;,;yf7r
p/.,;,tJl7.lldws,
C~/1lm,
$uJ-t/p; ~jf-h
.;J mt>haments
,,' "
e/t!;! 5~i~/~
I!JN. Cera/d
/JJe/all 5t//'?
/i!Cl)/!e hN?le
of non~stopping of cars before crossing the sidewalk at this ramp exit, to the Chief of Police, the Works
Department and to the Traffic and Safety Committee for study and a report. She advised that several
recommendations were made regarding this matter at the August 19th, 1975 meeting of the Traffic and Safety
Committee, and from speaking with a member of that Committee, she understands that these are:- that the
Council approach the owners of Prince Edward Square Mall to erect signs inside the exit warning of
pedestrian traffic and Section 187 of the Motor Vehicle Act (brlefly, this section states that it is
illegal when in a business or residential area to exit from private property without coming to a proper
stop before and after the sidewalk). She added that, unfortunately, a letter was not submitted by the
Committee in this matter to the Common Clerk, which would have brought the matter back before Council,
and she has therefore come before Council to ask that the Council act upon the Committee's recommendations
as soon as possible. She stated she would also ask at this time, since the matter was also referred to
the Chief of Police, that the Council request the Police Department to make periodic checks in an unmarked
car and to ticket and fine the infractions which affect the said Section 187 as called for; she noted
that these fines range from $10.00 to $50.00, or imprisonment upon non-payment. She stated that she
sincerely hopes that the Council will consider her presentation and request immediately, in the interests
of all citizens, this being a very serious situation. The Common Clerk confirmed that the Council on
July 21st referred the matter to the Traffic and Safety Committee and that the Committee's minutes
contain the recommendation as stated by Mrs. Sleep - the Committee recommends a stop or watch for pedes-
trians sign be recommended; however, this recommendation was not taken from those minutes to put before
Council as it was anticipated that the Committee would direct a letter to Council in this matter, but a
letter did not come - it is just a lack of communication, apparently. The Mayor thanked Mrs. Sleep for
her presentation.
Consideration was given to a letter from Mr. Norman A. Lockhart of 501 Greenhead Road, which
submits copies of correspondence relating to his objection to the expropriation by the City of his
property that is required for the construction of the Milford-Randolph-Greendale collector sewer project,
and which states that to date repairs to his driveway and immediate area to repair damages incurred in
April of 1973 as a result of a survey team sub-contracted by the City, and requests that if such repairs
are not possible, Mr. Lockhart will expect an amount to cover the cost of said repairs. Mr. Barfoot
advised that the City is in the process of completing the expropriation of this property for the in-
stallation of the sewer and at that time, once the City is in the position to proceed with construction
there will be a number of repairs to be done on the property and at that time the City will do everything
that has to be done. He felt that Mr. Lockhart's letter should be referred to the City staff for action.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above named letter from Mr. Norman A. Lockhart,
regarding repairs to his driveway and immediate area at 501 Greenhead Road that result from the instal-
lation of the sewer for the Milford-Randolph-Greendale collector sewer system, be referred to the City
staff for action.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Norman A. Lockhart of 501 Green-
head Road, with reference to the recommendations of the Expropriation Advisory Board that the City of
Saint John pay $200..00 towards the costs of Mr. Lockhart's appeal of the Notice of Intention to Exprop-
riate by the City of. his land in connection with construction of the Milford-Randolph-Greendale Sewer
Project, advising that although the actual cost to him was higher in making his appeal against the said
Notice (included in his costs would be secretarial services, photocopying services, time lost from
en~loyment, transportation, research, postage, et cetera), the maximum amount that the expropriation
authority is required to pay is $200.00, and he therefore requests payment of $200.00 -- be received and
filed and the said fee not be paid.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
submitting proposed amendments to the Subdivision By-Law which are recommended by the Committee, be laid
on the table for one week for further study.
lJ.1he above motion was carried by a "majority of Council members voting "yea".
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the above recommendation is one of the types of recommendations
that come from the Planning Advisory Committee in which the Common Council has no authority, in the final
analysis, anyway. Mr. Rodgers replied that the Council has the authority whether to adopt the amendment,
or not, and he supposes, in that sense, the Council has the authority on which it does with this item.
Councillor Kipping noted that as yet there is no requirement in this matter for the City Solicitor to
bring forth any information to Council.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor supply the Common Council with
a report at the earliest possible time.
The Mayor ruled the above motion out of order.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
with reference to the application made by Mrs. Gerald Melanson of 165 St. George Street, Saint John West,
for permission to temporarily place a mobile home at 214 Riverview Drive, Saint John West, advising that
the Committee recommends that such temporary permission not be granted, and further advising that the
Committee does not believe that mobile homes should be introduced in and about areas of conventional
housing except perhaps where the mobile home unit is to be permitted as a temporary accommodation while a
conventional home is being built on that site, and advising that City experience has proven that temporary
mobile homes can often become long time or permanent fixtures, and that if the City policy is against
permitting them in a specific location they should not as a rule be permitted even on a temporary basis __
be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
.....
".
.P4>hl?, /Jdt//
C;mm,
f1s s el7l io
ttIe,$f/7/~/'/;;);
c7riPJ'e tlt-i-
d/y, f?/';;IJ
ICplp( brptlA-
C /'1#:5,
/tl!!5fe'!:~
A.;;Jlre .1Jr,
IClef? hils
I/olJd/11 :J
.l?efc;1/n/f?1'
t/f/~//
/)I;;g /1f;; Ie
flttf/;N'/ty
.JJ~~,
Ifhl/kOl1/l1ell.
/1/,;; fe-r AIJM
/17 1 -tdlJ ,
I
.~t()1,1l-
(//l1eell f
'?e~/gh;{f-/o
5.:T Fund~
R ~I NI 7JeJle.
- {!Pl7J /J1 '
I
{/t--/~ I/?f/h
13eatd:. C~/7l,
1(/l7s~JJI(y
qi /led-s
.fIller
$~-4w
e 17 '!'oNe me.
1b/;'c1? {'hie
. [J.,;?/'b::4.1e
If' n ,;;;f'l.ttd:.
,Pdp,n i-~
~(ll /ttc.fi ph
c;6;!f
lrl...
149
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Advisory
Committee, the Common Council assent to the plan of the Westmorland Grove Sub-division, Phase I, submitted with
the Committee's letter, which letter advises that the Westmorland Grove development is being undertaken by The
Rocca Group, that present intentions are to erect fifteen 12-unit buildings and one 8-storey 97-unit building in
the first phase, that future development would entail four more high-rise buildings of the latter size, that
there are two new streets on the said sub-division plan - one called Coldbrook Crescent and the other called
Mystery Lake Drive, both of which have been approved by the Committee, and that there is also a parcel of land
for public purposes which is part of an open space network around Mystery Lake and its related stream system
based on the Municipal Development Plan.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that with regard to particularly sewerage and water run-off, he is hoping
that the City engineers as this project develops and as it is going to be increased in its size, are giving
sufficient attention to the water run-off problems that existed in the greater area in which this project is
going to be established, and he hopes that a year from now or whenever the project materializes that it is not
going to be accused of contributing to the already possible deficiencies in some of the water and sewerage run-
off problems that exist in that greater area. He asked if that is being looked at, in depth, as this project
starts to develop. Making affirmative reply, Mr. Barfoot stated that we are very much aware of the problems
which subsequent phases of this development may generate and are keeping a.careful watch on the expansion of
services which may be necessary. Councillor M. Vincent asked if Mr. Barfoot is saying at this time that this
project is not going to cause any additional problems to the Glen Falls area, when it is sompleted. Mr. Barfoot
replied that the first phase of the project with respect to storm run-off he thinks has been covered by proposals
to control or to limit the increase of storm run-off from the area; therefore, this should not cause any pro-
blems with respect to storm run-off.
Councillor Pye stated that he could not betray the trust of the residents of the Glen Falls area by
supporting an issue which it would appear could very well bring them nothing but future hardship and financial
loss - that is his opinion.
Councillor Gould asked if the retaining well is going to be built in this phase of the Westmorland
Grove Sub-division development, at this time. Mr. Barfoot replied that it is his understanding that this is
part of the approval which must be gained from the New Brunswick Water Authority - the Department of the Environ-
ment - for stream operations; their approval is contingent on the construction of appropriate run-off restrictions;
it is correct that the large tank to hold the excess water is going to be installed in this phase of the said
sub-division project.
Councillor Pye voted "nay" to the above motion.
Consideration was given to a letter from Councillor A. Vincent, tendering his resignation as a member
of the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission for the following reason: at a Common Council meeting
held at City Hall, October 27th, 1975 a resolution was moved by himself and seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
that "the Mayor and a select committee meet with the Premier and Cabinet ministers involved in the removal of
Multiplex from Saint John, and that they be informed of the concern of the Common Council at this announcement,
and that the Council was not informed of the announcement prior to its release to the news media"; that the
Mayor did not see fit to appoint Councillor Kipping or Councillor A. Vincent - the two Commission Councillors _
to meet with the Premier and Cabinet Ministers involved but rather the Mayor and a senior Councillor, Samuel
Davis, met the Premier alone, and, therefore, Councillor A. Vincent can see no useful purpose to serve on the
said Commission.
The Mayor explained that when the request came fro~ the Council for the Mayor and the Councillors to
go before the Premier, he selected Councillor Davis because he was available to prepare a Brief and he also had
the time to devote to getting the information required to provide the needed detail in order to present this
Brief to the Premier. The Mayor added that he realized that Councillors A. Vincent and Kipping were both on
that committee but in each community, there were Councillors representing communities, and he felt it desirable
to take a neutral individual who was not a Councillor in any community so the Mayor and Councillor Davis took
Mr. Patrick Darrah, Chairman of the said Commission, and that was the reason. The Mayor stated that, with that
as the basis, he would hope that Councillor A. Vincent's resignation would not be accepted by Council.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above noted letter of resignation be laid on the table and
Councillor A. Vincent he asked to reconsider this letter in a week's time.
Read a letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee, advising that the Committee
recently discussed the continual unsightly appearance of the uptown city streets due to litter and has also
received several letters from interested citizens expressing their concern with this problem, and also advising
that the Committee is greatly concerned with the amount of littering in the City as well as the high cost to the
taxpayers in having this litter picked up by City employees and would therefore request.that the Council ask the
Chief of Police to enforce the City's Litter By-Law by whatever means he deems necessary. Councillor MacGowan,
Chairman of the said Committee, advised that on the evening of Monday, November 3rd last, she had occasion to
walk along Charlotte Street and down King Street, and the amount of litter in that area was disgusting - this is
one area. She recalled that she has asked many times that the Litter By-Law be enforced, and she commented that
the collection of fines from enforcement of this by-law would contribute greatly to pay for the salaries of the
Policemen and increase the monies in the City's coffers, judging by the amount of litter. She stated she would
therefore very much like to see the Chief of Police start enforcing the Litter By-Law.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above named letter be received and filed and the Chief
of Police be asked to enforce the Litter By-Law by whatever means he deems necessary.
Mr. Barfoot recalled that the Council adopted a similar resolution on the above subject on September
22nd last, and he advised that the City staff has been in the process of preparing a report, and this report is
now ready and will be on the agenda of the next Council meeting. Councillor MacGowan replied that she does not
want a report - she wants action regarding the problem. Councillor Parfitt felt that there is an even more
serious situation than that of. litter on the streets, and that is the fact that people put their garbage out two
or three days prior to the pick-up day, and their garbage containers are taken apart by dogs and so on, creating
an awful mess on the city's residential streets. She asked what can we do to get after the landlords to correct
this situation. The Mayor replied that this problem will be looked into.
Councillor Cave advised that Councillor A. Vincent and he were present at the Admiral Beatty Hotel on
150
Cpa-},?, ~t/e
C.:J/'?.6Afe tJ' J1
Sy~mt~ Sf;:
f!r()/J1 ~)1~-41
do//. ~raar
Jb~'~e JJe;d;
C/t-y 4fJ'1.
$7: l(o/'~/7J.
/I1o~//e ;ro~e
s /fes
Aql7A a5St?h/.
<9rt?a/ ~ 5T
~/'dfZ/I t>/ eaJ
Ilve. - ;02;(~
fI/sc-tJ'r/~ J;'
<1 KVencs am
:B<</fd
4!r,tj~s ' 7erta)?~
1(#'/ e/;qd
Il/tJi//e /;ome
P/alJl7,lltlj//~,
C'p I?l /71.
l?e-AO;' /17!l
;JJ';;/J71dC Ai-/f,
Jl;;J7//,/}d' (,//~.
CI:?/7//7/.
,.,
Friday, November 7th last, during "Bangor Days" at approximately 1.00 o'clock, and having left the Hotel
were sitting in Councillor Vincent's car when a garbage truck passed by and proceeded around King Square;
they decided to follow this truck and just as they made the turn on to Sydney Street the traffic lights
came on, and they noted that in the heavy winds that were blowing that day plastic garbage bags and boxes
and cartons blew out of that uncovered truck, and that of the three men in the cab of the truck one man
got out of the truck and picked up two or three pieces of paper and then got back into the truck - in the
meantime, the wind was still blowing the garbage from the truck allover. He stated that he therefore got
in touch with the Police Department and gave the truck license number. He stated he would like to know
what action had been taken by the Department because it would cost money to pick up that debris. The Mayor
replied that this matter will be checked, through the City Manager.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter from the Saint John
Housing Commission, dated November 6th, 1975, the said Commission be given authority to initiate action to
determine the feasibility and methods of having a reasonable area of the Land Assembly Project at East
Saint John between Grandview Avenue and Hickey Road made available for mobile homes.
Councillor M. Vincent felt that the Council should consider the above matter carefully, and he
asked if the above recommendation is to develop, or to study. Councillor Higgins, stating that he agrees
with this point raised by Councillor M. Vincent, felt that before any definite action is taken the matter
would come back to Council because of the controversy involving mobile home parks. He stated that if the
Commission is going to initiate action to determine the feasibility and methods he thinks that the Council
sho~ld be in on any decision, positively or negatively. The Mayor felt that the aim is that the Commission
look over the piece of land and see if it is possible for a short period of time to use it while we are
getting another piece of land ready that is already set aside out in that area. Councillor Higgins. stated
that his concern is that before any action is taken, that Council is made aware of it. The Mayor replied
that this is a fair request. Councillor A. Vincent asked if we are going to buy the land in question from
the New Brunswick Housing Corporation. The Mayor replied that he thinks that the Commission would be
looking into the matter as a feasibility study and then reporting back to Council, and we will then ask
for permission to use the land, for a period - he added that this is an emergency use, really. Councillor
Parfitt noted that phase one of this land development has not been started yet and it was.in phase two
that a small mobile home park for 55 mobile home lots was envisaged, in the vicinity of an elementary'
school, at that stage; she stated that these lots have to be brought individually or by a developer, and
she does not see where the City would enter into it, at all. The Mayor replied that the Commission '
will look into it, to determine the feasibility. Councillor Gould asked if, after the Housing Commission
initiates action in this matter, is the Commission going to hire somebody to finish the study for the
Commission, and how much it is going.to cost to do this. Councillor MacGowan, a member of the said
Commission, advised that she mentioned this matter at Committee of the Whole last week - that the Com-
mission had looked at the land and there is an urgency for mobile home park land development, and the land
is already there - all the Commission wants to know is that the Council would like the Commission to look
into it and see if the land is available and if it is possible to use it - that is all the Commission is
asking. Councillor Green noted that some of the people who own mobile homes would be given the opportunity,
if' it is feasible, that this land is available to them to purchase; he believes that what the Housing
Commission is saying is - that the Council look into this matter and all bodies concerned, and then bring
a report back to Council so that the public can be informed.
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Historic Sites and Events
Committee submitting the Committee's proposed budget for 1976, be referred to the committee on budget.
Consideration was given to a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Terrance.Robichaud of 423 Milford Road,
Saint.John West, advising that they and their two children, together with their married son and his wife
and child all live in a self-contained house at this address and are too crowded and none of them has any
privacy; that they have been unable to find a lot on which to place a three-bedroom mobile home they
purchased, and they are therefore asking the Council's permission on compassionate grounds to place this
mobile home for a period of six months on the lot at 423 Milford Road, and have already obtained their
landlord's agreement to this arrangement; and further advising that if this request is granted the mobile
home would be connected to existing City services (sewerage, water, lights and telephone) to the satis-
faction of the Department of Health and City officials.
.
Councillor Cave proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the req~ested permission be
granted on compassionate grounds for a period of six months. He noted that by the expiration of that
period, perhaps we will have a mobile home park out in Saint John East, or in some other area; and he
stressed that this family is desperate at the present time for a solution to their problem of crowding.
Councillor Higgins stated that in the light of what has transpired earlier in this meeting, he thinks it
only fair that the Planning Advisory Committee be given an opportunity to comment on this application. in
the light of the general principle regarding placing of mobile homes. He felt that some type of policy
has to be set with reference to the principle of isolated mobile homes in residential areas, and he noted
that all that is involved in this particular case is tabling it for a week and asking that it be referred
to the Planning Advisory Committee, giving the Committee a chance to reiterate what it has been trying to
say on an earlier application at this meeting, when the Council refused an application for placement of a
mobile home.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above noted application for placement of a
mobile home at 423 Milford Road on compassionate grounds for a period of six months, be referred to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a report hopefully within one week in view of the seasonal cold weather.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the application from Dalmac Ltd. for re-zoning of
19,500 square feet of land at 460 City Line, Saint John West to permit the construction of a 12-unit
apartment building thereon, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and the
necessary advertising regarding the proposed re-zoning be proceeded with.
.
~
,...
.
I
I
C/ -1-12 /llfl',
:J)eFeJ1i1tid
. w//eJ7/ml
(//7/ t?J1 $1-,
J)l'ps/ri 115
,4dl7&sfer
A~d.
~ 31 to/~
:5t":
I J/Q#:2h7"'1ns
,/-f/'
ft/.;der 10 p.
(;;UI1,/l,
f/;fJM
. fJ1.;;JrJ&' ..s;
J}tldk o5f;
pro)?, t!-C:7.
{/rpqJ?
'fi <3l1e/t1dY /
1/J'J/7S' :Bed
S/.ee
IYIlIJ-si-9PjJl
hi e&1rS
e;r)-f/h.f -60
;Pr,.E<<; 5~
-flro/7! ;r~
If!,tJltl?
f?ar/r/llfl.;J-
;Pr,EL $~
C'ftj /171.(1,
7/t7/t'ce a/e
'/$ft7?'" 0)"/
If Wait/; -h .
'Pdes-tr/eYl1
S/~17
.
....
151
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager regarding the application
made by Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd. for permission to renovate premises at 237 Union Street, which is governed by
the provisions of the Deferred Widening By-Law, be placed on the agenda of .this meeting.
Consideration was thereupon given to the said report, which gives information requested at the Council
meeting of November 3rd last on the handling of a request made by Holtzman's Limited of 60 Waterloo Street to
carry out renovations to a building which also was subject to the said By-Law. The report also cites Council's
decision with reference to a like application made by Tri-Town Realty Ltd. concerning premises at 105 Union
Street. rhe report advises that in the case of the Holtzman's Ltd. application, no dollar consideration was
requested and none was recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the matter being left with the Common
Council, and it is his understanding that no work has yet been undertaken under this application (referred to in
Council resolution of December 16th, 1974) and that the whole renovation scheme will later be revised; that the
agreement with Tri-Town Realty Ltd. (referred to in Council resolution of April 7th, 1975) was concluded, to
compensate the company over a ten-year period should the City require the company's property frontage within
that time. The report states that there is no doubt an inconsistency exists among the said two cases and that
of Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd., but it is the City Manager's opinion that the Holtzman's Ltd. approval was adopted
before cost factors were known and this should be considered as the irregular decision of the three; and it is,
therefore, still the City Manager's recommendation that a schedule of compensation should be agreed upon with
Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd., and if it is the opinion of Common Council that a fifteen-year schedule is not re-
asonable, then the term may be reduced by Council to ten years, or even three years, depending upon Council's
outlook toward widening Union Street in this block. Mr. Barfoot advised that he suggests that the cost recovery
schedule in this matter be for a ten-year period, the same period as applied in the Tri-Town Realty Ltd. ap-
plication.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the reports from the City Manager, dated October 30th and
November 10th, 1975 with reference to the request from Dreskin's Lancaster Ltd. for permission to make alter-
ations and improvements to the building at 237 Union Street in order to establish therein a retail ladies
clothing outlet, be received and filed and as recommended by the City Manager, the Council permit the owner to
make alterations and improvements to the property in question, with the provision that the City not be liable to
compensate the owner for the value of the said alterations and improvements to the property after the expiration
of ten years in the event that the land is acquired by the City for the purpose of street widening, and that if
in the event the land is required by the City for the purpose of street widening prior to the expiration of ten
years, that the City be liable for compensation to the owner to the limit of $30,000.00 of the original value of
the improvements at an amount which declines by one-tenth each and every year, and further, that the Mayor and
Common Clerk be authorized to execute on behalf of the City an agreement based upon these conditions.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that it was Councillor Cave's motion that tabled this matter at the
November 3rd meeting, and he asked if Councillor Cave has received the complete documents regarding the Holtz-
man's Ltd. matter on Waterloo Street that he asked for. He added that Holtzman's Ltd. did not receive any
special consideration whatsoever, and that is the reason he supported the tabling motion on November 3rd last.
He stated he is not saying that the Council should be held up in dealing with the matter under discussion, but
he thinks that the requested correspondence should be made available to Councillor Cave, who asked for that
information. Recalling that the Dreskin's application was tabled last week in order that the Council receive
information, Councillor Higgins stated that he agrees with Councillor A. Vincent that the Council should not
hold up the Dreskin's application because this applicant has been waiting three weeks for a decision, but he
thinks that the information that Councillor Cave requested should be made available to all Councillors.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he will be out of New Brunswick on the afternoon of Wednesday,
November 12th next, and it is very important that he receive right away the information he asked for regarding
the total cost of property acquisition in the Urban development Market Square-Dock Street area because if he can
help the City, he will. He stated that he had anticipated that the said information would be provided for this
meeting of Council. Mr. Barfoot replied that the staff was planning to have that information to Council for the
next regular meeting of Council, and it will be ready for that meeting. Councillor A. Vincent stated there is
no point in him having a conference called with Government officials and the Mayor saying the meeting is to take
place on Wednesday afternoon in Halifax, if the staff is not going to give him the information. Mr. Barfoot
replied that the staff will attempt to have the information ready for the Wednesday meeting in Halifax, and that
had he known there was an earlier meeting scheduled this information would have been ready. Councillor A.
Vincent stressed the importance of the City staff speedily providing information that has been requested for the
Council members. He stated that he would like to be provided with the information in question for noon on
November 12th. The Mayor replied that it will be so provided.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that with regard to the matter of the non-stopping of cars
crossing the sidewalk when exiting from the ingress and egress ramp at the underground parking at the
rince Edward Square shopping mall on to Prince Edward Street between St. Joseph's and Prince Charles Schools,
opposite Richmond Street, which creates a dangerous and potentially fatal traffic situation to both motorists
and pedestrians as related by Mrs. Betty Sleep of 30 Carmarthen Street, the City Manager be instructed to
contact the Chief of Police to ascertain what action has been, or is being, taken regarding this problem, and
that the management of the Prince Edward Square shopping complex be asked to install a "Stop" or "Watch for
edestrians" sign at this location.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~Cie"'
1_.-)
O'IW
,.,
!Yla!l(lr
C?-/t'1'l Fdl/$
+/(l(J!/J?:/
st-~ i-~ f)-fl
e mt?J'7l'c.!'/7c:f
ul7P(e'r;;:-me~
~e..;? $1(,)'l{!J' /lc
?J'7em/er
IPme'l"',gcl7c ~
t1;1G'dS u )'Ie5
() /'1~a/1 /'.:r crd /0.
aml?1e'I1/af !(?I?
!11a/?sh {'beeA'"
(! knJ?- U!? m-ke
wc;-!/(
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the seven-
teenth day of November, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief
Engineer of Operations, C. Sullivan, Senior Project Engineer, and J. Gabriel,
Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and
Works Department, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Develop-
ment, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, D. French,
Director of Personnel and Training, C. E. Nicolle, Direction of Recreation
and Parks, P. Clark, Fire Chief, E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police, G. Baird,
Commissioner of Economic Development, and A. Ellis, Builqing Inspector
I
I
The Reverend Daniel Dryer, pastor of Germain Street Baptist Church, offered a prayer which
opened the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
November 3rd last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
November lOth last, be confirmed.
The Mayor stated that'with regard to the flooding disaster which occurred in the Glen Falls area
as a result of the heavy rainstorm of November 13th last, after viewing the situation in the area in the
early morning hours of November 14th he got permission from as many Council members as he could contact,
to carry out the tasks which he performed. He stated that he now wished to have the Council ratify and
authorize the following actions that he took:- he made the decision to call the Premier of New Brunswick,
and having explained to the Premier's Office the requirements for the City of Saint John he released the
following press release, "Due to the extraordinary heavy and continuous rain which has fallen on our city
during the past twenty-four hours, thereby creating serious flooding conditions in parts of the city
causing unusual dangers to property and to the health and well-being of a large number of our citizens, I,
your Mayor, in co-operation with the Common Council, have requested the Minister of Justice through the
Premier of the Province, under the provisions of the Emergency Measures Act, to immediately declare a
state of emergency in the City of Saint John. By having a state of emergency declared in this manner at
this time, certain resources might possibly be available to the City which otherwise might not be avail-
able. I will keep the public further informed."; the Mayor received from the Premier a reply that went
out to all the press across Canada stating that the Premier had contacted the head of the Emergency
Measures Organization and directed him to work in co-operation with the City of Saint John to meet their
requirements.
I
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above noted action of the Mayor be endorsed.
.
The Mayor advised that the difference between a state of emergency and the action that was taken
by the Premier is the following: in a state of emergency the action required first to create an emergency
would be a disaster large enough to have caused deaths and harm to citizens and it would be large enough
that we would be required to call in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to assist the City's police force
and outside help to help govern the City. He stated that in the case of the situation under discussion,
his aim was to try to point out to the Premier the great problem that we were facing, and to emphasize it
so he used the term; the action we were looking for was compensation for those people who suffered that
could not be covered by insurance, and the action taken by the Premier would lead to that type of action
when followed through; the action is that the Emergency Measures Officer came to the city with people and I
they looked over the area and found the problems and they submit today a report to the Premier, and the
Premier following through the procedures that the Mayor believes to be necessary both for state of emer-
gency as well as for the Emergency Measures Organization's actions to go before the Provincial Cabinet,
and from there the Cabinet makes the decision, and we would trust that it would be in line with the type
of decisions made in other disasters throughout the province.
(Councillor M. Vincent entered the meeting)
The Mayor stated he wished to publicly state that the City owes a great deal to Fire Chief Clark
who was on duty during this flooding twenty-four hours a day for approximately three days and did an
excellent job; also, he is commending the Commissioner of Engineering and Works for the efforts he expended
during the crisis. He felt that the City should be proud of the work done by the said Chief and Com-
missioner, and he is sure that the citizens in the area appreciated their endeavours; he commended the
Engineering and Works Department and the Fire and Police Departments, who worked in harmony in alleviating
the flooding conditions, and he noted that this crisis brought forth great co-operation among the City
staff including the staff at City Hall who had certain tasks to perform. He stated he wished to thank
.them, and to congratulate them.
I
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the agenda item from Councillor Kipping, which discusses
the Marsh Creek clean-up maintenance work, be considered at this time.
.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
.
~
"..
.iSH
tJ-(e/7 h//s
. &Pd'~~,
I t}h;1J?/, "f 0//1,
(/t/p r/r.5
4'& ~r.
Clen ?'.;; /;Is
FjppL a/?l111
II!1<<rsh
.aeek
&lie/? ~/~
-I"/Pcd/ i'7 4
reptl /' t-
?tU71{'$
Fut')?G1ce
. re'p<>Ilrs
IYlY'S. EIs./e
~!fJ7e
I
.
I
I
.
......
At this time, copies of a submission from the Glen Falls Flood Committee, dated November 13th, 1975,
were distributed, as well as copies of a report, dated November 17th, 1975 from the Commissioner of Engineering
and Works to the City Manager regarding the Glen Falls area flood conditions during the period November 13th to
16th, 1975. It was noted that in submitting the said November 17th report, the City Manager did so for the
information of Council with the recommendation that Mr. MacKinnon, Chief Clark and Chief Ferguson and their men
who worked long and hard in this emergency be commended for their efforts. Mr. Barfoot advised that Mr. Mac-
Kinnon is chairman of the Emergency Measures Organization committee and he has prepared this report on the flood
and the work done by the various departments, the cause of the flood, the actual amount flooded, the work done
in correcting the flood conditions -- all the details are in this report which was prepared by Mr. MacKinnon
along with Fire Chief Clark.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that a copy of the said report dated November 17th, 1975 be
provided to the chairman of the Glen Falls Flood Committee at this time.
A copy of the said report was thereupon given to the said chairman, Mrs. Elsie Wayne.
The Mayor advised that when the Fire Chief and Mr. MacKinnon requested help from the citizens for such
items as pumps, a number came forward with a number large enough to pump out basements, and then we found that
the use of some pumps were donated while some citizens, after making the gesture of giving out pumps, decided
they would charge the City for using them; Atlantic Rentals Ltd. on Milford Road made their gift free to the
City, and in the repairing of furnaces there was a problem of getting men in to do the work because they wanted
the City to guarantee the costs and this became a difficult situation - however, the Mayor telephoned the Irving
company who assured him that all their repair work would be at no cost to the individual or the City (that
company was donating that work, too, although some of those furnaces were under contract with the company,
anyway) - other major oil companies did not see fit to do this. The Mayor stated that the City wants to thank
those people who gave their assistance and equipment, free of charge.
Councillor Kipping noted that his memorandum to Council states that before the flooding emergency in
the city beginning Thursday, November 13th, he had been informed that clean-up maintenance work on Marsh Creek
had apparently been suspended for some time, and debris has been piling up at certain points, which were sub-
sequently shown on film view the local television station on Wednesday evening, November 12th. He noted that
the Council now has the letter from Mrs. Wayne, chairman of the Glen Falls Flood Committee, which sets out the
facts as Mrs. Wayne sees them. He suggested that the Council might hear orally from Mrs. Wayne at this time,
giving perhaps a summation of what is in that letter from the said Committee. The Council members agreed to
hear Mrs. Wayne.
Mrs. Wayne stated she was appearing on behalf of the residents of the Glen Falls area. With reference
to the television coverage on the evening of November 12th last with regard to the Marsh Creek, Mrs. Wayne
stated that CHSJ-TV asked these residents if they could do a programme on the Marsh Creek. Recalling that the
residents came before the Council on August 5th last, Mrs. Wayne noted that one of their requests was that the
City have an inspector of the Marsh Creek. She stated that there is a gentleman who works in the Works Depart-
ment who told the residents personally he would like to be the inspector of that Creek and that he will keep it
clea~; however, Mr. MacKinnon told the Council at the August 5th meeting that it was not necessary to have an
inspector of the Marsh Creek because it was cleaned weekly; when the residents went on the said television
programme there were dozens of tires behind Goodyear Tire - there is no retaining wall there (for the last
eleven months, the residents have also asked for this retaining wall) - but Mr. MacKinnon said he wrote to the
head office of that company and approached the company here to put up a retaining wall; the television programme
group then went behind the City barns on Rothesay Avenue and found that area had been in use as a City dump;
when she arrived at Haymarket Square on the night of the flood some of the crates that were in the Marsh Creek
behind the City barns were floating down at the Marsh bridge and had to be removed by the cranes (Which cranes
were not supposed to be needed there ever again because the Marsh Creek was clean and it was watched every
week); the night of the heavy rains, some members of the Committee and she decided to inspect the Creek for
themselves so they went to Strescon premises at 7.00 p.m. and they found there was approximately two feet of
water this side of the eastern side of that abutment as compared to the other side of the abutment before they
travelled to Haymarket Square; later than evening, at 8.00 p.m., she decided to check to see how much rain had
fallen and she learned that at 8.00 p.m. there had been 4.16 inches of rain fallen in Saint John; when she
looked out at 3.00 a.m. and saw the rain was still falling in torrents she saw the sewers backing up again in
the middle of her street and heading for her livingroom, she decided it was time to call the City Manager to see
what action he was taking, and she discovered that the City Manager was not aware of the said amount of rainfall
at 8.00 p.m. and she pointed out that, yet in December of last year, when there was a flood in this same area,
there was 3.6 inches of rain; she stated she would have thought that, with that quantity of rain, somebody would
have checked out the situation and decided that the people in Glen Falls should be alerted; she made the point
that such action was not taken by the City, but after the rain fell, and after Mystery Lake and its dam and its
sides started to overflow, the City people went up at 1.00 o'clock or 2.00 o'clock and took a log off the dam so
that the Lake's bank would not break - she can readily see that such action was necessary - however, where was
the Emergency Measures at that time and why did they not warn the residents of the Glen Falls that the log had
to be removed from this dam and that flooding would result and that the residents should be alerted so they
could save what they could from their homes, and leave their homes. She stated that half of the Emergency
Measures people did not know the area was flooding until the residents telephoned the City Manager and the City
Manager then called other members.
11rs. Wayne thanked the Mayor, Councillor M. Vincent, the firemen, the policemen, and the City Works
Department for all they have done for these residents through this recent flood. She stated she finds it hard to
believe that the Mayor called and the Premier sent down Mr. Henry Irwin of the Emergency Measures Organization,
The Honourable R. Logan, Minister of Labour, and they flew over Glen Falls in a helicopter and then they came
out and said there was approximately $750,000 damage. She stated she feels certain that had these gentlemen
viewed the area on foot and in a boat and inspected some of the affected homes, they would have said the damage
was more than that figure because she has had dozens of people come to her home who have companies in her area
and the loss in some companies is high - $50,000.00 in one company alone. She stated she was told by some of
the City engineers that it can be fixed - all we need is money. She asked when the Council went to the Cabinet,
why did it not go to the Cabinet for the Marsh Creek - why did the Council go with ten to twelve items. She
stated that the Marsh Creek must be fixed now, and the Council knows this. She stated that in coming to the
Council this time, she begs for compensation first, and for corrective measures second. She stated that the
residents have been told that a very competent man from the Canadian National Railways said that there were four
feet of water out behind the Dominion Stores where those two pipes are; she pointed out that the residents took
pictures and brought them to Council and Council looked at them - the residents also showed the Council the
pipes on Rothesay Avenue and they said they will fix the pipes on Rothesay Avenue - the residents at that time
asked the Council, when showing the pictures of the two pipes beyond the Dominion Stores, what will happen when
the water gets through Rothesay Avenue and get out behind the Dominion Stores, and the Council did not reply to
that question at the time. She felt that there must be somebody who has the answers for the problems that these
residents face regarding the Marsh Creek flooding.
In reply, the Mayor advised that when the Council members and City staff heard about this flooding
154
,.,
I%rsh aee%
c14J7 ~/h
~(')~/)7.f'
~1eJ? ~//$
;e:/pt7d ~mh1
4ft'.$'- m/e
ft/a!f~e
disaster they immediately took action. He pointed out that the lowest spot in the Glen Falls area is
eight feet below high tide and this is a difficult situation. He reminded the delegation that the City
spent $200,000.00 in the area this summer, trying to find ways of moving water out of the area; he noted
that on one of his inspection tours of the area during the flooding situation he was accompanied by
Councillor MacGowan and they noted that at one home with a yard around it and a fence there was debris
floating from that yard and going towards the bridge and it was plugging the bridge. He noted that the
problem of debris in the Creek in a combination of a lot of people generally - not only the City - who
pile this kind of material in their yards and then, when disaster strikes and before they have time to
move it, it creates some more of the problem. He stated that the City accepts the fact that the flood is
bad and these residents do need help and the City feels very sorry for them, and the City must do every-
thing it can to help them because they are citizens. He stated we hope that the Government will com-
pensate these people which is the first thing; secondly, we have to find the proper answer to try to hold
back water from that area. ,He assured these residents that the City will do everything in its power to
make this possible, to help them.
.
I
Councillor Kipping stated that because of the accusations that have been made, he thinks it
would be proper to reply to questions, such as, "who was assigned to supervise Marsh Creek; what was his
assigned schedule; what did he actually do?". He feels that the Council should have that information and
that it should be communicated to Mrs. Wayne. He suggesced to Mrs. Wayne that while she has suggested
that compensation be the first request and corrective measures, the second, that in the meantime pre-
ventive measures such as "early warning" would be in order - that when a heavy rainfall is predicted or
expected an early warning system be implemented in the City so that the Commissioner of Engineering.and
Works, the City Manager, and any other people involved in emergencies would be on the alert and perhaps
able to gear up for such an emergency in advance; he noted that the advance work that was done would
appear to have been done at the very last minute in the flood under discussion; warning should also be
given for residents who may, for one reason or another, not be aware of what is happening. The Mayor
stated he does not believe it is fair to try to put our staff "on the spot" at this time; he thinks that
the answers are due to us, but he does not feel the staff should be put "on the spot" because they are not
any more to blame than the Council is, itself. Councillor Kipping agreed with this observation of the
Mayor, and pointed out he is simply saying that there is specific information which the Council might ask
for now and which might be provided to Council. He noted that the letter from the Glen Falls Flood
Committee to this meeting of Council suggests that this matter be taken up at once with the Provincial,
Federal and any and all other authorities large and small.
I
.
In reply to the above questions posed by Councillor Kipping, Mr. MacKinnon supplied the fol-
lowing detailed information:- the person specifically handling the outside operation is Mr. Stuart Arm-
strong - under Mr. Armstrong, Mr. McRae is the Superintendent of Construction and it was one of his '
responsibilities to attend to the clean-up of Marsh Creek - when the subject of a title was brought up,
and he believes it was Mr. McRae who in turn at that time wished to take on that as one responsibility,
only, it was suggested that he be called "inspector of the Creek" or something of that nature, and Mr.
MacKinnon suggested that he was already doing this work and that the title was not necessary but that he
would carry it on with his regular duties - Mr. McRae did do this; for a long period of time, the City had
one crew working steadily at that and at that point in time when we felt that the majority of the clean-up
had been completed we had regular, weekly patrols and in some cases even daily patrols on portions of the
Marsh Creek to see what, if any, blockages there were at any of the obstructions and when there was
sufficient work crews were detailed to take care of this work - there was not at any time any work that
was suspended specifically - in the period from January to October 31st this year approximately $32,000.00
was spent just on the clean-up of the Creek and had nothing to do with any capital projects at all; he
thinks it can be compared with approximately $5,000.00 budgets that have been spent in previous years -
for example, the money that was allocated to the Great Marsh Commission when it was in operation; this
year, we have spent far in ~xcess of what we normally do, and he thinks that it was shown in the recession
of the water when it finally got away, in comparison to the storm last year which was of much smaller
significance - the storm of last week was gone in a much shorter period of time - it does not lessen the
problems that the people in. the Glen Falls have had, or the seriousness of it, but it does show that the
clean-up that was provided this year has resulted in a much faster recession of the floods; we do not have
a written job description for this person - however, in general, it was the clean-up of the Marsh Creek;
it does not remove the suggestion that there were boxes, et cetera, that were on the banks at various
times that were not removed - these were obviously there - the crews were not going along looking after
individual boxes or things that were on the bank but they were cleaning up the bank when it was required -
there was a log boom close to the Marsh Creek bridge which was catching most of the material and when this
particular storm started the crane was not required - there was no material at the entrance to the said
bridge - we did bring in the crane because it was noted that there was a large piece of plywood floating
down and it blocked one of the entrances and we immediately ordered the crane - the crane was parked there
until early this morning and it removed two truckloads in the total course of its removal from the causeway
entrances on both sides and both sides of the Marsh Creek; however, this was material that was getting by
and it was on the tops of banks and it was on the side and, as a comment, the City Works Department in the
back of its shop is certainly not using that location as a disposal area - there is one section that the
City bought just recently that has material down on the bank but the City just does not dispose of any-
thing back there - he is not saying that there is not material there that may have gotten into the Creek,
but the City is not using tpat location to dispose of material.
I
.
I
Councillor Kipping noted that Mr. MacKinnon is saying, however, that there are people who are
disposing materials into the Creek, still. Mr. MacKinnon replied that he did not say that they were
disposing of it - he is saying that it is getting in; to say that, he would be making the assumption that
peop~e were deliberately putting the material in the Creek, and he does not know that for a fact - he does
know that an awful lot of material is getting in and that in some cases, a lot of people are not taking
any precaution whatsoever t9 see that it does not go in; an illustration, of course, is the tire company
on Rothesay Avenue - these tires are just going in continually - we have app~oached them in the matter -
there is an obvious solution which is, not to put the tires back there - however, when the water gets up
as high as it did it takes everything with it, and this is what has happened; as far as the Marsh Creek
bridge is concerned, it was relatively clean and the crane was there as a precaution because over a very
short period of time if the crane was not there the bridge could plug up and the water could flood back
very quickly.
I
Councillor Kipping asked Chief Ferguson what measures are applicable - what laws are applicable
in this case of severe litt~ring of this kind. Chief Ferguson replied that he thinks this is something we
should look at and see what can be brought up - he would not like to answer the question without some
study of the matter. Councillor Kipping stated that his reason for asking the question is because it
would appear obvious that one of the answers to the problem is to enforce our Litter By-Law if it covers
the situation, or that by-law does not cover it, then enforce the other laws which would prevent people
from depositing materials into the Creek behind their properties or in any way that they deposit materials;
he understands there have been not only tires but mattresses, packing cases and debris of all manner and
kind going in the Creek, so somebody is at fault, and there must be a way to stop that, by law.
.
Councillor Cave asked what amount of monies have been spent on the over-all clean-up in the Glen
Fa~ls area, not only in the Marsh Creek but in the other areas of Glen Falls. Mr. Barfoot advised that a
~
,..-
....
1.55
~ ,
'''.,
.
/J!ar.5 h
I theeA'
Ck/7 h//s
/frt?d/ ~
&l/en h.d
I /7tJtld Cw/,
.
I
.
I
I
.
....
round figure of $200,000.00 has been mentioned as being the total City expenditure in the Marsh Creek area this
year - this figure includes the $32,000.00 cited by Mr. MacKinnon, and includes another sum spent for capital
works p~us the City's commitment to engineering studies and other matters like this - in total, about $200,000.00
this year as an indication of what this City is trying to do in the Marsh Creek.
Councillor A. Vincent felt that it should be the City Solicitor who would tell the Council what laws
the City could charge persons under regarding this littering problem. He asked if the Common Council is planning
on having a meeting with the New Brunswick Cabinet only on the Marsh Creek, bearing in mind we have to stop some
of the water coming down the Creek from the areas in Kings County that are around the source of the Creek and
that we need a holding pond and a battery of pumps and a clean-up of the Marsh Creek and a proper policing
control of the Creek - he felt that this is the only way we are going to solve the problem; he felt there should
be one or two holding ponds. He stated he would like to see something done to resolve the problem, but does not
know where the money is to come from to do so. He felt that we would have to have a plainclothesman at the
Creek to determine who is dumping material into the Creek, and make an example of somebody dumping into the
Creek unnecessarily.
Councillor Davis stated he would like to ask the fOllowing question:- he noticed during the flooding
that there was a 3 to 5-foot differential in head at Marsh Creek bridge - the water was higher on the flood side
than it was on the Courtenay Bay side by 3 to 5 feet, but he does not know the exact depth - so, the bridge was
acting as a dam and the bridge would have been better out of there; Mrs. Wayne said there was 2 feet difference
at Strescon; he does not know if there are any other major restrictions of that nature, but you now have a 5-
foot to 7-foot difference between Courtenay Bay and the flood plane. He asked if the City department has made
any observations of this nature, and does it know what major restrictions there are other than this garbage that
is throwing around - which he considers not a major item - he thinks that the restrictions are the major items _
these major restrictions - and that the biggest item is the Marsh Creek bridge. Mr. MacKinnon replied that the
department was ~ooking at this point what it was looking at engineering studies some time ago - at that time,
between the One Mile House and the Glen Falls area there were some 17 structures and it was only a difference in
e~evation of approxilnate~y 34 inches, he believes, between the elevation there and in Glen Falls and just
putting a 2-inch differential in head on either side of the structures and multiplying that by 17 structures you
have the difference in elevation between the One Mile House and the Glen Falls only with 2 inches of differential,
so that with very little obstruction at each obstruction there was going to be a flood if you got it at each
area - it is hypothetical, but it was going to be that easy to cause a flood in Glen Falls. He stated that when
there is a major rain, as there was in the recent case, the first major obstruction is the Marsh Creek bridge;
we have talked with the Province about the fact that they should be looking at rather than the circular pipe
structures that are there now, looking at the same bridge but the possibility of putting in a large, rectangular-
shaped structure which would pass more water with a lower elevation and they were going to look at that possibility
in the engineering study, and through their own, without trying to replace the said bridge; if you get a high
e~evation, of course, there or at any other structure as it feeds back, then the next major obstructions, of
course, are the Strescon bridges because they are full beams. Councillor Davis stated that the point he wanted
to make was that the bridge is a Provincial matter, and the bridge, as far as he is concerned, is the major
obstruction in a large flood. He noted that Proctor & Redfern Ltd., in their design had a 100-year design storm
which is a storm that is impossible to handle - yet our recent storm was bigger than their 100-year design
storm, so there would have been flooding; but to find a 3 to 5-foot difference on locations 100 feet apart is
actua~~y bui~ding in a dam, and the water would have gone down that much faster and would have taken all the
tires and a~l other debris with it. Mrs. Wayne interjected at this point, stating she has some information
regarding the Marsh Creek bridge that she can supply to the Council. Councillor Davis stated he hopes that
the Council will be getting involved with those major obstructions matters immediately; what we do about Strescon
is another problem because, obviously, the ownership of the Creek is theirs -we have an ownership problem, and
we cou~d point out that the new part between the causeway and Marsh Creek bridge is a big ditch that is owned by
Irving, and not by the City - that ditch in there is private property, so, the City has other problems, he
pointed out. He stated he wanted to point out that there are major obstructions and we do not have to go
picking around for mattresses and tires and such debris - we have a big problem and that is the problem, of
major obstructions. Mr. MacKinnon pointed out that, as he recalls the Proctor & Redfern report, it was a design
for a 25-year storm, and the second study the consultants are involved in now is actually one which predicates a
~OO-year storm or something that would take care of any flood - so that the tentative or preliminary estimates
of cost that they show for a 25-year storm, of course, would be much greater in order to control a lOO-year
storla and in this case, without having all the figures with him at this time, he noted there is some indication
that. it may have been a 100-year storm. He felt that the idea that such storm only occur every 100 years is, of
course, a fallacy. Councillor Davis pointed out that a design storm is something to start with - and he noted
that their 24-hour storm is one-quarter of an inch per hour, and the recent storm was bigger than that, and the
consultants say it is impossible to handle - but, it does not have to get that high - the point is it got too
high. He stated that the point he wants to make is that the Marsh Creek bridge is a Provincial matter, it is
the major obstruction, and the City should go to the Province for a new bridge.
Noting that the flood-prone area of Glen Falls is eight feet below the high tide level, Councillor Pye
pointed out that if rock fill had been placed throughout that area to a depth of eight feet prior to the building
of homes in that area, this flooding would not have occurred. He stated he was wondering if the Council could
prevai~ upon the Provincial Government to purchase one of the Glen Falls blocks of property, or even one street
at a time, and move those houses to higher ground in the Glen Falls area that is eight feet higher than their
present sites so that they would avoid the next flood; and if not there, to move these homes elsewhere. He
noted that there are 60 serviced lots in the Champlain Heights area where these houses could be moved to very
simply. He asked, other than that, would it be economically feasible to haul stone material to that area, build
up that b~ock from which the houses had been removed, to a point of eight feet from the present level, and then
when that is proper~y levelled bring the houses from the next block to the newly elevated block, and go over the
entire affected area in this manner, which would take possibly two years to complete. He noted that the stone
materia~ is only about three miles away and is available, at lime quarries. The Mayor replied that this is a
theory - he is not too sure that anyone could answer Councillor Pye's question as to whether this suggestion is
economica~~y feasib~e; ahtough the cost could be computed it would take time to do so; it is a theory that can
be put forward. Councillor Pye made the point that it would prevent future flooding.
Counci~~or M. Vincent stated he feels that perhaps it is time for maybe the Council to have a strong
motion that the Council wait a week to give the Provincial Government sufficient time to,hear the reports from
the staff who were present during the recent flooding, and then if the Council does not have some type of
response from that Government within a week, ten days, or two weeks, that a body of Council including the Mayor,
or the Council as a whole, ask for an emergency meeting of the Cabinet to discuss what is going to be done
specifica~ly in the line of compensation for the people in Glen Falls - either there is going to be some com-
pensation, or there is not, he noted; following that, if there is a decision made on that or whether it must go
forward to the Federal Government for a further decision, following that or in conjunction with that type of a
meeting that the areas of responsibility for the Marsh Creek, the bridging, et cetera, be clearly defined so
that the people and the Council would know once and for all just who is responsible for what, in that waterway.
Mayor Flewwel~ing withdrew from the meeting at this time and Deputy Mayor Higgins assumed the Chair.
156
~
~f'Sh Creek
Cflenh//s
~/t?,?tUJ? 1'.
blkJ? f:,~
;::/opp( Co/7//n'
/ls~IJ;;;;/-c-
ste;obel1 a/7S-//",
t?o, ~ -C:~t'.
~a//:/?1e/7-c-/
re mf .;;
.9crC/pe/J; ,.L
jlreJrel?1 ~
.2rl//h~ quj?/71
fXuoi-~f-/~/?s
,;vcc~d
7Purls-r ~te""dI
-6ure
~N'eS-//o?K//?
~t-K.
(,0/cw /a~el
~ra/pme/7r
r~da/
.%-Bj?ie/1 ahdr,
Co,~-6-d
7J, /I~-t?e/d
-<tfd:
4!e-/di& rI!fPp,h.
Caj?/fa/ /rojed:.
/lrel1a s-
/}..7), T -< f-~
On motion of Counci~lor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that within a period not to exceed two weeks a co~-
mittee of Council approach the Provincial Cabinet for a response as to compensation to the residents of
Glen Fails for losses sustained in the recent flood.
Council~or Green recalled that sometime ago he had suggested to the City Manager the possibility
of' insta~ling high pressure'pumps and the cost of same, regarding the flood control measures for Marsh
Creek, and he asked if a report is ready yet on this suggestion. Mr. Barfoot replied that he mentioned
this suggestion to the engineers who are carrying out the joint report for the Province and for the City
on the methods of remedying flooding there, and this is one of the alternatives the engineers are in-
vestigating - that is, the installation of pumps; also, the engineers are investigating the possiblity of
raising ground levels there.
At this point, on the question of Councillor Parfitt, who asked what is the condition of Mrs.
Wayne's house now that the flood waters have receded and heating has been restored, Mrs. Wayne gave a
detailed account on this subject.
The Mayor re-entered the meeting and resumed the Chair. He advised that he had been called
away from the meeting to receive a telephone call, and that this call was by conference speaker; that in
the room when he spoke with the Premier were The Honourable W. J. Woodroffe and The Honourable G. S.
Merrithew who were with the Premier today when the report was handed to the Premier a short while ago
from Mr. Erwin of the Emergency Measures Organization; that the Premier has directed that Organization to
contact the Maritime Insurance Adjusters Association and direct the adjusters to move into the area of
Glen Falls and .to assess the damages and direct the people there of such action, and there will be news
re~ease in the newspaper tomorrow directing the people in the area what to to with their damaged goods
for c~aim purposes, and then they will seek assistance besides Provincial assistance from the Federal
Government. The Mayor noted that this action that the Premier has taken is what we were wanting, and we
have succeeded that far in the matter; the next problem is to try to find an answer to stopping the
f~ooding.
.
I
I
The large number of residents from Glen Falls who were present, expressed their appreciation of .
the above information, and thereupon withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Council~or Davis
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the invoice from Stephen Construction Co., Ltd., dated November 3rd, 1975, for
supplying asphalt to the Works Department for the period October 16th to 31st, 1975, in the amount of
$54,033.37.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the City Manager,
approval be granted. for payment of the invoice from Irving Equipment, dated October 10th, 1975 in the
amount of $4,620.00-, for the rental of a scraper which was used at the City gravel pit from September
15th to 26th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that
the revision of the tourist literature has been completed and quotations have been received for the
printing of 25,000 copies, and recommending that the lowest bid received, namely, that of Barnes-Hopkins
Ltd., in the amount of $108.00 per thousand, plus applicable taxes, be accepted -- be received and filed
and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent requested that the above noted low bidder be instructed to use the Union
~abe~ on the above printed literature.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, approval be given for payment of the following invoices for equipment rental:-
Stephen Construction Company Limited - to the Works Dept.
Oct. 16-31, 1975
(dated Nov. 3, 1975)
$ 3,120.00
$18,821. 90
D. Hatfield Ltd. - to the Works Dept. Oct. 1-15, 1975
(dated Oct. 20, 1975)
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report of the Fire Department for the month of
September last, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and ap-
proved invoices for engineering services in connection with projects that were undertaken under the
Capita~ projects programme:-
i.
Corrnnunity Arenas
(a) A. D. I. Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 14,
dated October 31, 197 5
1,810.37
$
131,528.50
$
I
.
I
I
.
~
""'"
157
//2), T ,{--td.
.
(b) A. D. I. Limited
;~"'.;.; .,"; Engineering Services
..., . ,Payments prey:i:ously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 15,
dated October 31, 1975
$
$
133,338.87
851. 65
1?e:>cca (c) Rocca Construction Ltd.
ahS~n /~ Construction work
Total value of contract $ 2,913,949.00
Total work done, Estimate Number 10 2,957,960.00
Retention 433,694.00
Is-ewe/? Payments previously approved 2,468,121.40
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 10,
dated November 5, 1975 $ 58,769.06
CM$C6'/1~ Sanitary Sewer Crescent Avenue
$n17 r/.$'e Sunrise Contractors Ltd.
Total value of contract $ 25,200.00
{?o/nf rsd-lo,n Total work done, Estimate Number 2 25,200.00
,4 -I-d Retention 3,780.00
I Payments previously approved 19,278.00
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 2,
dated November 12, 1975 $ 2,142.00
~es .PI".
3. ~yles Drive and Garnett Road
";;;Mt??fI ~ . Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
G-eN/L .T Construction of watermain and sanitary sewer
~al7 Co.k. Totai value of contract $ 76,812.50
Total work done, Estimate Number 1 44,067.50
Retention 6,610.13
Payments previously approved Nil
. Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated November 13, 1975 $ 37,457.37
Arl,rewtlaf 1ft,.
76u/; he.,5"t: 4. Lakewood Avenue, Pauline Street and Westbrook Avenue
tft/e5I-irt/o!r Ocean Westway Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract $ 123,687.75
//1/ e. Total work done, Estimate Number 4 118,089.40
Retention 17,713.41
Payments previously approved 96,274.23
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 4,
dated November 12, 1975 $ 4,101. 76
On motion of Councillor Cave
I 'Pei-/-f/OI'1
- re w..;;d-er+
~~wer /i'l16'5
&J;/!lhfo,17
Wd:
~/:/14 /
, 73<<d.fd
Car.b-aft'e
. $f7/'//d5e
~'tI!' >>eij $-r
/~ Sf'-
OH-/2?C;;We4-
. /J. J/iflC!ed'
./Ilter
I :,8Y-/.;i/W
el1#me/?le,
',(/t!er
I'>U9f~s
fJ1r~.,1~
Oi-t-!! fltfr,
1r:;=i.JSpll~/-
-f(lr
.
.6'-!1er
:3.:1- /,:;v w
ll.....
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the joint report from the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Engineering and Works, advising that with regard to the petition made by residents of Shillington Road for
extension of water and sewer services in their area at the earliest possible date, the estimated cost of these
services wOULd be $25,000.00 for water and sanitary sewer services and a further $7,100 for road re-instatement,
t'ota~ling $32,100.00, and recommending that this project be considered in the 1976 Capital budget, be received
and referred to the committee on Capital Budget for a recommendation, together with the request from the
residents of the Cottage Road and the Old Black River Road for the extension of City water.
On motion of Councillor HOdges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report submitted by the City Manager on the action taken
in connection with garbage spillage on November 1st last around King Square that was witnessed by Councillors
Cave and A. Vincent, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager on the enforcement of the
City's Litter By-Law, which was requested by Common Council as a result of a letter received by Council from
I~s. L. Davis on September 22nd last commenting on the lack of litter receptacles on city streets, advising
that the City staff are unanimous in their opinion that education and advertising are better answers to the
prob~em of preventing litter and that enforcement should once again be put in motion after a short period suit-
ab~e advertising in the media, and submitting the following recommendations:- that the said By-law be amended to
make the driver of any vehicle responsible for litter thrown from his or her vehicle; that the penalties be made
more thought-provoking by raising the minimum penalty from $2.00 to $25.00; that the control of the use of non-
returnable bottles is beyond the jurisdiction of the municipality - the City Solicitor expresses his belief that
this is related to trade and commerce practices and would be Federal in scope - if Council so desires, disap-
proval of the use of non-returnable bottles could be registered at that level; that Section 7 of the Litter By-
Law concerning vehicle loads, Section 12(3) concerning garbage collection vehicles, and Section 256(1) of the
Motor Vehicle Act concerning spillage on the highway is to be enforced; that a programme of education and pro-
motion with regard to cleaner streets be undertaken through the Department of Economic Development with support
from the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee in soliciting the aid of the media, schools, and citizens
generally in an a~l-out and continuing effort to eliminate litter in all its forms -- be received and filed and
the said recommendations adopted, and that the City Solicitor be requested to prepare the necessary amendment to
the Litter By-Law to incorporate the above named changes.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the following paragraph appears in the above mentioned report: "Second,
the Litter Prevention Programme involves police enforcement of the anti-Litter By-Law of 1968. The Chief of
Police reports that while some few offenders were charged and paid a minimum penalty of $2.00, the by-law is very
difficult to enforce, and, indeed, where some individuals were brought before the Courts, the Police were ridic-
uled by the Court, and, in general, a poor spirit was engendered by adverse publicity. The by-law in its present
form is not received as a popular means of preventing littering.", and she asked Chief Ferguson how many were
charged - how few. Chief Ferguson replied that he can get that information; there have been nine in this year,
and he can get the number that were in, last year. Councillor MacGowan stated that she asked for a report, and
every time she asks for a report she gets this same paragraph as is in the above letter, that irks her. On the
point of the by-law being difficult to enforce, she pointed out that other cities enforce such regulations;
regarding the point that Police were ridiculed by the Court when some individuals were brought before it, she
1-8
~D
~
//t-ter 9jf-~
11/ pf(?J'1 7 e0/cle
/lcl +tl7es
r~ //tfel"/hf
~m/ht:J ()~
I'o.;u{m a!L
7(ot!K II/II 1f~
pV';;'!f
t';'''JI /J!~/".
p/.;;;IJI7,;f/f//s -
C!0/77.m.
M.!r.f'C; $01"1$
:lJ ej71f:
..1 Pte.;:;1 Ji-O/l:!?$
/+d.
/" ~ t:/n /~I7..5t
:l)e-/~ r/1l?d
tv/Pie/? /.1'7,7'
617. ;?/'-Ig,; ers. ~
C/i-Ifs YaW
t?IJFo~en;t?4
?JAo<!.e'dare s
(t.e .sir/ires, de.
7'tlh'~e J)e'~
COI71,1?1 /:.t't-ee ()
ft/j die
(/rb;;J)? ?{i>116'ttl4.
/l"p'p/7;j/~~1
'A:;/per f?jatTt,
.2JpcW- . '.5/ .
M :8.,F: p.. c:
sd'rlt</;I7~n ,
/I?~~' ~N-
1!-/me$,{6
felt that is ancient history, .and she doubts very much that anyone has been brought before the Court in
the last ten years regarding littering. She asked if the Chief can tell her otherwise. Chief Ferguson
made negative reply. He stated that the Department has been charging under the !1otor Vehicle Act like it
did in the previous item regarding litter from the garbage truck around King Square; for street litter,
you can charge under that Act, and a minimum fine of $10.00 is charged - we have been charging consider-
able for littering. He confirmed that they have been charging under this Act for littering such as the
throwing of candy bar wrappers on King Street. Councillor MacGowan stated she finds it hard to understand
how this can be, but she will approach the City Solicitor for an explanation in this matter. She stated
that, in any case, she would very much doubt that anyone has been before the Court for littering on the
city streets in the last ten years and were ridiculed because we have been asking many times for action
and every time we asked for. action, we get this same ridiculous reply, that they were ridiculed by the
Courts - and that goes away back when an elderly man threw some litter on the street and he was thrown
out, and since then it has been almost impossible to get anyone to take any action on this, and this is
why she tries so hard to get some action.
.
I
Councillor Gould asked how much it is envisaged a programme of promotion and education to keep
the streets clean will take. He felt that it is not possible to have a satisfactory programme because we
will never be able to afford it. Mr. Barfoot replied that an estimate of cost has not been prepared, but
it would be a fairly small cost in relation to a total summer street cleaning budget, he felt. Councillor
Gould felt that the programme would be ineffective. Councillor A. Vincent stated he favours increasing the
fine and that it be under the local by-law because if it still remains under the Motor Vehicle Act it
means the City is just collecting the fines for the Provincial Government.
I
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that
the staff of the Department of Community Planning and Development has received a request from residents of
a roadway in the Morna-Grand Bay area, as shown on the submitted plan, that ~his roadway be given the name
"Rock Hill Roadway", and that he and the Commissioner of Comunity Planning and Development recommend that
this request be granted, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development, who advise that the Ideal Stores Ltd. request permission to repair
the roof of the company's building at 199 Union Street at an estimated cost of $3,000.00, the Ideal Stores
Ltd. be permitted to carry out these roof repairs (this property being on the northerly side of Union
Street which is the subject of a deferred widening by~law), and that no agreement is required between the
Company and the City for write-off of this cost over a ten-year period in the event the City requires the
property for street widening purposes.
It was noted that the City Manager is of the opinion that agreements in the above mentioned
deferred widening by-law areas when improvements are permitted to properties therein, should be limited to
items involving major alterations for the building and to a value in excess of $10,000.00. Councillor
Gould~,stated he is not sure it is a good idea not to have agreements in these cases. He voted "nay" to
the above'.motion.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager submitting a draft
.etter for reply to the letter received by Common Council on August 25th last from the Canadian Manu-
facturers Association enquiring about law enforcement procedures in the City of Saint John, be received
and filed and the letter as drafted in reply to be forwarded to the said Association, expressing apologies
for the undue delay in making reply.
I
~rr. Barfoot recalled that the Council on August 25th had asked that the city staff prepare a
draft reply .in the above matter and that the draft response to be sent out by the Council be approved by
Council before being sent out. He noted that this is a letter that will be sent out by the Common Clerk
on behalf of the Council. Councillor Gould stated that when the draft of this letter was considered (in
Committee of the Whole on September 22nd last) by Council it was his opinion that a short version of this
letter would have sufficed. Councillor Kipping noted that this draft letter is simply a report out from
what Council approved in Committee of the Whole.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the request and recommendation of the City Manager
for payment of the account received from Shawinigan Engineering Maritimes Ltd. in the total amount of
$324.11 for professional services rendered in the appraising of the Dock Street power plant in connection
with the North End Urban Renewal Scheme, covering the work carried out during the months of April and May
1975 (the estimated cost of the said appraisal work is $15,000.00), which was laid on the table on October
20th ~ast, be taken from the table and filed and the said recommendation adopted.
.
Councillor A. Vincent, who favoured tabling the above account until the Council has the re-
quested meeting with the Chairman of the New Brunswick Electric Power Commission in this matter, asked
that such meeting be held on the Dock Street building because we want it for one dollar, and stated he
~
,..-
/I1t-.f.: at
il';:a.r~C
. C'ha/rman
C/i~ /lJ.!fr.
/tl~l)?7
R 1I.f~$jel<
.
/tju/'pme17
ren-i-a/
cJ~/if/d.k$
{( '16:z ) ,.(-6.
ICt'U'J1'
/l1aeC-owah
~a(tfile
/'~ 17 t- a /
(irClI7~orIa
1-f-/DI7 '6-0
ft/tJJ1ff sHe)
.
~
159
wo~d not favour paying three or four hundred thousand dollars for that old building that should be condemned.
The Mayor stated that he has been informed by the City Manager that we have to meet with the said Chairman,
anyway; and if we pay this account, the Chairman will still meet with the City, the Mayor added. Councillor A.
Vincent asked when the meeting is to take place. Mr. Barfoot replied that no time has yet been set up but we can
approach the Chairman to set a time. He suggested that when the appraisals have been completed and we know what
we are talking about would be the time to meet with the said Minister; that would be in about one or two months.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, approval be given for payment of the invoice from R. H. Laskey, in the amount of $3,222.00, dated
Octooer 7th, 1975, for the purchase of loam which was used on McCavour Drive.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
authority be granted for payment of the invoice dated October 31st, 1975, from Chitticks (1962) Ltd. in the
amount of $14;861.40 for rental of equipment during the period October 16th to 31st, 1975.
Councillor MacGowan discussed with Mr. MacKinnon the details of payment for the rental period of
equipment by the City, with regard to the basis of an eight-hour day, or on the basis of the time during the day
equipment is ordered for rental for a specific job. Councillor Kipping asked if monthly rental of equipment,
particularly the rental of trucks, has been considered, rather than hourly rental. Mr. MacKinnon replied that a
number of things have been considered in the .past; the bills are only high when you are looking at them over a
monthly period; the department finds it is renting equipment for half a day, a whole day, or sometimes for two
days a week, and that to pay an equivalent to an hourly rental or somewhat reduced, when it may not be in use, is
not as economical as paying the hourly rate, as is presently being done. Councillor Kipping and Mr. MacKinnon
discussed details on this subject, and Councillor Kipping stated that the point he wishes to make is still that
monthly rentals should be considered when the City is paying on an hourly basis - as we have been quite regul-
arly, half-monthly and the bills are still large - he therefore feels that a monthly rental should be considered.
Councillor MacGowan felt that if you total all these figures for the number of hours rented and the hourly rate -
if they were working on an eight-hour day, for instance, it could cost the City around $1,000.00 a year just for
transportation of that equipment to the job if they were having an hour lost in the course of a day; she felt
that apparently they could not be losing more than an hour a day because if the equipment is only coming for a
couple of hours and you lose time on that, this large equipment could possibly take half an hour to reach its
destination. Mr. MacKinnon felt that these comments are relevant to only heavy pieces of equipment and not to
something like trucks where we are fairly sure as to the programme for that day and are ordered well ahead of
time, so that they are there on the job; in the case of most of the heavy equipment, some of it has been there
for several days or, for example, the entire length of a job, and it would not be removed - the only time you
would pay for it would be the first time it was moved to the job; in the case of the larger equipment, there is
usually a travel time one-way and because we may only have it once in the run of a year, or once in the run of a
month - we do when we order it, there is some travel time involved.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, in reply to the
160
~/' .~ ~~,., presentation made by !4rs. Betty Sleep to the November 10th last meeting of Council regarding the need for
~ ;/~~~ ~ stopping of cars before exiting from the underground parking of the Prince Edward Square shopping mall on
r~, ~ ~ to Prince Edward Street, advising that the Traffic and Safety Committee reports that it has recommended to
!15itlJ? // :5/51)'7 re the owners of the said shopping mall that. a "stop" or "watch for pedestrians" sign should be located at
l?X/ i- frO,h? ?r, the exit from the parking area and that the said owners have informed the City that this sign will be
-~ ~ ~ placed on their property at once, and further advising that the Commissioner of Engineering and Works has
~v.r, ~~~~~~ suggested, subsequent to November lOth, that a cross-walk be painted in on the sidewalk and has stated he
~"o~l.1tt' ~~,{/~ will arrange for this on City property as soon as possible -- be received and filed and a copy of same be
;P,.., E4'- s7f: sent to Mrs. Sleep.
7/oa fi/e.,.... Councillor Gould asked if any consideration is being given to the request made by Mrs. Sleep
~ ~ezt. ~;?,?~. about fining people under the Motor Vehicle Act for not stopping before crossing the above named side-
~~e ~ wa~k, and he asked if there is going to be any increased surveillance in that area. Mr. Barfoot replied
Cross-AYfi/k t9J1 that this was requested by Council and will be carried out. Councillor Hodges asked when the Council
~/'~t?tGl~/)( will know for sure that these things are done, and stated he thinks that the Council should put a time
I limit on it, of at least no longer than two weeks, to check to see that these things are done. He asked
that the City Manager report back in this regard in two weeks' time. The Mayor noted that this will be
done. ~Councillor A. Vincent asked - with the Legal Department and the Chief of Police, are we going to
do something there. He received an affirmative reply.
Fines p(.ol1der
/lJt?(fJY' ~j/
/Jel
/Ie;;;' C~.pf hi
rPau/6- R~ AL
s~UJq4'e fir"
_ J3t-~-f /0 i'7
/llo)JfeO'/s!f
'Park
.3 t:, 0 .7Je f/(7/t? j?-
mel7i- ~-i-L
Su-6 -flk,d/~/7J.
::/-61/ ~/;c/~tPr
, .
l/"bClI7 7Pel7ett/.,;;/
II7c;,,/cef ~ -
..Pock $-f.,/'fO~
d1cftds, C'tPsi's-
l'e;Of) I" t-
. ,~
J)u ft1'p' I/otv'es
,,{Clke
Sand!j -pt--. '7?.,c,
!pY'~e ;;~,.-
//75
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, recommending that
Heat Craft Ltd. be paid the sum of $4,500.00 for the sewage lift station on the Gault Road, and ex-
plaining the details surrounding this matter, which involves a sub-division agreement between 360
Development Limited and the City of Saint John for development of certain lands on the Gault Road, being
a portion of Monte Cristo Park Sub-division and the fact that the developer was unable to complete the
work involved in the said sub-division agreement of February 13th, 1974, and that as the said developer
has not been able to pay the above noted invoice, Heat Craft Ltd. have requested the City to pay the
amount as the City requires the pumping station operational in order to service this sub-division, be
taken from the table (having been laid on the table on November 3rd last) and filed and the recommend-
ation adopted:
A1~D FURTHER that documents satisfactory to the City Solicitor relating to the above matter, be
executed.
Noting that if the City does not pay Heat Craft Ltd. in the above matter this company can
remove the pump at this sewage lift station, Councillor A. Vincent felt that the City should tighten up
its regulations in such matters. Mr. Barfoot replied that, on that matter, the City has received legal
documents from Heat Craft Ltd. satisfactory to the City Solicitor should the City agree to pay this
amount; the City has also received a Release from 360 Development Ltd. Councillor A. Vincent stated that
the point he is making is, if 360 Development Ltd. had not gone broke the City would not have had to pay
this amount, and the other company is saying that if it is not paid a certain amount of money the
installation will be taken out - so, his question is - why is not the developer bonded or something, and
if the developer goes broke the City would not have to make payment of this kind. Councillor Higgins
recalled it was his motion that was adopted the matter be tabled as he felt the matter was difficult to
follow. He asked if the $34,000.00 that is referred to in the original sub-division agreement was a
hold-back. i4r. Barfoot explained that this figure was Council's original approval for expenditures for
materials for this sub-division - these expenditures are only made as the sub-division proceeds; in this
case, only half the sub-division ever proceeded and so the City has not spent that $34,000.00 - the sub-
division only put in half the houses and this has resulted in only half the assessment. Noting that the
developer went out of business, Councillor Higgins made the point that in order to keep the development
going the City is going to put in $4,500.00. Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply, and stated that there
are people living down there who depend upon the sewage pumping station in order to look after their
sewage. ~he Mayor pointed out that if Heat Craft Ltd. takes out the sewage lift station in question,
the City will have to put another one in. Councillor Higgins asked how often the City has to go good for
a developer who fails in business. Mr. Barfoot stated he believes this is the first time the City has
become involved in a situation like this; it is not a common occurrence. Councillor MacGowan asked if
sub-divisions post a bond. Mr. Barfoot replied that the procedure the City follows is that the Council
approves the expenditure of funds and it requires the developer then to buy the materials rather than
the City buying them, and the City ends up by owing the developer money which is paid to the developer
when everything is completed at the conclusion of the sub-division. Councillor MacGowan asked if it
would not be to the City's advantage to have developers post a bond for just such an emergency as the
case of 360 Development Ltd.; she noted there is always the possibility that the development is not
completed by the developer. Mr. Barfoot replied that in the days when the City bonded sub-dividers the
bond to be required was only the same amount as the cost of the sub-division materials, so the bond
wo~d really be only the amount that the City owes, anyway, in sub-division materials. Councillor
MacGoan asked if, now that the City knows this can happen, would it not be to the City's advantage to
make a requirement that the developer would post a bond, to protect the City regarding such things. Mr.
Barfoot stated that, in effect, the City found that this method of enforcement of its requirements is
very much easier than proceeding against a bond; the second point is that bonds are often very difficult
for small developers to obtain as they have not established a credit rating in the bonding business.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the report dated November 14th, 1975, submitting
further information regarding property acquisitions in the Urban Renewal-Market Square-Dock Street area,
be laid on the table for one week for further information.
Councillor A. Vincent, prior to moving the above resolution, advised that the Council does not
have all the information, and that he found $229,414.00 more today and he is sure that if we have some
more time, we will find some more information. He stated that a rough estimate of the City-owned land
comes to $229,414.00 and he requests from the City staff that we find the year we bought it and at least
bank rate interest on top of it, and find out really what the land is worth. He noted that we are
getting up into a lot of money, here.
Councillor MacGowan voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Commissioner of Engineering and Works be heard
at this time regarding the report on the Howes Lake disposal area and Sandy Point Road garbage littering
problems.
~
.
I
I
.
1-
.
I
I
.
.....1
,..
161
.
I
..7)<<. /'l7 ,p f f
floU! e s
~~lre
$al7d~ ,?t-,
R/.
//#eI'I/lj'
C'omm,
kn1r.f, ,~
Ulbr~s
I
.
IA'/~r ffa
,j'ar. ~el.
ruc/('$
F/nes
Oai~~t1/
,;p;;J:r{/rM/
/leI-
C'i-;I /!l!fr.
~h/d'Jo~~
/I1dt?r tl6'./;I(y~
.Ikf. enH
m~~t re
~7f!7};~~
,.(;tkr -!,rom
:#r~~j.s
SaMt!ll1.'
fIowes ~.ke
I v(tA--/'J7?
(Jaso/i j;e
-ciijhb re-
/ oC,7/-I1 OI7,!
.z;.// k1 ?J I
Ti,/Eq;' S {iI',
st?I"P'/ce ~z;I7,
I
aP1#1/Hee
,pf! /(/~();e
.
....
Mr. MacKinnon advised in detail, as follows:- he brought this item before Council because of the
extremely poor situation at the street entrance to this dump site; as indicated in the report, over the past
number of years periodically people have been dumping garbage at the dump site gate, usually just on a week-end,
and we can clean it up quite easily on Monday morning, but in the past a few plastic garbage bags or the odd dead
or boxed or something of that nature; in the past .two months or so, it has reached the point that this location
has to be cleaned every day - we have even put a container there and people are dumping into the container in the
daytime - we just cannot keep ahead of it - it is just a complete shambles on the outside of the gate and for all
the people who have to drive by that way or go to the University, or anybody living in that area, the situation
is something that has to be attended to; he has recommended, first of all, that the container be removed - which
is something that the department could do, anyway; that the second recommendation is that some strict enforcement
by the Police to stop the dumping be made - he thinks this could be controlled under the Motor Vehicle Act; he
felt that, considering the fact that eighty per cent of the garbage in the city is picked up by the City per-
sonnel, there is no reason that this private dumping by individuals has to go on - the dump site is open for
eight hours a day, five days a week, and also on Saturday morning - he thinks that the way the people are using
this particular dump facility is terrible, and there is no reason that they have to do it, at all, after the dump
hours; this garbage is coming from allover, and not just the city, but is coming from outside the city, and
peopLe just do not seem to care - it is coming from the Rothesay-Renforth area, from the Grand Bay area, and
other areas - it is being dumped by everybody, and there is no reason for it; with regard to what his number one
recommendation in this matter, and how soon it can be implemented, and how many Policemen he wants to do so, with
Police dogs, in the interests of obtaining a conviction, he stated that the first action will be removal of the
said container and the people will be told in that way that they cannot use that container, and the gate, for
dumping - there are signs there prohibiting dumping there - from there on, he thinks that if the Police would
just enforce the Motor Vehicle Act it is going to require, certainly, some public attention through the news
media - with that in mind, he feels that the people will get the message that they are not supposed to dump
garbage in this location. Ccouncillor MacGowan stated that the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee was
concerned about this situation and she believes the Committee inserted an advertisement last week-end in the
newspaper saying that it is illegal, that there will be considerable fines for offenders, and at the same time,
she gave a copy to the Chief of Police and asked him to make sure that it was enforced, and he assured her that
he would do so. Discussion centred briefly on the problem of dump pickers who get into the dump in spite of
locked gates and burn materials in order to gather scrap metals, and who also sort through that garbage that is
dumped outside the dump gates and contribute to that garbage being scattered over the area. Councillor MacGowan
felt that the dump pickers are a problem, and something must be done. Councillor M. Vincent felt that the by-law
is going to have to be more strictly enforced. Noting that Mr. MacKinnon's letter states that, if necessary, the
City may have to have someone left at the dump gate to obtain license numbers of those vehicles dumping such
garbage there, in order to obtain prosecution and to lend credibility to the fact that the City is determined to
clean up this area, and that as an important adjunct to this, it is necessary for the Police to also follow up on
those vehicles that are carrying garbage, demolition materials, sand, gravel, et cetera, without having the
proper covers or tarpaulins on their trucks and thereby are littering all the streets leading up to the area, and
noted that this should be strictly enforced, as well, Councillor M. Vincent hoped that the staff will take a
close look at that because he thinks that it may very well be worthy of consideration to leave the dump open but
have somebody there so that burning can be controlled or restricted - but perhaps to provide an opportunity to
people who do have waste garbage, debris, et cetera to at least take it there maybe after the hours that the dump
is presently open; he felt it is probably enticing the problem if you have a facility ahd then restrict acces-
sibility to it people will do the next best thing which is, dump it somewhere, and he felt it may be to our
advantage to leave the dump open, control the burning for certain hours only but have a security on it by having
a person there. He stated he feels that the comment in Mr. MacKinnon's letter in this regard is a good recom-
mendation. Mr. MacKinnon pointed out that the problem is the high cost of doing it; we would have to cover the
garbage in order to do it that way, and to provide a man for the period of time - they are just going in there
even at night time - might require special protective measures for the safety of that man, he pointed out; the
situation is not just normal with people going in there with a little garbage. Councillor Kipping emphasized to
the Chief of. Police that patrolmen should be specifically instructed to stop the uncovered garbage trucks and
note the necessary details at that time, and have them picked up for violating the Garbage By-Law and Motor
Vehicle Act.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager
and the Commissioner of Engineering and Works, as contained in their joint report of November 13th, 1975 re-
garding the Howes Lake disposal area and the litter of garbage at the entrance to the said dump, and along the
Sandy Point Road, the Chief of Police be asked to enforce forthwith the Motor Vehicle Act as it relates to the
dumping of garbage along roadways, streets, et cetera, and that the Police Department follow up on those vehicles
that are carrying garbage, demolition materials, sand, gravel, et cetera without having the proper covers or
tarpaulins on their trucks and that are thereby littering all the street leading up to the Howe lake disposal
area, by strictly enforcing the laws relating thereto, forthwith.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager and Commissioner of
Community Planning and Development, recommending that the application for the relocation of the following gas-
oline tanks at the Irving Oil service station located at Tilton's Corner, Saint John West (one 4,000-gallon hi-
test gasoline tank, one 4,000-gallon tax exempt gasoline tank, one 10,000-gallon regular gasoline tank, one
lO,OOO-gallon non-leaded gasoline tank) as shown on the submitted plans, be received and filed and the appli-
cation granted.
Coupcillor MacGowan proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the matter be laid on the table
until the Council members receive the plans that are referred to in the above letter, stating she has not seen
such plans. It was noted that the plans are with the correspondence in the possession of the Common Clerk, and
that the plans have been approved by the Fire Department.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as fOllows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, November 10th, 1975, when there were present
Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A.
Vincent and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
162
(!fJ)7?m, If'; t? e
!I1t?U/ /ll;:fks 9-
C~a?fPf/i n,,,(-C-~
/l/'I(Jj/~6'c-t f;
fZk'Rtt?$~/";;11 ,
unhr?~.ss '
$ I"MJ:XPf/ /Pi..~
~o /I'/qr/(ec,
'--
lI/a!l~j1;' Comm,
fll1llk4l5o//sm
Pol/ee .7J~
r/oJ7?6'/e.5's
In-6t?x /c!'aCeL
'pe('sfJl7 s
ctde,IJ7f/ on
-f /me
~F ~sI-/a
'?rClI/, OovC:
I~()X/ea~i!!?~
Pe/'s P.i'7S /J
.7Je6ed-ioJ7l7c
Sa/I/.n-l;'tJn
flr/7?!f
,"Hhn /110011&':/
elfy /lijr.
C.4/d cr,e JbIJ'ce
t'tJ/?/P1,M ,f,ko,lt>J.'
.7Jd~d/()/? d
IJ11fCl k Ic-,;;n!ed
j?erSN1$
A;;J.I'ld amn>,
T~(),mc:;.s
/l1 d Cu-e-aheo,h
/l~b~J.2)u
It//I/d'* ;?t,ty'u,,-
1. That the Common Council request that Mott, Myles & Chatwin Ltd., Architects, bring in ele-
mentary drawings and estimates of cost for a pedestrian underpass linking Brunswick Square and the City
Market building, following which the matter. be brought to Council for a decision as to whether or not
this proposed project is financially feasible for the City to undertake.
Saint John, N. B.,
~7th November, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the
recommendation contained therein adopted.
Read a report from the Mayor's Half-Way House .Committee,.submitting a report from the Police
Department which outlines the cost to the community for picking up and detaining hatiliual drunken persons
on a short-term basis, and advising that this Committee over the past three winters:-~ainly through the
aid of Local Initiative Programme funds and dinners supplied through the Department of Justice, has been
able to provide food and shelter to those unfortunate alcoholics who .are homeless, and that the Committee
has been told repeatedly and firmly by the Department of Health that responsibility .for alcohol educa~ion
and treatment rests with the Department of Health. The report states that, therefore, when Friendship
Hall was closed in the spring of 1974 it was with the hope that the Provincial Government would assume
the responsibility, and noting that winter is upon us again and a core.group of twenty to thirty homeless
alcoholics are faced with inadequate and sometimes non-existent provision for food and shelter for the
coming months, states that the Committee would urge the Council to press the Provincial Government to:
(1) enact the Intoxicated Persons Detention Act, or, (2) provide an effective mechanism and facility to
provide for the needs of homeless alcoholics in the city.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the Common Council press the Provincial Government
to enact the Intoxicated Persons Detention Act and provide suitable accommodation for detention, and,
secondly, that they be asked to provide an effective mechanism and a temporary facility to provide for
the needs of the homeless alcoholics in the city until the said Act has been enacted and permanent
detention facilities established.
Councillor M. Vincent pointed out that the above matter is a Provincial responsibility. Coun~
cillor MacGowan confirmed that this is so. In reply to Councillor Parfitt's question as to whether there
is any accommodation at the Salvation Army Hostel for these people, Councillor MacGowan advised that the
Salvation Army at the request of the Province was attempting to get something established but received a
letter in ~uly saying that no funds would be forthcoming. She advised that on April 15th, 1975, there was
a letter from I~. John Mooney saying that the total sale figures for 1973 (and they would be considerably
more, now) was $68,871,350.00 and there was a net profit of $26,000,000.00 from the sale of liquor, and
she felt that some of that should be going back into the rehabilitation of these people. She added that
the Committee would very much like to see Lonewater Farm expanded to look after these individuals. She
recalled that in the Police Department report of approximately September she brought to the Council's
attention that the. number had risen from 1,360 in 1974 to 2,164 in 1975 and there was a need for such a
place as Friendship Hall, .although she is not recommending Friendship Hall - she thinks that if we want
the Intoxicated Persons Detention Act passed, for their own security, it is the only way we are going to
get any action - we want the passage of the Act and the provision of a place to put these unfortunate
individuals tied in, hand in hand. The Mayor noted that the Police Department report mentioned above
says that the cost of transportation for each person apprehended is based on a 15-minute time period for
a police transport at an estimate of $50.00 per hour to keep the transport in service, which means it was
quite costly to run our vehicles in the city in this regard. Councillor Pye stated he feels that the
said Act shou~d be amended so that when a man is arrested and is picked up he should be charged and it
should carry an automatic one-month penalty; this gets the man off the streets and gives the Police an
opportunity to do a more important job - look after more serious offences; in addition, the records prove
that a great many of our inveterate inebriates have passed on during the past couple of years because
they do not get a (Chance to get straightened out as they would in gaol and they do not get enough sus-
tenance during that period which they normally would if they were incarcerated, and, as a result, they
are dying of malnutrition; in addition, when they are released too soon from gaol, as at present, they
are constantly plaguing pedestrians by their "pan-handling"; he therefore thinks it should be an automatic
thirty days penalty as it was heretofore; another point is that these inebriated persons draw Welfare
cheques, as well, and it is therefore a costly procedure - he felt it would be much cheaper to put them
behind bars for thirty days.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report from the Chief of Police, dated November
14th, 1975 and addressed to the City Manager and submitted by the Mayor's Half-Way House Committee,
outlining the cost to the community for picking up and detaining habitual inebriates on a short-term
basis, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, Mr. Thomas W.
McCutcheon be offered the freehold interest in the property situate at 114 Elliott Row for the appraised
value of $2,800.00 (this property also being known as Lot 8).
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor
Davis
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land
in 22 Suffolk Street (also known as Lot 16) be offered to Mr. Abbey J.
Barristers, for the lessor's interest which is estimated to be $2,000.00.
Committee, the lessor's interest
Duguay through Willet & Marquis,
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....1
....
/';;17// oa
..:ZJcJr~ 7);e, -
. Sfln 1?ec;1
~.5f-ei7le
F n;1i1k {J
S~Vf?!/
16~3
application has been received from Dora Dickson Real Estate on behalf of Mr. Frank G. Savoy who wishes to pur-
chase the freehold interest in civic numbers 5, 7 and 9 Germain Street, Saint John West (also known as Lot 9),
and recommending that the lessor's interest in the said property for the Maude Carson Estate property be offered
to Dora Dickson Real Estate, agent for this estate for the lessor's interest which was valued at $3,000.00, be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
the sum of $6,000.00 for his property on Champlain Drive, shown on the submitted plan,
required for the proposed McAllister Drive extension.
kdl7l1e6-h I
~/~Pr l~. Kenneth Black be paid
I c!,.1a:i:~h ,which is
~J.?ill~zf~1' Councillor A. Vincent enquired if the City needs the above mentioned land, now. Mr. Barfoot replied
-2't', ~~ that this land is part of the lands required for the proposed McAllister Drive extension which it is not believed
will be constructed for approximately one year. He confirmed that this land is in the route of the road.
Councillor Davis stated that, on this matter, the Land Committee would like to have a review of the McAllister
Drive extension project, from the Committee's view at least, to see if it cannot be located farther away from the
Irving Refinery because this year we have had severe pollution in that area and this road extension would bring
it closer to the residents. He noted that our engineers and the consultants have studied various locations for
this road extension and it is now three or four years since that was done, and the Land Committee would like to
have a review, and since that is quite extensive it is a hard job to do, he suggested that perhaps that should be
done for the entire Council, if the Council wants it. Mr. Barfoot stated that he would be pleased to review the
matter with Councilor with the Land Committee, whichever is preferred. Councillor Davis felt it should be
reviewed with the Council, for the complete Council. Councillor Green signified his concurrence in this review
being done, for the information of both the Council and the Land Committee, and for any possible change in policy
by the Council regarding this road extension so that the Council and Land Committee will know just where we are
going, before we get tied up too heavily on land acquisitions.
/tpj7r.a15.;;}
rund;y
/Jj7p;;IS~/5'
~-fa,
1J':;%i~i-
I /YlIII!bMd~
t'O//56?(.l/i?r
/1ffralsa/
7fb.q Le
~';.k1'4
/J>$tJt','/-f~
/l~esJbte
37,,('6'lhSIl ~ Seconded by Councillor Davis
I ~;1~' RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, that was
J'1C91?)7~t'/ laid on the table on November lOth last, be taken from the table and filed and the recommendation contained
~~~/,;;;)n~. therein adopted for amendments to the Subdivision By-Law as set forth therein, and that the City Solicitor be
eY~~~~~ asked to prepare a formal amendment to the said by-law in this regard.
~o/~2c-/t'o On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Esl-d'lie d
. /l, ~r/r1
Sm/fh
S,Prt~~e~kt.
l1Iaier //ne
p-j/rOj?Na6'
GeO)'1f1e r
Clarlr,&,C:
.JJ~0 p
'Pa;9j7.i'/S
I
(1t7JeIp, /l,...?-
1/; J1(~ t!t/7t-
tk(1)'1~e-r
CIa;A; 6' ,e.
Sen/tlr
/;('5.;;;1
(,,'Pt?)1se /
Ct7al7, ;Jf,
. f//neel7t-
/Pe-.z oh /)7
.
,,(/tJ%,<< ..2),
;:V/6>~C"e
,,</o!;la s
~/@i/n.f/
Serv/ce:/f.
ll....
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the City of
Saint John expropriated 21,112 square feet of property of the late A. Carle Smith on May 25th, 1971 for the
Spruce Lake water line, and that negotiations for settlement of compensation for this property has continued and
on October 29th, 1975 a letter was received from Mr. George T. Clark, Q. C. acting on behalf of the Estate of A.
Carle Smith for compensation, and that the Committee recommends that payment of $1,600.00 (which was the in-
dependent appraisal value estimated by Roy de Stecher & Associates), interest at five per cent from May 25th,
1971 to date of closing, costs of evaluation which are $190.00, and legal fees rendered by Mr. Deno P. Pappas to
the late Mr. Smith in the amount of $150.00 for full settlement of the expropriation of the said property for the
said water line, be paid -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for the name of the lawyer who represented the above named Estate. C?un-
Cl~~or Davis replied that Mr. Deno Pappas was the solicitor at the time of the expropriation and Mr. Clark was
!1r. Smith's solicitor, and is handling the Estate. Councillor A. Vincent noted that Mr. Clark is also Senior
Legal Counsel for the City, and was so in 1971, and stated he thinks that there should not be this conflict of
interest in view of the fact that Mr. Clark draws a salary from the City. In reply to Councillor Hodges' question
as to wbyit took since 1971 to settle this property matter, Councillor Davis replied that it was only recently
settled and it was settled by Mr. Clark - Mr. Smith did not want to settle and it had to go to expropriation, and
now the Estate has settled this matter. Councillor A. Vincent stated he thinks that the Council should have a
meeting with Mr. Clark and in the future he does not think Mr. Clark's partners should represent any exprop-
riation against the City of Saint John while Mr. Clark is retaining the salary paid to him by the City and
pension and not on the City payroll, really; he added that Mr. Clark is in the City's pension plan and is the
,
Senior Legal Counsel and he does not think that Mr. Clark should have a conflict of interest, and that Mr. Clark
and that law firm should decide whether they want City business or clients' business. He stated he would like to
have some firm policy in Council, and some guidance. The Mayor replied that we will have to go into it. Speak-
ing in agreement with Councillor A. Vincent, Councillor M. Vincent stated he feels there is a role to be played
by people who are going to assist our Legal Department and he thinks that sometimes having clients as well as
being retained by the City can be a bit difficult and could be rather embarrassing, and added that he speaks in
support of Councillor A. Vincent's comments. The Mayor again stated that we will take up this matter.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, the account received
from Fundy Appraisals Ltd. in the amount of $175.00 for the completion of the independent appraisal of Mr. Norman
Lockhart's property that is required for the Milford-Randolph-Greendale sewer pipe line, be paid.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
the account submitted by Roy de Stecher & Associates Limited in the amount of $434.65 for the completion of the
expropriation appraisal of the Agnes Daley property at 37 Leinster Street that is required for the proposed fire
station, be paid.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with
reference to the extension of time granted by Council on November lOth last to the Committee in which to report
proposed re-zoning for Mr. Lloyd D. Pierce of property located on Brown Street, advising that the Com-
has not been able to resolve this matter but hopes to do so at its meeting slated for November 25th, and
that the Council may either extend the time for the Cimmittee's report Or proceed to make its own decision
re-zoning, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
endments Theretoll insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land located on Brown Street, adjacent to civic
164
~
1?e-;:< 011 /;;"7.
~/C?:fA' S #,~/h.
Se>rv/et7 ~-cd'.
~/C?y-d 3/
'7J/eree
lle-Ao /?/h9'
F/rs~ A',2Jj/
~ -t-d. (m-4f;
/'e f? 0 J'1 -t-
iii oriff<::9,j'e (dn.
(10a'/;" 11 !//l1ee'1?
1?es/~l?.Rtf / on
ft/'/7f-4dPdw n
5'.7 ~ nd~ .
lPg/PI? .7Je'V'e~
Ille/?~ [!;M.m,
number 635 Brown Street, having a frontage of approximately 50 feet and a depth of approximately 134.7
feet, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "B-2" General Business district, be read a first .
time.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until the
Council receives a report from the Planning Advisory Con@ittee.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with Councillors Higgins, Davis, MacGowan,
Pye and Hodges and the Mayor voting "yea" and Councillors Kipping, Parfitt, Cave, Green, M. Vincent, A.
Vincent and Gould voted "nay".
Councillor Kipping noted that the foundation is already in for this building - the footings are
in and part of the foundations, he understands, and pointed out that if this builder does not proceed
soon he is going to lose out on the construction season w~ich means a loss of business, et cetera. He
stated he does not think that the Council should be holding this man up unduly, and he felt that perhaps
the Council could come to a decision at this meeting on the re-zoning if it could get some kind of an
indication from Mr. Zides as Municipal Planning Director. Mr. Zides advised that this re-zoning would be
a fairly routine thing except that we have, first, a protest from someone else, and we also have the
question of the starting to build without a permit; we also.have some apparent confusion as to whether
some people in the area who were alleged to be on both sides of the question understood what they were
petitioning for, so the Planning Advisory Committee deferred this matter simply to go into it further,
and will try to get a complete report for the next meeting; this means that it would not be until after
November 25th that the Committee's report would come back to Council. Councillor Kipping asked how many
letters were sent out to the surrounding residents. Mr. Zides stated he does not know the number; what
the Department did was take an area of some 400 feet in every direction and find the names and addresses
of' all the property owners - letters were typed and are being delivered to some 20-odd people, anyway;
the protests to the re-zoning only came to the Committee through Mr. Mintern who had been talking with
some of the people in the area and who had his own objection before the Committee; the Committee also had
a list of people who agreed to the proposal which was submitted by Mr. Lloyd D. Pierce; there were
several people who signed both statements or petitions, so as a result of that the Committee felt that in
view of the circumstances that point should be tried to be straightened out; there are other factors
which led the Committee to look at the matter a little harder.
Question being taken, the motion for first reading was carried with Councillors Higgins and
Pye voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of 'fhe City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land
located on Brown Street, adjacent to civic number 635 Brown Street, having a frontage of approximately 50
feet and a depth of approximately 134.7 feet, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "B-2"
General Business district, be read a second time.
"nay" .
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Higgins, Pye and Kipping voting
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report from the Board of Directors of First
L.D.H. Ltd., dated November 13th, 1975, be received and filed and a meeting be arranged with the said
company regarding the company's suggestion for a second mortgage to the City to secure the existing loan
made by the City to the company.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that Councillor A.
member of the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission and
said Commission.
Vincent reconsider his resignation as a
continue to be an active member of the
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he is now withdrawing his request that the Common Council
accept his resignation from the above named Commission.
Read a letter from Mr. Gordon E. Hood, Planner, Community Planning Branch Department of Munici-
paL Affairs, written on behalf of the Saint John Regional Plan Steering Committee, requesting the par-
ticipation of the Common Council and the City of Saint John in the preparation of a Regional Plan for the
j?e~,~~/7, Saint John Region, and advising that as co-ordinator of the background study to. a Regional Plan (which
;71~//?~, study was sponsored by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion and the Department of Municipal
~/. Affairs) which was undertaken in 1971, he would like to arrange an initial meeting with the Common
[blllhUh. rlCJfh. Council to. discuss: the Regional pla';ning process, what the City of Saint John's aspirations are, what
~~)?~17 the City's aspirations are in relation to a Regional Plan, and what are the problems that the City
CZ7 ' /perceives within the Saint John community and within the region. Councillor Davis asked for some elab-
~.~ 77 e~/(JI7~ oration on this subject, noting that it has been a long time since this study was conducted. Mr. Zides
)2J/ov)? advised that the various studies in and around Saint John at the time of the beginning of the Department
of Regional Economic Expansion programmes led the Province to become involved in looking at the region
outside of Saint John because they felt that the impact of any development activity would extend beyond
the city limits; at that time, they used such work as we had and elaborated on it to develop a regional
concept. He explained that it is the Province's responsibility to prepare regional plans of New Brunswick,
and this is the first one; what they are doing is the result of some of their experience over the past
years and as the result of more detailed local plans, as to re-examine their over-all concept with a view
to adopting it in a formal way; Mr. Hood has prepared a report in which he sets out the time frame and
the general content of the regional plan - what he would like to do is to meet with the public and with
municipal officials - elected Councils, and so on; as the result of which Mr. Hood will then formulate
some modifications to the general plan as originally drawn, and come back finally to his people with a
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
JI"'"
165
recommendation for adoption by Cabinet. Councillor Davis felt there are a couple of discrepancies: he noted that
this plan extends to St. George whereas our Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission extends to St. Stephen,
and this goes as far as Westfield, whereas that goes as far as Welsford - so, there is no co-ordination there at
all. Mr. Zides pointed out that they had this first, because they started before we did.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
S:T 1?o//~/lcJ
7>/6/ h
.7Jepf. flUi'7, .
1t9~/f1$/
W'0~~1t''?, f~
.:Eral7~/J
ti.PrA?p),1~~ Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the petition from residents of Beaconsfield Crescent and
~ L 1t. the Lowell Street area expressing their objection to the provision of access to the Lowell Street arena over the
re~/ /t?)7 P db" h' t' th t C't 1 d d thO
.aa/>>$-C- former orter property, an su mlttlng t eH recommenda lon a the l y an scape the area aroun lS arena
;:~~e~s ~t? and erect a fence at the earliest possible date, be referred to the appropriate City staff for their consider-
,fto€l7d/ ,/OWtf'/t ation.
T./over
iG Councillor Green advised that the Land Committee has reviewed the above matter and also the matter of
~~~~~ closing of the old Lowell Street area which comes around to Beaconsfield Avenue and that it has been the Committee',
r~ ~ feeling that access through the Porter property to the arena should not be, and in consultation with Mr. Nicolle
~~~ Jf they have agreed that they would carry the road around the other side - brought in from what land the C.P. Rail
~f?ce wants at the present time - therefore, he believes that this will accomplish what these residents of the area are
;(c9J1~~~~ asking. Councillor MacGowan noted that the petition states that the area used to be lower than the back yards of
<>.1"'0 _/ ~~;,. the homes in the vicinity but the arena area is now higher and drains down into those back yards. She asked if
o/<t.c~ ~7~'h this is a fact, because she thinks that this is a very serious charge, if the City builds arenas and does not
~o~e>/~ ~ take precautions that it is not going to have problems with flooding. She stated she would hope that proper
. drainage will be installed, if it is necessary. Mr. Barfoot advised that it will be, very definitely. She asked
if landscaping will take place. The reply to this question was affirmative. Councillor M. Vincent stated that
L he has noticed that the ground around the new City arenas where parking is taking place is very rough and that it
~ft/T;)7;1 will be difficult to park cars when the ground freezes, in some of the spaces there. He asked if work is being
~~e$ done to get these areas at least as level as possible for parking for winter use. Mr. Barfoot replied that this
will certainly be looked after.
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the meeting be arranged with Mr. Gordon E. Hood, Planner,
Community Planning Branch, Department of Municipal Affairs, on behalf of the Saint John Regional Plan Steering
Committee, regarding the preparation of a Regional Plan for the Saint John Region, and that Mr. Hood's letter be
received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
;.r,1~,~~~ RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Clarence Saunders of 12 Wright
~ ~~~ Street advising that the fence adjacent to the sidewalk at 12-28 Wright Street has been subjected to vandalism
~ttJ.7. and that this will create a very dangerous situation for pedestrians this winter as there is quite a drop-off
;C-el7ee', into the vacant lot at this location, and suggesting that a fence be erected there of material stronger than
I ttI rl !Jhf $-t.. wooden slats, be referred to the appropriate City staff for a report.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
~~-~t?J.7iJ7~ RESOLVED that the application from Kennebecasis Investments Ltd. for re-
~eJ.7J7~~~ zoning of 23.25 acres of.land in Phase 3 of the Bonaccord Sub-division on the Loch Lomond Road for the cons-
~~est7?1<!: truction of housing thereon, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that
~~~ authority be granted to proceed with the necessary advertising regarding the proposed re-zoning.
'P/SJ.7)? ,
rJvI ns, ~M
On the subject of sub-divisions, Councillor A. Vincent stated that he has asked repeatedly for the City
staff to bring in a new programme for sub-divisions because Saint John is the only municipality left in North
America that is subsidizing the developer, without at least passing it on to the purchasers. He stated he is not
really opposed to subsidizing the developer if it is passed on to the purchasers. Mr. Barfoot replied that we
are gathering information for that report now, as to subsidization practices, and it will be coming to Council
shortly. Mr. Zides gave a progress report in this regard, advising that some replies have been received to our
enquiry for ilif6rmation, and these indicate that Saint John is one of the few places that is subsidizing develop-
ers. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is prepared, if he is given the list of the 18 or 20 cities in Atlantic
Canada, to personally see that envelopes are picked up and delivered to Mr. Zides at no cost to the City, so that
l~. Zides can receive the answers to the enquiry letters that have been held up because of the present postal
strike in Canada.
. $ub-d/1//5;:
f?t?;/Ctf
?/7~m~ht?
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to have a complete list before Wednesday of this week
~~/1;f~~ of all the non-Union salary increase because the item he read in the Halifax Herald of last Wednesday on this
~rJJ.1-~;OI7 subject was not what he voted for - the salaries listed in the said newspaper in this regard are not what he
I ~ ~tI~~5 voted for. He stated that the people of that newspaper say they got their information from City Hall here, and
/7~;? ~/2 he wishes to give them the correct information. The Mayor replied that this requested information can be pro-
Lt?ttJ1, 17, vided by means of a report.
Vlh(!el1r
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
I
~",.
J
.
lrIr..
166
/llaC)-;;;f/II/f/;-
waf! meeBl1'y
$alltPJ Claus
'jJ.;;IY'aPie
Commi#ee
,{ tJ rpll'.5 f .7).;;1
[(;1'I1t? /#e~
,,((J!t,al/si; ~tf.
{J0/IJ/71/ ~
S;;;;17-1-~ CYa~S
'Pcd:I f1:ilae
c::btp~/ /l, I/?Il~~
tla/ar/RS
~J1-0J/I//1
e'17J?/o/~
Salary tf,,1fh ~~
/YtJJ7- (/ n /011
e /7J //0;1 (!r?S'
CoM/II, I/?Il~
(1erf/ftea/~ of
/lJer;'-r .
c/ {//c.r i'71 RR-
'Bead, C'omm,
;tlrs .I70);O/ ~r1 0
,c NJ7(! /.~ /VicM
1i1r.*-/l!I'S,ff: J?,
WIJPd
~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-
fourth day of November,. A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
ROdgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, G. Baird,
Commissioner of Economic Development, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community
Planning and Development, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
and E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police
I
Mrs. Mae Todd, Assistant Pastor of Hillcrest United Baptist Church, offered a prayer which
opened the meeting.
The Mayor advised that a meeting will be held in Hampton, N. B. at 8.00 o'clock p.m. on November
25th next, with respect to the Mackay Highway.
I
The Mayor at this time spoke in appreciation of the efforts put forth by the committee he had
appointed, the chairman of which was Mr. John Miller and the members of the committee also formed this
committee, to produce this year's Santa Claus Parade which was a great success. He also expressed the
appreciation of the City of Saint John to all those who entered floats and bands, or in any way contributed
to this Parade or participated in it, from not only our own city, but from communities in New Brunswick,
inc~uding the local schools. Councillor Gould suggested that if such a success could be realized by this
committee from three weeks' work, a continuing committee that would work the year around in trying to get
a~~ those businesses that did not participate this time to do so for next year and ensure the success of
this parade next year. He felt that such a committee should be appointed now, for 1976. The Mayor
replied that we are hoping that the Santa Claus Parade could be taken in with the same committee that runs
Loyalist Days, to expand its duties to include the said Parade. Councillor Gould felt it would be wise
for that committee to approach businesses either before their calendar year of 1975 ends or before March
or April, 1976, before their budgets are made up, so that they could include their contribution towards
this Parade in their budgets.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the Common Council encourage the Loyalist Days
Committee to expand its scope of duties to look after the problems of producing the annual Santa Claus
Parade at Christmas time.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that at the last meeting of Council, he had asked that he be
provided before November 19th last with a copy of the complete list of all the non-Union salary increases,
and he expressed his disappointment that the City staff has not as yet provided him with this information.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that this Common Council be adjourned now, until Councillor
A. Vincent obtains the above noted information regarding non-Union salary increases.
The Mayor felt that this had been an oversight on the part of the City staff, and pointed out
that the information can be provided for Councillor A. Vincent at this meeting.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors A. Vincent and Green voting "yea" and
the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent .
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that Councillor A. Vincent receive the above noted
information, as soon as possible.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he wants to know the non-Union salary increase votes before
those employees receive their cheques.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that no cheques be issued to the non-Union salary employees
unti~ Counci~~or A. Vincent gets the list he is seeking.
Councillor Davis recalled that the Council members voted for all the non-Union salaries, in_
dividually. The Mayor noted that Councillor A. Vincent is saying he did not have the list of those
salaries because the Council members turned the list in, after dealing with those salaries. Councillor
Davis pointed out that the Council approved each one of those salaries, individually. Councillor A.
Vincent replied that his information"is that some have been changed, and he is not going to go for it; he
added that if they have not been changed, he feels the list of these salaries would have been received by
him by now.
I
Present at the meeting were Mrs. Ilona Forgo and Mr. Francis Nickson who were presented at this
time by Mayor Flewwelling with Certificates of Merit from the Civic Improvement and Beautification Com-
mittee, which bear the following citations which were read by Councillor MacGowan, Chairman of the said
Committee: - Mr. Nickson has demonstrated that imagination, deft placement and a flair for colour can
transform ordinary garden flowers into an eyecatching and pleasant display at his residence at 31 Jean
Street; t~s. Forgo has been able to demonstrate that a rather unusual site can be effectively and beauti-
fully adapted to a formal setting at her residence at 2463 Candace Street, which very pleasant property
examplifies the criterion for which the Beautification Committee is striving. Councillor MacGowan noted
that ~tr. and Mrs. W. R. Wood of 56 Mecklenburg Street are also receiving a Certificate of Merit (they were
.
~
r'"
167
.
'"
I
P/;::;IJJ7, /J...I~
.comm,
I lie-A on!)?
SCholle/?
1}.ryt'd/R.5
L!;fl1ll .1,
/Yc%tll'l,
/roI5 tl)? q--
ell/lier
.
CounJ1JI/'m?
I fid ~ud~i.
~". (paved
l~wl7)
Gfleel'l 6iY't?a
PlaJ<J7' fJe:/v/s.
{:OI1l)77.
.
1/Yl(J/;/ Ie hOh7
~~:f7 CoIJ
eN?fe 'flrotl-
u~fs ,.( -t-L.
I (!/6!1~/;(J;I().
~ttl1 / rf, (/;~
/lspha/t-
. $iejJ/;t:??J
eon:5f;.- !!OJ,,
.....
unable to be present at this meeting), having shown exceptional imagination and creativity in transforming a
sma~l area of their urban environment into a spot of beauty - their ingenuity and enterprise having proven that
limited space is no detriment to maximum beautification. She noted that as a result of Mr. and Mrs. Wood's
beautification of this property by means of trees in containers on the sidewalk and hanging baskets, they are
going to do even more of such beautification next year and she believes that some of their neighbours are fol-
lowing their example in so beautifying the surroundings of their residences and are going to try to beautify that
whole street. The Mayor and Councillor MacGowan extended congratulations to these award-winning citizens.
Councillor MacGowan advised that the Committee made a tour of the city to view the various properties and as a
result, a great many letters will be sent to persons whose gardens the Committee found to be very attractive but
which did not qualify for the Certificates of Merit.
Consideration was given to the following letters:- from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising that
the Committee recommends against the requested re-zoning of a 250-foot times 240-foot lot located at 770 Bay
Street to "B-2" General Business classification to permit the construction by Scholten Properties of a building
to be used for a food store on the ground floor with a gas bar, and apartments on the second floor, for the
reasons set forth in the Committee's letter; from Mr. Lynn A. Nason of Nason & Collier, solicitors for Scholten
Enterprises Ltd., advising that since their client appeared before the Planning Advisory Committee on October
28th last regarding this re-zoning application, it has acquired additional information which it believes the
Committee should consider before giving a final recommendation to Council, and, therefore, the Council is asked
to again refer this matter to the said Committee for further study so that Scholten Enterprises Ltd. can again
appear before the Committee and present further information to it.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the matter of the above named proposed re-zoning be returned
to the Planning Advisory Committee to consider the matter again with the additional information that is being
presented by Scholten Properties Ltd.
In response to the question as to whether it was permissible for persons to speak to the proposed re-
zoning at this time, it was noted that the public hearing~as held on November 10th in this matter at which time
the Planning Advisory Committee asked for time in which to prepare its final report for Council, and the Council
granted that request, and the Committee has now submitted its report at this meeting of Council. Councillor
Higgins felt that since this matter is now being referred back to the Planning Advisory Committee, the chance for
anybody to speak would be at that Committee. Councillor M. Vincent asked if there was an appearance at the
Planning Advisory Committee level by a law firm on behalf of Scholten Properties Ltd. during the Committee's
deliberations and decisions concerning this re-zoning application. Replying in the affirmative, Mr. Zides stated
he thinks what has happened, however, is that - he does not know what the additional information is, but that
~etter says there is to be additional information. Mr. Rodgers noted that the above motion, if Council wishes to
adopt it, is in order, the solicitors for the applicant having now asked for the opportunity to place additional
information before the Planning Advisory Committee so that the Committee will have all the information before it
makes its decision - he assumes that the said solicitors did not know that the Committee's recommendation was
being submitted for this meeting of Council.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that Mr. Zides provide information for the Council on the regulations
requlrlng persons to develop their properties in accordance with their development plans following Planning
Advisory Committee and Common Council approval of such development plans and the issuance of permits for the
development of properties. He explained that he knows of one such case, at 52 Mountain Road, where the whole
lawn was paved, but when the permit went to the Planning people it showed a green area there. The Mayor asked
that Mr. Zides submit a report to Council in this matter.
Councillor Green noted that the Mayor is instructing the person who is present at this meeting and who
wants to speak at this time on the said re-zoning matter, that he will have a chance to make an appearance, later
on. ~he Mayor confirmed that the said person will have an opportunity to make such an appearance, with the
Planning Advisory Committee. Councillor Higgins noted that Mr. Zides will give that person the date that will be
set for such hearing.
Counci~lor A. Vincent recalled that the Common Council on July 28th last, refused permission to Super-
ior Precast Concrete Products Ltd. to locate a mobile home on the company's property at its plant on Golden Grove
Road, and he advised that this trailer is still on that property. He asked if the City is going to take some
action to see that the said trailer is removed from that property. He added that the Council instructed the
owner to do so, over six weeks ago, and no action has been taken.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that permission be granted to place on the agenda of this
meeting an item relating to the Planning Advisory Committee.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that on the above noted date, the Council refused the renewal of per-
mission for the placing of a trailer as an office, or whatever, on the above named property, and that he would
like to know what action has been taken, to date, in this matter. He recalled that he asked two weeks ago about
it, and nothing has been done, and the trailer is still there; he asked if it is still there. Mr. Zides stated
that, as far as he knows, it is still there. Councillor A. Vincent stated he wants to know what the Council
Order was in this regard, and when Mr. Zides is prepared to act upon it. Mr. Zides pointed out that all he can
do as far as acting is concerned is to refer something to the Building Department which enforces and that De-
partment takes things to the Legal Department, and that is where this matter is. Councillor A. Vincent asked
what is holding up the removal of the said trailer from this property, and how can we get action. Mr. Rodgers
replied that he will have to check the correspondence and see where this matter presently stands. Councillor A.
Vincent asked what is holding up the removal of the said trailer from this property, and how can we get action.
Mr. Rodgers replied that he will have to check the correspondence and see where this matter presently stands.
ouncillor A. Vincent asked for a report in this matter for the next meeting.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the invoice from Stephen Construction Company Limited, dated November 17th, 1975, in the amount of
$35,570.02 for supplying asphalt to. the Works Department during the period of November 3rd to 14th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the City Manager, approval be
1"68
",
qu.i'pm~d-
. re~-'if/
2). /7cSC!'/l?/L
;( -I:L
C'-f;:J He;> / /
01 eOl J7 /Y7~
(! t:J J? -f-rOl c- T
tPreorI- ;f/orf/;er.
:Buj/ d/n!l
/Yla /n-C-BnOlhce
-.;+~
t/rkl11?entf'kk/.
lI1arJef $" -
.J)pdr S-E:
COh1I'/ex
kKft".tJfridl-t./Oh
granted for payment of the following invoices for equipment rental:-
D. Hatfield Ltd. - to the Works Dept.
Oct. 16-31, 1975
(dated Nov. 4, 1975)
Oct. 1-15, 1975
(dated Oct. 20, 1975)
.
$ 18,162.60
- to the Water Dept.
$ 13,705.65
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, further to his
report to Council on October 17th last, regarding the City Hall building and the large number of com-
plaints about the maintenance of the building, including cleaning, advising that the cleaning problem has
been discussed in detail by City staff with the owners of the building, who acknowledge major problems;
that at the present time, the City is responsible for its own cleaning, with the owner being responsible
for common areas and the balance of the building; that this work was tendered for some years ago, and the
same contractor does the cleaning for both the City and the owners; that the present cleaning contractor
has been providing a steadily declining level of service; that the owner has explored various alternatives
and it has been suggested that a more efficient service could be rendered if the owner assumed responsibility
for cleaning services in the entire building; that the owner has now negotiated with another cleaning
contractor, Great Northern Building Maintenance Ltd., to take over the cleaning as of January 1st, 1976 --
and recommending, (1) that written notice be given to Modern Building Cleaning by December 1st, 1975 to
terminate their contract with the City as of January 1st, 1976; (2) that the City enter into a contract,
effective January 1st, 1976 with Great Northern Building Maintenance Ltd., for the City's portion of the
cleaning - this contract to be in effect for a period of twelve months from January 1st, 1976, with a
cancellation. provision of thirty days' written notice - the City's portion of the contract to be $4,090.00
per month -- and further advising that the owners of the City Hall building and the City staff feel that
the above named arrangement should overcome many of the existing problems -- be received and filed and the
recommendations contained therein adopted:
I
I
AlID FURTHER that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute on behalf of the City of
Saint John the above named contract with Great' Northern Building Maintenance Ltd.
.
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's query regarding a comparison between the City's existing
cleaning contract and the proposed contract under which the City would pay $4,090.00 per month, Mr.
Barfoot advised that the present contract calls for a payment of $3,339.56 per month; the City's present
contract is expiring and the indication was that a new contract from the same company would be consider-
ably higher than the bid received from Great Northern Building Maintenance Ltd. - therefore, it is just an
incre~sed cost factor (and not any enlargement of the area of the services, or not any other areas, to
compensate for the increased cost) because it is wages and everything else.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for the name of the signing officer for the said Northern Building
company, and 11r. Barfoot replied that our correspondence is with Mr. N. Bathurst, President, and his
office is in Dorval, Quebec, which is the head office of the company. Councillor A. Vincent questioned
that we are giving this contract to a company from Quebec, and Mr. Barfoot advised that this company is
already working in New Brunswick and intends to set up a local operation. Councillor A. Vincent asked to
be told a Hew Brunswick address for this firm. 11r. Barfoot replied that the correspondence is with the
head office of this company, which is in Dorval. Councillor A. Vincent asked what is the difference
between the local company paying taxes, license plates, parking meter tickets, et cetera, and other forms
of revenue to the City; he then asked what is the address of this local company. 11r. Barfoot replied that
the operation of Modern Cleaners, to whom Councillor A. Vincent was referring, is from Fredericton, New
Brunswick. Councillor A. Vincent asked what amount of money we are talking about: the difference between
a registered company in the Province of New Brunswick and doing business in this province, and a firm from
outside the province. Mr. Barfoot advised that the difference will be approximately $1,600.00 per month
for the first six months of the contract, rising to $2,200.00 per month.
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the City called public tenders for this cleaning work. Mr.
Barfoot replied that the City, in conjunction with the owners of the City Hall building, received quotations
from these two companies. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the owners of the City Hall building are shareholders
in the said Northern Building Maintenance company, and asked if it is not true that the said building .
owners own the said cleaning company. He added that his information is that the owners of the building
own the cleaning company. The Mayor commented that this would not make any difference; that as long as
the company does the job at a certain price, he cannot see the difference. Councillor A. Vincent replied
that there is a big difference - the City should call local tenders; he added that the City did not call
loca~ tenders. The Mayor pointed out that the owners of the City Hall building called the tenders.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table and public tenders be
I
called on behalf of the City.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with Councillors A. Vincent, Green and Pye
voting "yea11 and the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, MacGowan, Parfitt and M.
Vincent voting "nay".
Councillor Hodges noted that the termination date of the Modern Cleaning contract is January
1st, 1976 and the commencement date of Great Northern's contract is also January 1st, 1976 and he asked if
the City is to pay each company for that date. 14r. Barfoot replied that the point made by Councillor
Hodges, that the termination date of Modern Cleaning's contract should be December 31st, 1975, will be
arranged correctly.
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green and A. Vincent voting "nay".
Consideration was given to the letter from the City Manager which advises that for some time the
Urban Renewal Office has been attempting to negotiate the acquisition of the properties required for the
development of the Market Square Complex, and most of these properties have been successfully acquired (as
reported in detail to Council on November 17th last) and the property costs totalled $2,613,227.00, and
that the fifteen properties which are listed below, which still remain, give indication that expropriation
will be required, and that serious negotiations have been carried on with these owners in most cases and a
settlement has been unable to be reached in some cases because the owners are not fully convinced that the
Ci ty does intend to actually acquire their property. The letter further advises that filing "Notice of
Intent to Expropriate" will assure these owners that the City does intend to acquire their interests; that
it is felt that the initial steps should be taken as soon as possible because under the new Expropriation
Act expropriation is a lengthy and time-consuming process, and such action will ensure the City's owner-
ship of these properties at a time concurrent with the expected schedule of the redevelopment of the area;
.
......
"..
169
.
I
I
t/rb~h I
'R ~116'f1/a
/J1d1f>/rd;;; -
Ve?cK ~-&-.
con;f?! e)<
.I5<IJNIJNOl-
r / -6-/01?$
C/f!jSoI/d-
-ft?r
1?t95'cil1tfer:l b
{', e, o. 11/, r, / ,
I 17(; (~-'/oo,
-t~ /5 '7)OOK)
I
k-lOr/7JCJ -
-f/Iln re
. .;;b,ove
j?N?I6'I'1f-/ e$
*'
I
I
{bttl1,/!,
. tl/I1a?-!1f
~
ll.....
that expropriation will prove economically beneficial to the owners as, under the terms of the Act they will be
able to avail themselves of the amount of the City's offer - these monies are obtained without prejudice to their
claim and provide immediate financial assistance to enable the owners to arrange for their relocation; that
expropriation as soon as possible will prove economically beneficial to the City in that the value of the pro-
perty interest will be set as of the date of expropriation - negotiations being carried on verify that the market
value of these property interests is subject to the same escalation as all else in the area with no apparent
reason to believe that this trend will change in the near future. The letter contains a recommendation that the
City Solicitor be authorized to file the necessary Notice of Intent to Expropriate with the Expropriation Ad-
visory Board, regarding the fifteen properties listed therein, and that are also listed below in these minutes.
Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table and a list be provided
for Council of all these properties, of their assessed and appraised values, and the last offer to the owners of
these properties.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with the Mayor and Councillors A. Vincent, Green,
Pye and MacGowan voting "yea" and Councillors Hodges, 11. Vincent, Parfitt, Gould, Davis and Cave voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the information furnished by the City
l1anager, l~. Barfoot, in his letter dated November 21st, 1975, his recommendation is hereby adopted and the City
Solicitor is authorized and instructed to commence expropriation proceedings under the Expropriation Act for the
acquisition of the fee simple and all rights, title and other interests of the following described properties by
the filing of a Notice of Intention To Expropriate with the Expropriations Advisory Board and causing the same to
be served on the respective owners, namely:-
Tax Map Reference Number
F-6-19-8
F-6-19-9
F-6-19-10
F-6-19-24
Civic Address
53-55 Dock Street
57-59 Dock Street
61-63 Dock Street
22-24 Nelson Street
Owner
H. M. Hopper Co., Ltd.
H. M. Hopper Co., Ltd.
Frank Fales & Sons Ltd.
Irving Oil Co., Ltd. (Princess
View Service Station)
J. D. Irving Co., Ltd.
Leonard & MacDonald, Ltd.
Irving Oil Co. (AI Legere)
Ocean Finance Ltd.
Thomas S. Gorman Ltd.
Smith Brokerage Ltd.
Alban S. Emery
Eastern Trust (J. D. Irving)
Parrtown Taverns
L. R. Mawhinney
Foster Green
L-6-19-19
1-6-19-20
L-6-19-23
L- 5-1-9
L-5-1-10
L- 5-1-13
L-5-l-l4
F- 5-1-24
F-5-.L-29
F-6-11-5
F-6-11-12
8-9 North Market Wharf
7 North Market Wharf
75 Dock Street
11-12 South Market Wharf
9-10 South Market Wharf
2-3 South Market Wharf
l-5 South Market Wharf
Water Street
21 Water Street
48 Smythe Street
23 Mill Street
Councillor Cave felt that although the tabling motion proposed by Councillor A. Vincent was defeated,
the information that Councillor A. Vincent was seeking can still be provided. The Mayor agreed. Councillor
Green noted that two or three of the above listed businesses are fairly close to settlement and if we expropriate
we are going to waste money of the taxpayers and the expropriation is going to be a long, drawn-out affair. He
stated he knows two people who have been put to quite an expense - the fact is, they were issued an eviction
notice that the property would be wanted by the City, two years ago and they started making arrangements to get
out, and so on. He felt that if the City goes into expropriation, and so on, some of these firms listed are
going to be put at a disadvantage - and he felt that for a couple of weeks, the City should try to negotiate
something before it puts these firms to a lot of expense. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he asked for the
information on the properties already purchased and was told it was $2,613,227.00, and after reviewing it with
some City staff he picked up another quarter of a million dollars - he picked up City-owned property that the
City staff forgot to add amounting to $229,414.00 plus no bank carrying charges; he stated that what he would
like to know - and he is interested in the civic centre going ahead - exactly we are getting into - he is sup-
porting the civic centre and wants to see the library started, and so on, but he just wants to know what we are
doing regarding this matter. He stated there are some people in this area that he knows we can probably conclude
an agreement if we sit down with them, and that is why he asked to table the motion; he stated he understands
there is one person in the block who is prepared maybe even to donate a building; he added that there are many
advantages on that block and he is saying that if we could get a sheet - maybe it should be in the form of a
"teach-in" - he cannot find out, for instance, what the last offer was to Hopper's or the appraised value. The
Mayor noted that Councillor Cave suggested that it be included that this information be made available to all
Councillors. Councillor A. Vincent stated that the information we would like to have is the cost of the re-
maining buildings, the cost of what the City estimate is, the assessment, the appraised value and the last offer
negotiated, and the amount the property owners want; then we will know what to do. Mr. Barfoot replied that this
information will come to hand. He advised that with some of these properties the expropriation procedure is the
only way that these will be ac~uired; the beginning of this expropriation procedure does not stop negotiation,
which still carries on exactly the same as if there had been no expropriation procedure.
I
Councillor Higgins re-entered the meeting during the foregoing discussion period.
(Councillor Kipping entered the meeting)
Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels strongly that all the information should be made available; City
staff should supply the Council with information that the increase of the fifteen per cent on next year's Pro-
vincial budget will be the percentage they are paying for Urban Renewal, and if that is true we will not be even
meeting our payroll. He stated he is only warning the Council in this regard, that if the total fifteen per cent
they said was going to be a restraint is going to be the fifteen per cent on everything, will the City Manager
publicly guarantee to him at this meeting that it does not include the Provincial Government's percentage. The
Mayor replied that it does not have anything to do with this matter, right now. Councillor A. Vincent maintained
that it has got something to do with it.
Councillor A. Vincent, for the information of the Council members, advised that the following is the
information he is asking for regarding these Dock Street area properties:- the assessed value, the City's ap-
praised value, the property owners' appraised value, the City's offer, the property owners' offer - the final
offer, so we will know where we are. Councillor Higgins stated we might know where we are, but he does not
believe that you can sit down and consider "their offer, and our offer" in the negotiation of property, when you
170
,.,
(!/--ry ;1/aJ7Bj'er
J>t?/k!f re l'ue/
j?ull1tf Tai'7k
111 S ~d /jB-// ~.11$
.;}-//It~cd/(:)hs
r€ <zx/s-t-/i'7j
seflJ//f!e .9-fOlti~
Shell all {J, tJ/'
CatJC1da
C-a~t?/il1e -&'n
.,}-fserv/ce L'
.s-ieJ'C"/ ph
t7!oblle home
/J(e;ttJ1i~e ;?/u 11"
are talking about fifteen properties. Councillor A. Vincent replied that all he wants is, for instance,
regarding H. M. Hopper - what they are asking, what their assessed value is, what we have offered, and
what the City's appraised value is - and he wants. the same information for each of those fifteen pro-
perties that are listed. Councillor Higgins agreed that this information should be obtained by Council.
Mr. Rodgers stated that he assumes that Councillor A. Vincent is looking for information in a
confidential capacity for Council, with respect to what has been negotiated and how close the City is to
settlement; if the Council is interested in that information, it should get that information before it
adopts the recommendation to file the Notice of Intention to Expropriate. He pointed out that the said
recommendation made in the City Manager's letter sets machinery in motion that involves a lot of docu-
mentation, a lot of expertise, surveyors, filing notices, setting dates before the .Expropriation Advisory
Board for hearings (and that Board is busy now, and it has to make up a docket) - so when the Council
takes the step to start expropriation he believes the Council should be aware that even though negot-
iations can continue, that is true, is there any chance of settlement. Councillor Davis advised that
these negotiations have been going on for a long time, and he is sure that the City's 35% share and the
65% share paid for by the senior governments puts it in a category where the City alone does not have the
authority to make the decision; let us say that we do get these reports, and we do find out what our offer
is and what they want and the actual evaluation - we are still not in the position to instruct anybody to
do anything - we cannot go out and negotiate, ourselves, because we are not in the position to do that -
there is still a cost-sharing condition here and there is still a committee involved in Urban Renewal. He
stated he is not denying the fact that the Council should have this information but he thinks it should be
confidential because the matter is still wide open, and he honestly believes that whether the Council gets
the information or not we will still go to expropriation, in most of these cases. He added that these
property negotiation matters have been going on for so long, that is why the City Manager's letter regard-
ing expropriation procedure is now before Council regarding same.
Question being taken, the motion carried with Councillor Higgins voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent questioned that his aforegoing tabling motion had been declared defeated
by the Mayor by a tie vote of 5 affirmative votes and 5 negative votes, thus creating a tie, when there
were 11 Council members present in the Council Chamber. He asked for a check of the voting, at this time.
This was done, from the record kept of the Council minutes. It was pointed out to Councillor A. Vincent
by the Mayor that the motion had been defeated, for tabling. Councillor A. Vincent still questioned this
ruling, and the Mayor's ruling that the motion regarding expropriation procedure had been passed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that this Council support the Chair in its decision.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Green voting "nay".
Councillor Higgins stated he agrees with the Mayor's decision, and that was the reason he made
the motion: whether the vote was 5-5 or 5-6 with six "nay" votes, the motion is still defeated; the above
motion in support of the Chair was passed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that on
rlovember 6th, 1972, the Council authorized the Supervisor of Technical and Inspection Services to review
and approve or disapprove of fuel pump tank applications in accordance with the appropriate City by-laws,
and the then City Manager advised that the said resolution applied only to applications for private
installation of gasoline and fuel pumps and of tanks, and that applications dealing with service stations
would be dealt with at Common Council; and further advising that, however, there seems to be little reason
for Council having to rule on changes in underground tankage at existing service stations when these
installations are required to be in accordance with the appropriate City by-laws and regulations; and
recommending that the Council clarify its previous resolution of November 6th, 1972 to the effect that
this procedure also apply for the installation of underground fuel tanks at existing service stations __
be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Mr. Barfoot explained that the above matter is requesting the clarification by Council. He
stated that at the present time, all these changes in tanks at existing service stations by a procedural
decision have to come to Council for Council's approval, and as these have already been approved by the
various City departments for their installation, including the Fire Department, and the service station is
already an approved business, it seems to be just a thing with which the Council should not have to
involve itself. Councillor A. Vincent asked what assurance he will have that these applicants will go to
the Fire Department before they come to Council; he is led to believe that we passed one two weeks ago
that did not go to the Fire Department. i4r. Barfoot replied that he understands it is the procedure for
anything to do with these inflammable materials to go to the Fire Department; however, he will ensure that
this procedure is followed. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is talking about the Texaco tanks that
the Council approved and it was approved by the Fire Department after this Council approved the request;
the question was asked if the Fire Department approved, and the answer that was given was in the affirm-
ative, he recalled, and it was approved later by the Fire Department. Councillor Higgins recalled that
before that particular vote was taken, to which Councillor A. Vincent refers, Fire Chief Clark was asked
to say whether or not the Fire Department approved it, and Chief Clark made affirmative reply; then the
motion was taken, and approved by Council, but not before the Fire Chief came to that stand.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Com-
missioner of Community Planning and Development, submitting the application received from Shell Oil
Company of Canada for the installation of one 5,000-gallon gasoline tank for the company's service station
located on the corner of Carmarthen and St. James Streets, and recommending that the requested approval be
granted for such installation, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager, and
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, advising that Mr. Maurice Muir has submitted an
application and letter requesting permission for the placement of a mobile home on his lot at 206 Bay
Crescent Drive, Saint John West, for a period of six months, it being his intention to live in this
trailer while he constructs a new home, and advising that a building permit has been issued regarding this
temporary mobile home placement, and recommending that the application be approved, be received and filed
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....1
r'"
17~
.
I ~/c;I7I7,lldt/;
{l0/77,I7J
1?e-;(olJi>>
(dL/tl/J7llJf
,(/pma
Ctll71>fruc,
.;(-1/ /al7/1s
IIf-f/( pi fo
~';;J /1( C~m-
I
f:Clhtf,S
b(~tle1'1!7en
f?/;;Jn
7/6J:fMt!I7t- Ih
//eu ~-f /an
.loY> f?ubl/c
j?U-f7/,P$6'S
IJII/5 oJ?
$/;//llh!"-t-oh
Swb'-:vC/V,
I
.
#Zr5.:ru~
(.~#lt'Nn
;?fofrle io~
I
I
.
....
and the requested permission be granted.
Councillor Hodges asked that a check be made regarding the above noted period of six months, because
the Council refused permission to two people last week regarding mobile home applications; he added that he
cannot go along with this as no-one can make a check on these temporary things because one of the applicants last
week wanted temporary permission for only one year.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising
that the Common Council on November 10th last gave third reading to a by-law amending the Zoning By-Law to permit
the construction of the Lloma Construction Ltd. proposed apartment project on Thornbrough Street, and at that
time, the Committee reported to Council that several small adjoining areas, which were not covered in the public
notice, should probably be considered .for re-zoning, and that this matter would, therefore be taken to the
Committee; and further advising that the Committee now recommends that the areas so indicated on the submitted
print be re-zoned from "R-IB" One-Family to "RM-l" Multiple Residential, and from "R-2" One- and Two-Family to
"RM-l" Multiple Residential classifications, as shown on the said print, and that the Council is also asked to
pass a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act which would tie the layout of buildings in the
area marked with an asterisk on the said print to the plan of the Lloma Construction Ltd. development which is
being filed with the Common Clerk -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted and the necessary
advertising take place regarding the proposed re-zoning, and that pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Plan-
ning Act the layout of buildings in the area marked with an asterisk on the above named print be tied to the plan
of the said Lloma Construction Ltd. development which is being filed with the Common Clerk.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising
that the Common Council on September 8th, 1975 accepted the Committee's recommendation to accept the sum of
t240.00 from the Allison Shillington Sub-division in lieu of land for public purposes for what is shown as Lot 5
on the submitted print, and further advising that, however, Lot 5 has not yet been legally created; that Mr.
Shillington now proposes to layout two lots, the original Lot 5 and a new lot to be Lot 6, and is proposing
that, instead of a money payment, he vest in the City land along the Little River which is in line with the
requirement of the City's Municipal Development Plan, and that Mr. Shillington had engaged a surveyor to layout
Lot 5 and, apparently, he has had to engage another one to layout Lot 6, and the result would be two sub-division
plans, one for each lot - each plan would vest the applicable area along the Little River; and recommending that
the Common Council assent to the plan of proposed Lot 5 and to the plan of proposed Lot 5 in the said Allison
Shillington Sub-division -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor MacGowan asked that the Council consent to the placing on the agenda of this meeting of an
emergency item.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that Councillor MacGowan be granted permission to place an
emergency item on the agenda of this meeting, at this time.
Councillor MacGowan advised that she had received a letter, dated November 24th, 1975, from Mrs. Judy
Cameron who advises that on that date two men from the Community Planning and Development Department gave her a
slip of paper stating she and her husband have to remove their mobile home from its site back of the Maritimer
Motor Hotel on Ocean Westway because the site is not zoned for such use. The letter advises that they moved
their mobile home to that site on condition it was permissible for them to do so, and the previous owners, /1r.
and ~ITs. Raymond Oldfield, did not tell them that they could not. The letter further states that Mr. and Mrs.
Cameron have four children aged 10, 8, 5 and 4, and two of these are in school; they all live in a room at the
motel together; the pipes in this mobile home will freeze and the trailer will be ruined - the men were there on
Jovember 24th to hook up the trailer and were told not to do so; there are no vacancies in the trailer parks, the
trailer park that they moved from has been filled. The letter states that the Camerons are very upset about this
situation and had they known the trailer could not go back of the said motel they certainly would not have moved
it there. Councillor I~acGowan advised that Mr. and IITs. Cameron are asking for permission to retain their mobile
home on the said motel site for a period of six months, on compassionate grounds.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that Mr. and Mrs. Cameron be granted permission for the temporary
placement for a period of six months, on compassionate grounds, of their mobile home on the site back of the
Maritimer Motor Hotel on Ocean Westway.
Councillor Green spoke in support of the above request, and pointed out that this mobile home cannot be
seen from the street, and there was a mobile home formerly on this same site; this motel has been purchased by
new owners who realize there had been a mobile home unit there before and who assumed it was already approved to
have a mobile home there for that reason. He noted that these people have been placed at a disadvantage, and
stated he feels that the Council should do its utmost to help them out for the time being. Councillor M. Vincent
asked if Mr. Zides knows anything about the notice that was handed to Mr. and Mrs. Cameron by the men from the
Community Planning and Development Department. Mr. Zides replied that he does: this is a case that people were
caught, but the Council had instructed the last owner to vacate the mobile home premises and told that owner the
Council would not consider any further. application from him, but that previous owner has been telling the people
in the Building and Technical Services Branch that he was just trying to sell the motel and also to remove his
mobile home; when he did that, and apparently he has sold it - given the people the impression that they could
have a mobile home there; there is a neighbour in the immediate area who had been complaining about the mobile
home being there - claiming that it detracted somebody from buying her property. Councillor M. Vincent noted that
~IT. Zides is reconfirming that the Council ordered people with a mobile home off that motel property, and if the
above motion is passed, the Council is going contrary to a previous motion and a previous decision this Council
took with other people. He stated he wanted to make the Council aware of that fact. Councillor Higgins asked
how long this Council has been involved with Mr. Oldfield and that mobile home unit alongside that motel. Mr.
Zides advised that in April, 1973, he was given permission to stay there for six months, and renew it for three
months. Councillor Higgins added that we have been renewing and renewing it, and, finally, Mr. Oldfield was
given the order to get out. Mr. Zides replied that such order was given in about June of 1974. Councillor
Higgins noted that with winter coming on, he will have to go along with the above motion, and stated he believes
that if this motion is passed, because of the time of the year and the children involved, that the new owners of
that building have to realize that in another six months the Council will have been putting up with this parti-
cular mobile. home site situation for three years - and these new owners of the building have to face that.
Councillor Gould raised the question of what guarantee the Council has that these new owners will move the mobile
172
,.,
/!lob! Ie iCll7?e
7ef'}1!f ~Ob/~
SJ:1bd2Jet/el
C'~ml?7,
S, O/1!,c..4j"
CClu~1 /
Pt?rt- 5h/~
//t?ur 4-
Ols,kdo$
CrJU!?, ~ ~e$
7i us.> id7 n
rtmi>015sa ,ce:'r
/(:8J)10ul-/l?f
/7s.s.oco.
(/t?.;;Jh)
k' ~+ c
1'J/c;,~/v /I-!f
$~ene
k/'nff $'1'-
I1ren01s dtlol"s
/l J).r ,lIlt.
;r;2. j:'/I"e a.
home from this site at the end of the six-month period. The Mayor replied that it would be the same
guarantee that moved the Oldfield mobile home - the Council would order the Camerons out of there, which
would be unfortunate, but we hope they plan to move and to find a place for it. Councillor Kipping
stated he feels rather badly about this case because he thinks it is a case where someone has been
duped - been deceived, actually - into buying this property thinking that they could do a certain thing
which they now find out they are not able to do, so the Council is arranging it so that they do not
suffer unduly because of it; he rather feels that this matter should be given quite wide advertisment, in
a way - that they had been duped; he does not feel any compunction .about doing that, at all, against the
former owner because the former owner was in almost a running battle with the City regarding his wish to
remain in a mobile home on his property; he can remember the arguments that Mr. Oldfield used at the
time - that he could not make the motel pay if he had to take a unit of the motel and use it as living
quarters, and all that kind of thing; now, apparently, he has sort of perhaps pawned it off on somebody
who is in trouble as far as accommodation for the winter is concerned. He suggested that the Council
just make ita point to "point the finger" where it belongs. He agreed that the Council has to go along
with the above motion, to avoid hardship to the Camerons.
Councillor Cave felt the Council has no other alternative but to try to help Mr. and Mrs.
Cameron out for a short period in this matter. He pointed out that on November lOth last he brought up
the matter of l1rs. T. Robichaud who applied for a permit for six months to locate a trailer at 423
Milford Road, Saint John West, because there was not sufficient room in the home at this location to
house all persons. He noted that a report in this regard has not been received as yet, and stated he
would like to have that report as soon as possible.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Port Development
Commission, to whom had been referred the letter from The Saint John District Labour Council in the
matter of retaining the flour and asbestos traffic through the port of Saint John, advising that the
matter of reduction in future of the tonnage of these materials through this port has been known, and of
some concern to the Commission for some time and pointing out that the reduction in flour shipments is
the direct result of less than adequate cargo assembly facilities in this port and that the best possible
remedy is, of course, the construction of the much publicized Forest Products Terminals, and in this
regard the Commission is currently preparing a brief which will be delivered to The Honourable Otto Lang,
the new Minister of Transportation, when he visits Saint John next week, and further advising that in
addition to this formal presentation the Commission in co-operation with the National Harbours Board and
the Saint John Port Authority has been in touch with all the relevant Provincial and Federal officials in
a continuing effort to have construction proceed on the new Forest Products Terminals, and that the
Commission will keep the Council of the City fullY informed on developments as they unfold -- be received
and filed.
In glvlng some background information on the beginning of these flour shipments, Councillor
Hodges advised that during the term of a previous Council, when Mr. Eric L. Teed, Q. C. was Mayor of the
City, Mayor Teed was fortunate enough to invite the Ambassador from Russia to come to Saint John and it
was through the intervention of that Ambassador that we were able to get a part of the flour shipments.
He noted that since that time, the City of Saint John has not invited any Ambassador of Russia to come
back to Saint John and enjoy our hospitality, and he thinks we have been very remiss in this. He stated
he feels the City should extend its hospitality to somebody who has made the citizens of this city many
millions of dollars by giving work of this nature to our port, and he thinks that this Council, through
the J1ayor, should send an invitation to the Russian Ambassador and ask him to come to Saint John on
business, again. He advised that with regard to the flour shipments, at the present time one contract is
ending, and a new contract is ready to be signed, and the Commission will keep the Council informed
regarding the flow of shipments that pass through this port.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the K.B.M. Outing Association
Incorporated, dated October 22nd, 1975 and addressed to the Commissioner of Finance, further to the
Association's letter that was before Council on April 7th, 1975 on the subject of financial arrangements,
advising that in reference to the City's offer to secure a loan to assist the Association in .clearing its
debt, due to a better income than the Association had anticipated it has been able to clear this debt
unaided, and expressing the Association's thanks to the Common Council for its support in this matter,
and advising that the Association will keep the Recreation and Parks Department of the City informed of
activity -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the request from the Knights of Columbus, Saint John
Council Number 937, for permission to erect the Nativity. Crib in King Square during the Christmas season,
be granted.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would ask permission to place before this meeting of Council an
item regarding the three new rinks which he understands do not meet the specifications of the New Bruns-
wick Fire Marshal's office; that is, the report that we are not allowed to use the upstairs rooms in'the
three new arenas, by an Order from the Fire Marshal's office.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above noted item referred to by Councillor A.
Vincent be placed on the agenda of this meeting, at this time.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he checked with the Commissioner of Finance and learned that
the City paid the consultants, A.D.I. Ltd. $134,190.00 to date for fees and to the best of Councillor A.
Vincent's knowledge, after several telephone calls, the plans have never been approved under Section 27
of the Uew Brunswick Fire Marshal's Act. He advised that he would like to know that if the doors in
these arenas have to be moved (and he understands they only have to be moved ten inches, to cover the
law) - he understands that a purchase order has been issued or is about to be issued by A.D.I. Ltd. to
the general contractor; he wants this Council's support to instruct the said consultants to make these
arenas acceptable to the Fire Code of this province, or legal action will commence. He stated it is his
eeling that the City paid the consultants much more than it should ever have paid (6% on the first
million dollars, and 3 1/2% on the other) - and he felt that when you add it up he does not know how it
came to that sum, and he understands that the bills are not all paid, yet - therefore, he needs some
assistance in this matter. He stated that he has received several telephone calls about this matter. He
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....1
,..-
17"tJ
.
I
/}reJ7a
d tJt1J? 5
M:B,FI're
CtJ/e
/l J), r:
,4Cp{,
~4?t:CCJ
eo.J7&-6)-1~-
~/<?h .hId,
I
.
I
:l3ral7$n//
$'1'
//r-e l1o/~-
/.;Ji-;p IJ 5
. ~ fr!J //(jr,
{ltJU/J, /J,
V / nc!e 17-1-
2/~, I.J7o/?
;:; f7e J} e'pt.
l.5alc~J'7 6>5
IYon- nill!?
e.o/fl <-'!fee ~
CtlUn, fJ,
V/nceJ?t-
I
stated he does not know what the City paid $134,190.00 for. Councillor Higgins stated that he will do everything
as Chairman of the Arenas Committee to assist Councillor A. Vincent in getting the answers to his question. He
stated that this could be news to him - nobody has telephoned him about this matter, but he does recall quite a
situation earlier in the year when the Overdrive entertainment group was coming into the Lord Beaverbrook Rink
and under new fire regulations there have to be a certain number of exits available in order to have a certain
number of people present and starting with that Rink they could only put in approximately 3,000 people and had
sold over 5,000 tickets and they had to take out all the front windows of that building and start making exits;
at that time he thinks it was made abundantly clear to the designers, A.D.I. Ltd. and .to Rocca Construction Ltd.
that these fire regulations would have to be incorporated into the new anreas. He stated that, to his knowledge,
he would have presumed that this was done - if it has not been done, he will certainly find out about it and
report back to Council; he will get all information he possibly can on this matter. He stated that he will have
that information in for next Monday's meeting and he will meet with anybody concerned. Councillor A. Vincent
stated that if A.D. I. Ltd. has issued a purchase,.. order to Rocca Construction to change those doors ten inches,
that A.D.I. Ltd. had better make sure they are going to pay for it; he added that the order has already been
issued - he confirmed it with the Commissioner of Finance, and with the City Manager, and with many other people,
and with Provincial Government officials - and he thinks that the Mayor has:heard about this matter, as well.
Councillor Hodges noted that all we are interested in is seeing that the buildings in question are
properly fire-protected - we do not care about A.D.I. Ltd. Councillor Davis advised that in the design of the
arena building there is a door that leads upstairs - that door is placed right at the entrance doors - unfor-
tunately, when that door is open it blocks the exit doors by about ten inches; this is very poor design - in-
corporated in that poor design is the fact that the ticket office is located right at the front door which means
that the people lining up to go to the rink line up outside, which is not something you do in the winter, if you
can help it; so, there are certain things that need correction, and Councillor Davis agrees completely with
Councillor A. Vincent that if there are over-runs on this contract due to these errors that the City should not
be penalized for that.
Councillor Green stated - backing up Councillor A. Vincent on this request - he has had several calls
on the matter, particularly on the Lowell Street arena and he was deeply upset about the situation and found out
it was true; he feels that the City should not have to pay for any expenditure over and above the regular design _
if the consultants have made an error, the consultants should pay for it, in his opinion. The Mayor stated that
he agrees, and that Deputy Mayor Higgins is going to get the information from staff and will bring it to Council.
The Deputy Mayor added that he will obtain everything he can and bring it back to Council next Monday night,
which is all he can do.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he wanted to go on record as saying that he met with an official of Rocca
Construction Ltd. today and he does not want to throw any light on that company or any of that company's sub-
trades on this job - they built the arenas according to specifications; the City paid $134,190.00 for those arena
plans, and he feels that is where it should lie. Councillor Gould asked whose responsibility it is to assure
that the .Provincial Fire Marshal's office sees those plans. Councillor Cave replied that the Council will find
this out when it receives the report. The Mayor added that the Council is going to have the information next
Monday. Councillor Davis advised that the Fire Marshal has seen these plans; they made us install sprinklers in
these arenas, and everything has been fine - the only thing that was missed, and on the plan is about a quarter
of an inch (Which is about ten inches, in actual fact) - doors did not mesh properly, and that is the problem.
Councillor M. Vincent gave information that the inspection on the arenas that is being referred to, and that has
caused some of the problems to probably some of the Councillors and to one of our City locals, was a result of an
inspection carried out by the Saint John Fire Department and the Fire Prevention Inspection Bureau. He suggested
to Deputy Mayor Higgins that, in getting his information for the Council's next meeting, that if he contacts the
said Fire Prevention Bureau he will find the answers and the incident that leads to probably the question being
raised at this meeting of Council.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would ask the City Manager why large buildings are not kept up to date,
his point being that the large building that is being constructed at Brunswick Square is not complying with the
fire regulations. He stated he does not blame that on Brunswick Square - they are welding over there and if
there is a fire over there we would lose those two cranes - we could have a real accident over there - they did
not bring up their fire leads with the building. He asked what is the good of having a building permit and all
the inspectors, if we do not implement it - if we have a fire on the tenth or eleventh floor of that building _
the building is not built according to the plans that we issued - all that wood, and everything, would cause a
terrible fire. Councillor Kipping replied that the plans have all been approved - it exceeds the fire regulations.
Councillor A. Vincent commented that they did not do the job, and that the question is, we need someone in City
Hall right away - a plan reader, or someone - to see that the work is carried out because those leads should be
taken up, floor by floor - he added he is sure that the owners could sue the City if the City did not do it, as
it is no fault of the OWners or the developer, but the fault of the City. Mr. Barfoot replied that he does not
know the full details of this matter and that he would be glad to discuss it with Councillor A. Vincent and the
Building Inspector at the earliest possible opportunity. Councillor A. Vincent disagreed that he should have to
tell the City Manager what should happen over at the said building that is being constructed. The Mayor replied
that the City Manager and the Building Inspector will have information available in this regard for Councillor A.
Vincent. Councillor A. Vincent asked for a copy of the Saint John Fire Department's minutes of that meeting over
there. The Mayor replied that we will bring the report that we can get in this matter to Councillor A. Vincent,
and it will be provided for him, next week.
At this time, Councillor A. Vincent was provided by Mr. Barfoot with a copy of the list he had re-
quested, of the non-Union salary increases. Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like a week to study this
list, and he asked if the cheques will be issued to these employees before he has a chance to study this list.
In reply, some Council members expressed the view that these employees be paid in the interim.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent, Pye, Green and M. Vincent
voting "nay".
Councillor Parfitt withdrew from the meeting.
LEG A L Mr. Rodgers advised that Mr. Frederick A. Morgan, a Solicitor on the Legal Department staff, because of
his age will be retiring at the end of 1975, but not on pension. He pointed out that the Legal Department is
understaffed. He asked for the Council's concurrence for the engaging of Mr. Morgan's services as"a private
;r,?Drqr~J7 individual, even though he would be retired, for the services Mr. Rodgers feels Mr. Morgan can provide to the
. ?7et01j7e~~ -ega~ Department (as outlined verbally by Mr. Rodgers) for a period of nine months from January 1st, 1976 to the
/ /~ ~ end of September, 1976, at a rate of approximately $10.00 per hour. He stated he knows that Mr. Morgan will
Ae.!.a ~ return this fee in service to the City, and on that basis, the service is not going to be done, or it is going to
~t?IICI'~O/' be done by someone else at a fee considerably more than $10.00 per hour. The Council members advised that Mr.
Rodgers place this item in the Legal Department's 1976 budget for Council's consideration at the budget meetings.
..... .
~~I.? ~el.7~ Councillor A. Vincent made the point that he thinks that the motion adopted by Council on
~_ )(ez' ~ - llovember 24th last regarding expropriation of fifteen properties in the Dock Street-Market Square area is
II~r~. rong legally - we cannot expropriate those properties unless we have in our motion that we file a plan, a
:J)&?C)r St-, t"Q~ lot number, and so on, and this will require a separate motion for each individual property _ that is
;f.KproJ?;W~07tf7~1.7. hat he is trying to protect. He explained that this was his reason for proposing an amendmeht to the
If. above motion (whiCh Councillor Gould indicated he would second) to lay on the table confirmation of the
~ttJ.1/~tIIl.7~ linutes of November 24th for one week until he can study the dialogue of this motion regarding expropriation
hat is contained in the November 24th minutes. Councillor Davis stated that if the Council's procequre
has been wrong regarding making motions for expropriation of these properties then the Council should
correct the procedure; however, the minutes of November 24th that are now before Council for confirmation
are correct, the Council just having received at this meeting of Council the proper wording of the motion
it adopted on November 24th regarding the expropriation of the said fifteen properties. Councillor A.
incent stated that his reason for asking that these minutes be tabled is because it would give the
Council members the opportunity to meet with the City Solicitor and ask him about the correct procedure
elating to these property expropriations. Councillor Davis, pointing out that this has nothing to do with
abling confirmation of the November 24th minutes, stated that the Council can review what happened
egarding this particular item, but the minutes of the November 24th meeting are correct because what.
appened at that meeting is recorded correctly therein. At this point, with the consent of Councillor
ould, Councillor A. Vincent withdrew his proposed amendment to the motion.
174
'/'eY-,.;J I :J}~
"13u~fet-
;:re,tt!'e/'/ c k 19
/I1.or~h
c!t'l-!f ~;;CI'6
"j)rt1t!l!'d~f7e pie
e l(j?I"'jPr /sf/ (71?
~
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that an item be included in the 1976 Legal Department
budget to cover payment of fees of approximately $10.00 per hour for services that areto be rendered to
the said Department for a period of nine months in 1976, commencing January 1st, 1976,-by Mr. Frederick A.
Morgan.
.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
I
k.
I
Common C
.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the first day
of December A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector,
D. French, Director of Training and Personnel, G. Baird, Commissioner
of Economic Development, C.. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks,
and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police
I
The meeting opened with prayers which were invoked by Bishop Sotirios Anthanassoulas of the
Greek Orthodox Church, Diocese of Canada.
In welcoming His Grace, Bishop Anthanassoulas to the Council meeting and to the City of Saint
John, Mayor Flewwelling noted that this was the first visit to the city by this prelate, who had given a
very inspiring address on the evening of November 30th to members of the Greek community and to other
members of our community, in Saint John.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
November 17th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
I
November 24th last, be confirmed.
I,
.
;V~r~ $~/j9l?1~ rheMayor expressed at this time the pleasure of all citizens of Saint John with regard to the
~ 'I7~se 'nformation received to the effect that additional Japanese shipping lines have decided to use the port of
S/;'I/;?I'n.;! //i?i?S 'aint John as their main port.
~
"..
175
.
;f/orrl-Aj
reF&Jrts
I
Ils;;.);.;l //1-
(b,,/d mix)
Cb/G17.s ,
elYl~/ t?J7
h/IJ-6--."t?-fe
IIJ "Ckn,1-1.
/1#r.;//ll'ciJUS
~,;jspl7<?1l-t-
'Jilx/l7/f
Sf-e~h en
CtJ)'Jspf'.. C't;,,4
qu.ip/I'lt?17
. r>en-ce>ll
f!J;/U,/clrs
(11/'(,,2) ,ll-L
.:J),f/~e/J
,[C-a:
$.t-ePh en
Chn $-l-r. Co.
.J.-p-d.
I C:fy J1&r.
1f)2J-/S-.z
~rJt/I71. ~
,(e';;$e
S. :r.7;f~
Clo.
A'e..#5e
.
I :4fPifL/J$'p.
1?~il"S -60
/~-/s-,;Z
:PI', U/rn, s-c-.
:Barl"/c,;;;r& s
I hI" ,Pub/tC
se>J;:e~!I
/:.?~-/Cx/
'PI", t1/m, SI:.
cJ'/'f ~r.
.. ~/L,5'-'l?sr:'
F;re.:o~
~k<<---I?sw/ck
~f sbll/fj7/
Il1se.€?'zf/ <)/7
IY. ;jj.7B1. Co.
,I,.h{
ll..... aW1,#JIi/xl?/7.
Councillor A. Vincent expressed the hope that the City. budget committee will consider not cutting the
Port budget in view of the great effort put forth by that Commission in the past.
On motion of Councillor HOdges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the reports for October of the Fire Department and of the
Division of Technical and Inspection Services, including Plumbing, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the asphalt
supply contract calls for hot mix to be available each year from April 1st to December 1st, and outside of these
dates, cold mix must normally be used for the repair of potholes in streets, and that approval is requested to
purchase approximately 20,000 gallons of Colas cold mix emulsion from Flintkote Company of Canada, Ltd., at 451
per gallon, and for the payment of $10.00 per ton to Stephen Construction Company Limited for the supply of
aggregates and production of cold mix (costs would be $9,000.00 for emulsions and $15,000.00 for mixing, totalling
$24,000.00 or $16.00 per ton), be received and filed and the requested approval granted.
In further explanation of the above item, Mr. Barfoot advised that the City received a second bid,
Mulco, but the above bid of Flintkote was the lower of two prices received.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the invoice, dated November 18th, 1975, received from Chitticks (1962) Ltd. for rental of equipment
Water and Sewerage Department for the period November 1st to 15th, 1975, in the amount of $7,451.20:
AI~D FURTHER that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following
invoices for equipment rental, namely:-
D. Hatfield Ltd. - to the Works Dept. Nov. 1-15, 1975
(dated Nov. 19, 1975)
Stephen Construction Company Limited - to the Works Dept. Nov. 3-14, 1975
(dated Nov. 17, 1975)
$ 18,134.05
$ 2,072.00
Mr. Barfoot advised that with regard to his letter to Council, dated November 27th, 1975, regarding a
proposed addition to the lease of the former Seamen's Mission building at 150-152 Prince William Street by the
City to The Saint John Theatre Co., which the said Theatre company had proposed, he has been requested by the
said Theatre company to withdraw this request for an addition to the lease document as they no longer wish to
have any change made in their lease.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the request made by The Saint John
Theatre Co., the letter from the City Manager which submits the company's proposed addition to the lease document
which leases the City-owned building at 150-152 Prince William Street (the former Seamen's Mission building) to
the company, be withdrawn from the agenda of this meeting.
Mr. Barfoot noted that the above matter will now follow Common Council resolution of September 22nd,
1975 which authorized execution of the lease of the above building to the Saint John Theatre Company Inc.
Councillor A. Vincent asked what is going to take place if there is an accident in the said building
or in the building adjoining it before this building is repaired; he recalled that the Fire Department inspected
the adjoining building - we reported - the City Manager went down and put the barricades up and they did every-
thing, and then they went down and sneaked one away, and they sneaked two away, and now there are no barricades,
no signs, no parking, or anything. He warned. that this is the type of weather that is going to cause the City
some embarrassment - if it would freeze and stay cold he is sure there would be no bricks fall on that building,
but with this alternate raining, melting and freezing, and melting, and freezing, a heap of blocks, tin, bricks,
et cetera will fall from the building and kill somebody. He stated that the City must do something now to
repair the face of those two buildings, before someone is killed. He felt that the fact that he has given this
warning, is making the.City liable. He stated that his suggestion is that the City either repair the buildings
or tear them down.
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
Councillor A. Vincent contended that the buildings are unsafe, the metal is hanging down, and all he
wants is that it be repaired - instead, we are stalling and stalling. Reporting on what has been done to date
on this matter, the Building Inspector advised that three tenders have been called - separate tenders - and the
first two received no replies from anybody to fix these buildings; we called for independent, separate tenders
and he believes that they are now with the Purchasing Agent for consideration, at the present time. Councillor
A. Vincent referred to the point that the Building Inspector had closed off the sidewalk, put no parking on them
and everything else and the fact that he called tenders, does not mean that all this makes the wall safe - he
pointed out that people are still walking by there. In.reply to the question as to whether the wall is unsafe,
and what is its condition, Mr. Ellis stated the point is, he gave no authorization for the removal of the
barricades or anything else - he has not had a chance to get the barricades back there, at the present time.
Councillor Hodges stated that he comes by that location each evening and it is his belief that some of the
people who come out of the properties in this area moved the barricades as a prank; he has seen these barricades
out in the street. Mr. Ellis assured the Council that he will see that the barricades are put back in place.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, submitting a report
prepared by the Building Inspector which contains details on an inspection carried out in conjunction with the
Fire Department on November 26th, 1975 on the standpipe at the tower building that is being erected at Brunswick
Square for the New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited, which inspection was made further to the discussion on
this subject at the Council meeting of November 24th, 1975 -- be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that he asked for the above information and thought he was going to.get a
176
-2ru /7 s w /cA-
Sf?' .:>/-O?hd'''p/
Lbu/J,/J, 0~e~
Ct'-f!f Ill!!)",
(?~/-E.rll jJP'ojec
IJ//!-IVJ'V/, e-fe,
t; ecuer
C!reehd;{e J'
SUP-(l(/I/.,
;a/db Ie a)? sit':
/-t-~
:]), 7?,;:;: .E:
;?1/I-fbn( de,s-.
b?ffils /J.ss~,
",{+~.
~
report. He asked whether the standpipe in the above building has been changed, and if so, was it ap-
proved. Mr. Barfoot, in reply, stated he can just report as to what the inspection report that is now
before Council says, which is a report of a job-site meeting held on November 26th last, at which time
certain commitments were made as to the completion of a standpipe system; as to whether the size has been
changed, he has no knowledge. Councillor A. Vincent explained that he is talking about the location of the
standpipe - was the location in the wrong place, to start with, and is that why it has been changed? Or
is it being installed now in the wrong place? Mr. Barfoot stated that he understands they are changing
ome of the locations of the pipes, but he does not know the reason for making such change. The Mayor
asked what difference such a change makes to the construction of the building, from our point. In reply,
Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that the City does not have a piece of fire fighting equipment that
would fight a fire up there, and he stated he feels that this report could have come back in a different
form - he knows the report is wrong. He stated that if the City Manager is prepared not to co-operate and
answer, that is fine. The Mayor advised that we will get the answers, by next week.
.
I
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above
feels that he is just being walked over in this matter.
receive the answers.
motion, stating he is not satisfied, and that he
The Mayor assured him that the Council will
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
14anager, authority be granted for payment of the fOllowing construction progress certificate and approved
invoice for engineering services regarding the following named capital projects:-
I
1.
Greendale 36-inch Storm Sewer - Phase II
Fairvale Construction Ltd.
Construction of sewer line
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate.
dated October 31,
$ 89,170.00
59,350;00
8,902.50
Nil
Number 1, .
1975 $ 50,447.50
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be granted
for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering
services, in connection with projects that were undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic
Expansion programme:-
L
Milford-Greendale-Randolph Sanitary Sewer Collector System
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 49,
dated October 31, 1975
$ 165,982.32
$ 4,617.96
I
2. Milford-Greendale-Randolph Collector System
f1c;,.r;;e and-I'>. Gaspe Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract $1,463,230.25
~t-d'. T9tal work done, Estimate Number 824,947.55
Retention 123,742.13
Payments previously approved 626,683.41
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate !lumber 7,
dated October 31, 1975 $ 74,522.01
C'hD/M f//a/I? ;Its, 3. Champlain and Lakewood Heights Collector Sewer .
/PI.keWotld //-/5, Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
~O// $eu;er Champlain Heights system
Total value of contract $ 178,810.23
fleraIL:T7fJ;CJJ7 ~otal work done, Estimate Number 4 167,639.24
(1t? ,/ i-;t. Retention 28,498.67
Payments previously approved 131,814.89
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 4,
dated October 31, 1975 $ 7,325.68
a~l?tft?r 7>/ 4. Carpenter Place Lift Station I
Frecon Ltd.
l-1L'zL S-f-61-/-/P,n Total value of contract $ 658,850.00
rreaoJ? /hl Total work done, Estimate Number 8 488,313.85
Retention 73,247.08
Payments previously approved 381,713.75
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate.Number 8,
dated November 26, 1975 $ 33,353.02
~U$6Wa:; ~
~"d!/t!&lr 7(;;1"-
/n!! A-I-d.
5.
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
Goodyear Paving Limited
Construction of western approaches
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 11
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum'recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 11,
dated November 19, 1975
I
$1,285,044.50
1,302,293.45
195,344.02
1,002,107.89
$ 79,941. 54
On motion of Councillor Kipping
$",~-d/~/!~/'~ Seconded by Councillor Cave .
)? RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising: that the
~~p~~nvJ7 ~~ . sub-division agreement for Woodlawn Park required that the developer (Traders Realty Limited), supply a
~~~e ~~R)7 Lagoon for sewage treatment - in the first phase involving 136 lots, the developer had built a lagoon
~ ~~~ ~/~ which was capable of handling approximately 75 lots, but was responsible for providing a lagoon which
~ ~. would handle all 136 lots; that in 1973, when Traders Realty Limited sold their interests in Woodlawn,
~
".
Tn 7'S ~
tf/r;, tld /';;;11/ n
. ';P.;;rA-
$uJ-~;j/,
O/fJreemel7
SelP~e
/.;:;I-t1fJ'1'?1 9-
-r-r'edmeJ7
-$~e/-fer
/?eS(/'Z-e:i
Il/arbOU/'V;
$~-P(i
17?~/,p), ~
7h0/?lf?t$t?J?
~ed'/lead
Pr()~erl-!i
,?n'-l-ed, 19sr.
.
I
~/-t;f /lijr.
~ers /
1i' eall!f r-l
SiR/lor
'Resc:>tdtl%'
,,(-6-L.
r/ppd;'h5 <l-
. .$ewe~e
,PIP)/ems
I
I
.
.....
l;'1iiolj!iii!'.
'J ci
Park, they cleared up all deficiencies in Phase I - in lieu of having a lagoon which could handle 136 lots but
actually could only handle 75 lots, Traders paid the City $18,900.00, the estimated value of increasing the
lagoon to full capacity - in 1973, the City accepted the money in lieu of the full size lagoon, because the
development in the sub-division was indefinite and the possibility existed that the money might not have to be
spent on the lagoon, but possibly might be used on trunk sewers, et cetera; that Shelter Resources started
development in the said Park under the development name of Harbourview and this construction, when completed in
1976, will bring the total number of lots requiring sewage services to 350 - the responsibility for supplying the
sewage treatment to the 350 lots is that the City is responsible for 136 lots (the original lots in Phase I) and
Shelter Resources is responsible for 214 lots; that the logical approach to supplying the required sewage treat-
ment was for the two parties (Shelter Resources and the City) to get together and share in the construction of a
lagoon which would handle the sewage from all 350 lots; that the design of a new lagoon has been taking place
since mid-1974 and is now complete and approved by the Department of Environment - the estimated cost of this new
lagoon is $167,745.00 and the City's share would be $57,395.46; that the reason the cost of the new lagoon is so
high is that the standard for treatment has greatly increased in the last two years, resulting in expensive
equipment and a better quality of lagoon being required - examples of some item now required are, chlorination
and asphalt lining of the lagoon - also, inflation has greatly increased the actual construction costs; that the
1975 capital budget included an amount of $100,000.00 for sanitary sewer materials for sub-divisions and of this
amount it is estimated that only $45,000.00 will be spent - therefore, the City has $55,000.00 for sanitary
sewers plus the $18,900.00 paid by Traders Realty Limited; that the City Manager recommends that the city use the
said $18,900.00 plus $38,495.46 from the 1975 capital budget to pay its share ($57,395.46) of supplying sewage
treatment to Woodlawn Park -- be received and filed and the recommendation contained therein adopted.
Recalling that on May 21st, 1974, and also on November 3rd, 1975, a presentation was made to the
Council by "IT. Ralph G. Thompson, President of the Red Head Property Protective Association regarding the develop-
ment of the Harbourview Sub-division by Shelter Resources Ltd., Councillor Parfitt stated she assumes that the
above report from the City Manager is in reply to Mr. Thompson's letter which enquired about this development.
She asked if what is said in the City Manager's letter in this matter really being done, and stated that thinking
the City Manager's letter was in answer to Mr. Thompson's question she referred Mr. Thompson to what was being
'explained in the City Manager's letter and made him aware of this matter so he would get a copy of the City
Manager's letter; I~. Thompson claims that nothing is being done regarding this matter, therefore, she would like
to ask if this is being done -- according to the City Manager's letter it has been approved by the Department of
Environment. Mr. MacKinnon replied, giving the following information:- the recommendation in the City Manager's
letter is in partial response to Mr. Thompson's petition - a number of questions were asked in that petition -
this was not intended as a response, necessarily, but as a normal continuation of the work we were doing in that
sub-division; the lagoon had not been completed and quite a bit of design work had gone into the rest of the sub-
division - this is the finalization of that and we were asking that it be approved - but it is in partial re-
sponse to the Red Head petition; this work will be done and it will complete the lagoon; one of the petition's
questions, he recalled, was that during the course of construction sewage would be dumped out on to the beach
area, and it was merely a point that Mr. Thompson made - it is not necessarily true, at all - we are hoping that
the method that we use in constructing it will not allow for the dumping of any raw sewage on the beach area, and
that we will be able to complete it with a minimum of disturbance.
The following information was supplied by Mr. Barfoot in reply to questions put by Councillor M.
Vincent:- the principals of Traders Realty Limited - the City has not dealt with that company since 1973 but they
were completely separate and distinct from the principals of Shelter Resources; Ikr. David M. Lunney is involved
in Shelter Resources; Traders Realty Limited is a different company, altogether, who received this particular
sub-division from j~. Mollins, away back. With regard to the formula under which the City accepted $18,900.00
from Traders Realty in view of the deficiency in the capacity of the sewage lagoon, to handle 75 lots rather than
136 lots, which amount was the estimated value of increasing this lagoon to full capacity of 136 lots, Mr.
Barfoot explained that the formula was worked out on the basis that the original lagoon was going to be aerated -
there was going to be mechanical equipment installed in the lagoon to increase the capacity from 75 to 135, and
the $18,900.00 was the sum of money sufficient to pay for this equipment - we had a price at the time, but the
work did not proceed because of the intending expansion by Shelter Resources.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the recommended sewage treatment for Woodlawn Park will correct the
problem the residents have had there, with flooding and sewerage. Mr. MacKinnon replied that the problems they
have with flooding is not related to the lagoon and the sewage system. Councillor MacGowan pointed out that when
the rains came, the sewerage backed up. Mr. MacKinnon stated that did happen, but as he recalls the situation,
the lines were plugged in a number of locations and they just did not handle the system - this is not a change in
the transmission lines, but, rather, just the treatment of it - the treatment of sewage now is very primary and
the overflow is going into the stream and out into the Red Head area, on the beach; this particular system is
handling the treatment of the sewage, and not the transmission; the flooding was a localized problem because he
thinks quite a bit of rain got into the lines themselves, probably, and they just could not handle the whole
flow. Councillor MacGowan recalled that in this area last fall there was a problem of flooding and some re-
sidents had to move out of their home when they returned from holidays, until they got their house cleaned up,
because of the back-up of sewerage. She asked if the said sewage treatment system will correct this problem. Mr.
MacKinnon replied that he is not familiar with the individual problem and he was therefore not able to comment on
this case; he added that such a problem can happen almost anywhere, regardless of the treatment facility that we
put in, depending upon a particular condition that might happen - for example, a plugged line. Councillor
MacGowan asked: why were the lines plugged, and whose responsibility is it - were the lines big enough? Mr.
MacKinnon replied that he does not know what the design is, without checking the total sub-division, but the
plugging of lines occurs from sand and grit and paper, and other materials. Councillor MacGowan noted that the
sand and grit was being piled, apparently, on people's property and giving them very little space to call their
own. She asked if this situation has been corrected, or will it be corrected. She stated she does not want to
see the City put more money into the development if they are still going to have problems out there; she urged
that the City do it right if it has to spend any money at all there. In reply, Mr. MacKinnon explained that part
of the sub-division is an old sub-division that the City is now responsible for (it is about three, four or five
years. old); the rest of the sub-division is relatively new and there is quite a bit of materials around houses
and the developer has to complete that area - actually, there are two sub-divisions that we will be making use
of - one is the co-operative sub-division in that area, as well. Councillor MacGowan noted that apparently the
sub-division that is three or four years old has not been corrected - she understands that there are mounds of
earth there; there is a problem out there, and she just wants to see the problem cleared up; if the City is
spending money, let us make sure we are not going to run into more problems. She asked if this sewage lagoon
will look after all the houses that are there, and that are being planned to go there - and why was the develop-
ment not.completed, before. Mr. MacKinnon pointed that this problem is handling the treatment of sewage and it
will not look after piles of sand and grit, or anything else that may be located on properties, or anything else.
Councillor MacGowan felt that, then, before the City goes ahead and does anything, the developer should do his
share to make sure that there are not piles of sand, and whatnot. Mr. MacKinnon replied that he feels he should
go out and have a look at the area and at the problem, but it has nothing to do with the treatment facility that
is under consideration now.
Councillor Gould asked when the fiscal year for the capital budget ends. Mr. Barfoot advised that the
capital budget is approved, year by year; there is no such thing as money which ends, on a capital budget - a
capital budget is approved for a certain amount and is subsequently bonded for; in that area, we have not used
all the capital monies for 1975.
178
,.,
PI(?(lt//.;;w1? ?d.
( $riJournfft:.u)
$t{~-tIt';v..
;9, :7J, I ~--f/.
(Jt117~U /f-dll?~
/J1; IIt~e(/;' lie .
Se(lfl~6' t-rea-t-
.me)~p/9d
tf/(;(lal(Jd1l']:( /l 1/6',
am f7r&h,tj/llhJkh.
'Plan
(!/t.fj If! 5r,
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
area.
Councillor MacGowan asked that the Council have a report on the Woodlawn Park (Harbourview),
The Mayor replied that such a report will be made.
.
Considerable discussion ensued regarding the City Manager's letter regarding the engaging of
engineering consultants for the design and construction supervision of the Millidgeville sewage treatment
plant and associated works, his recommendation being that the firm of A.D.I. Limited be engaged in this
regard. Councillor A. Vincent asked to be informed of the estimates of cost that were quoted by the other
five engineering consultants who submitted proposals in this regard and what their bid was estimated to do
this work, and stated he wanted to be recorded publicly as stating he is not happy with the services of
A.D.I. Limited in the past (he noted that the City Manager's letter states that the engineering staff of
the city has reviewed the proposals in detail and examined them on the basis of technical expertise, work
force available, past performance on City jobs, and current work being done for the City), and that,
furthermore, he is not happy to give a contract out to an engineering consulting firm for $400,000.00., not
knowing the consultants' percentage. He asked what percentage we are talking about, if we do give the
work to A.D.I. Limited. Mr. Barfoot replied that the City's engineering contracts have been on the basis
of per diem rates and we normally would have an estimate of the total costs of engineering before we
begin; however, regarding this project - because the exact work which is required to be done in this
sewage treatment has not yet been identified, which is the first stage of any consultants' job, it is not
possible for us or the consultant to put in a definite bid or final value on the value of the engineering.
Councillor A. Vincent asked: if we do not know what we want this firm to design, how would we choose it,
over five other consultants. Mr. Barfoot replied that we are not picking that firm. Councillor A.
Vincent pointed out that Mr. Barfoot's letter says he is recommending this firm, and we are talking about
an estimated cost of $4,650,000.00, and he is recommending in that letter that it will be a $400,000.00
fee, and Councillor A. Vincent wants to know what are the terms of the fee and its percentage - he just
wants to do good business, here, and he thinks it is time that the City tied down its consultants that
there will be no percentage over the 400 if that is their estimate, over the $4,650,000.00; he thinks it
is time the Council took a look at this. He felt that this same firm over-designed the City arenas, and
the City got into problems with the arenas over this; certainly, at 6 per cent on the first six million
dollars, they put $150,000.00 worth of sprinkler systems in.
I
I
Councillor Cave advised that the matter of the consultants for the design and construction
supervision of the Millidgeville sewage treatment plant and associated work was discussed by the Works
Committee at great length; there is a fee for consultants - this information is avilable for Councillor A.
Vincent, he added, if Councillor A. Vincent desires to find it out; the consultants have been paid the
same price for years.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the firm of
A.D. I. Limited be engaged as engineering consultant for the design and construction supervision of the
i4illidgeville sewage treatment plant and associated works:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the City Manager in the above matter, advising that this sewage
treatment plant which would be located at the main Millidgeville outfall (at the end of Woodward Avenue,
below the Cedar Point Trailer Park) was recommended as a Stage I priority in the Comprehensive Community
Plan and the estimated cost is $4,650,000.00; that the work will be done according to the schedule of
nlinimum fees of the Association of Professional Engineers of New Brunswick, and that it is estimated that
the cost of engineering fees will be approximately $400,000.00, and that this matter has been discussed
with the Works Committee -- be received and filed.
I
Co'uncillor A. Vincent stated that in the interests strictly of good business, he is asking that
if the City pays A.D.I. Limited $400,000.00 and their estimate of $4,650,000.00, based on a fee basis,
comes in at $5,000,000.00, do we pay them the percentage - which we have been doing in the past. He
stated. he knows of other cities that are not doing this. He stated he would like to have a copy of the
minutes of the meeting referred to by Councillor Cave. The Mayor replied that this request will be
acceded to.- Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Mayor supply him with the information to which Councillor
Cave referred. ~tr. Barfoot explained that the purpose of putting in the estimated cost figures was to
give Council some idea of the dimensions of the cost that might be involved in this recommendation; at the
present time, we do not have an estimate - good estimate - of the works involved; this estimate which he
has given the Council is taken out of the Comprehensive Community Plan which is several years old - this
has to be up-dated, the preliminary and very tentative basic designs have to be examined as well as the
estimated cost, and the first stage of work which any consultant - whether it was any of the six con-
sultants referred to in his letter - would have to bring in as a preliminary design which would be further
discussed with Council containing an estimate of the cost; at that stage, he thinks it could be defined as
to how much it would take in engineering fees, but at this time it is impossible to define within 100, 200
or 300 thousand dollars how much it is going to cost to complete the engineering, for this depends on how
fast you proceed with the work, and whether, in fact, you proceed with all the works that are involved,
here. He pointed out this is just a round-table estimate, for the guidance of Council.
.
I
Councillor Green asked, in the request for submission of proposals, did the City Manager ask the
parties who made proposals on this. work to offer a percentage of five or six percent on the first million,
or two or three million dollars, on a graduated scale; did the City Manager go after that end of the
proposal. In making negative reply, Mr. Barfoot advised that these consultants were asked to submit
proposals - expressions of interest of doing the engineering for this particular project; he does not
believe any cost figures were asked for - and in the cost, of course, we are guided by the above named
Association of Professional Engineers' minimum fee schedule which sets. out a certain fee for a certain
amount of work, or a certain minimum fee on a per diem basis, on a time rate. Councillor Green noted that
on an estimated cost of four million dollars, the engineering fees are going to run into quite a sum, and
for a large figure like that, he wonders if it. would not have been good business to ask for an estimated
percentage bid on the proposal. Mr. Barfoot replied that it is because of the lack of definition, he
thinks, at the moment, of the engineering work that has to be done which makes it difficult to ask for any
definite price bid at this time - this is the first stage, only, of what is going to be a job over a
number of years. Councillor Green asked: once the engineering consultants are given the job that is being
recommended in the City Manager's letter, does that not mean that they will go right straight through
until the job's completion - you are not going to haul them off the job after they come in with the full
survey and engineering costs, and so on? Mr. Barfoot stated that it would not be normal to take them off
the job - it would be normal to keep them on, unless their performance was not as we desire it, and then
we would have to change engineers. Councillor Green stated that, personally, he would like to have seen
the City Manager go ahead and ask the consultants for an estimated bid on that price.
I
.
(Mr. F. A. Rodgers entered the meeting)
~
r'"
/l,J).L i-6
. III ill/dr;/I
$~UI';;;!fe
-tre;iJl--me
p/aJ?"C-
I
I
/l/'eJ?.?l$ ad
~-/I')1e s;;fe
-6:/ ':'o/f,tft;-
~I tlJ1S
F/ I" e :lJ.e;Pt-:
ec-e, J?e;;o
.
1?et'11 <I- ~r),
:LJej?-C;
aUJ?, /1
//l'lJeeh-f
L1; ry /llfr.
7?odea
Cons-/rue.h
I
/l, :J). I L-f.
.
Ilreh<;/S
dpp/,s
I
I
.
....
119
Councillor Davis advised that there is, at the moment, a committee that deals with engineering and
works and it is chaired by.Councillor Cave and the other committee members are Councillor Hodges, MacGowan and
himself. He stated that he is sure that Councillor Cave, under normal circumstances would report on the meeting,
but that Committee went over all these submissions - the fees are precisely the same - they are prohibited by
Law to change their fees (he is sure some of them do, but if we asked for evidence from the other municipalities
that they have been getting bargains in fees, they will not tell us) - so, we have no difference, whatsoever, in
the fees that these six firms are asking; the Committee went over them quite carefully and there were problems
with each and everyone of them; we have had some good experiences with all of them - we have had some not so
good experiences with some of them; the decision was made to select A.D.I. because we know them - we know what
mistakes they make - and we can count on them; the said Committee meeting was a lengthy one and the Committee
went into considerable detail and asked all these questions that are being asked right now - he thinks they are
aLL legitimate questions - but the decision was to go with A.D.l. and he sees no difference between them and the
other five consulting firms. Councillor Cave added that the said Committee considered the two local consulting
firms (Godfrey Associates and A. J. Callaghan) but it felt, after the explanations, that the job was too large
for them and they did not have sufficient staff - this is a major job, and it is a job that must be completed in
the not-too-distant future - so, with that in mind, the Committee just went along with the recommendation - he
does not know what else the Committee could have done. Councillor Gould took exception to the fact that the
consultants' fee would be based on the tender price of implementing the design, rather than on the estimated
cost of the project.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Gould and A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the joint report submitted by the City Manager, Deputy
Mayor T. J. Higgins, and Mr. F. N. Remete, Project Engineer of the Engineering and Works Department, and the
separate report prepared by Division Fire Chief J. J. Melanson, of the Fire Prevention and Investigation section
of the Fire Department, resulting from Common Council meeting of November 24th, 1975 at which points were raised
regarding the use and construction of the City arenas presently under construction, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that there was an item on the above subject in the newspaper since the
November 24th Council meeting, signed by Mr. J. Brownell (Of the Recreation and Parks Department). Deputy Mayor
Higgins felt that the above reports.are more extensive, containing dates and other information, than was re-
ported in the newspaper; he added that he had nothing to do with anything that was put in the newspaper.
Counci~lor A. Vincent asked: if the City Manager had in his possession the fact that on November 7th it was
going to cost the City. not one penny, why did he not tell us" then? And.if Rocca had in his possession -- when
Councillor A. Vincent met with the Vice-President, Mr. Jack Quinn, who knew nothing about it on last Monday
before a Council meeting -- why did he not tell Councillor A. Vincent the information? He stated it seems to him
that a hurry-up meeting was held; he is not satisfied; he called Jack Trenholm on the telphone -- all he is
saying is, that he called Jack Trenholm -- he thinks that, if you recall, another Councillor mentioned the fact
that it was the Fire Department that was doing it -- if this all took place on November 7th, or before November
.7th -- alL he is asking, is, why was he not told -- all the City Manager had to say was that the matter is under.
control - a little error had been made -- Councillor Davis said it was ten inches out line (regarding the door
leading upstairs in the arenas as related to the entrance doors to the arenas) - somebody else said something
else. He stated he understands that those rinks are very over-designed - that toey get $50,000.00 worth of
sprinkler systems in it. Councillor Higgins replied that is correct which has cut in half the fire insurance
rates the City would have paid. Councillor A. Vincent expressed the belief that if those arenas had not been
over-designed we would have had four arenas instead of three, but A.D.I. Limited got their six per cent on their
design, and that is what he is fighting.
During further ensuing discussion, Councillor Davis pointed out that the sprinkler systems were
required in these arenas if we are going to use them in the summer time. He stressed that the general design of
the arenas is excellent, and he noted that,the cost of the arenas is too high, but as far as he is concerned,
the ice in the arenas is terrific and the purpose of the arenas is for everybody. to enjoy themselves. He
therefore asked what are we haggling about. Councillor A. Vincent, referring to the above named joint report,
stated he was speaking of the construction drawings which are supposed to be submitted to the Fire Marshal's
office. He stated that he called Jack Trenholm last night in Fredericton and Mr. Trenholm confirmed it again -
it is there - there is a specific section in the Fire Prevention Act of New Brunswick that states those drawings
are supposed to be approved. He stated that in the future he would appreciate that when he has asked a question
in Council and there is a Council investigation going on, conducted by an able chairman, such as the Deputy
Mayor or any other Councillor, he does not think the civil servants should be quoting on it - he thinks they
should let it come in in the report. Deputy Mayor Higgins advised that he was approached before the November
24th Council meeting that there were certain deficiencies in the arena - he said that was news to him and he
would find out, like any Councillor would approach another Councillor, and to get an answer as soon as he
possibly could - and as things evolved at the November 24th meeting it had to come out, and he did not have the
answers to it; he called the meeting (referred to in the above named report) and included were three members of
the Recreation.and Parks Department, the rink manager, and Mr. Nicolle and Mr. Brownell, Mr. McCaig of City
staff, designer, and, of course, everybody from A.D.I. Limited - they designed the rink and the Deputy Mayor
wanted to meet with them - also, from the Works Department, and also from the Fire Department; he figures that
covered everything; and this report was the minutes taken by Mr. Remete, the Project Engineer, of City staff, at
the Deputy Mayor's request; and when this report was finalized and all questions were settled, Mr. Remete wrote
out the report - the minutes of the meeting - which the Deputy Mayor co-signed underneath; since them, Mr.
Barfoot has added his word to it, but it was signed by Mr. Frank Remete, of the City, and Thomas J. Higgins, of
the City. Deputy Mayor Higgins stated that he believes that this group has answered the questions that were
brought up at the November 24th Council meeting; if the press wants to get the answers to Councillor A. Vincent's
questions of November 24th Council meeting, he is sure they will receive that information. Councillor A. Vincent
stated that he spoke privately to the City Manager and he wished that the City Manager had brought it out. He
stated he feels that all the Council members share his own feelings, that if they ask a question, he does not
think that somebody on City staff should give the information out until the matter comes back to Council; he
added that the City Manager told him that he was right in this view. He asked if the City Manager would confirm
that that is his feelings. ltr. Barfoot replied that Councillor A. Vincent is perfectly correct, and that he has
spoken to the people in question, and he will send out a memorandum to staff on that matter; if a matter is
before Council, it should not be commented on by staff. Councillor Kipping noted that that matter was being
worked on before the question was ever asked around this Council table, and he stated that he would think that
the staff would be quite in order to have made a public announcement on it, because it was being worked at on a
staff level - several of the Council members had already been aware of this problem - we were working quietly
behind the scenes to get it resolved, and it seems to him that is perfectly in order. He stated that there has
been quite a hullabaloo around this Council about nothing, for the last two meetings, and he thinks the Council
should call an end to it, right now.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended in the joint report from the City Manager and
180
76>11 er..L../
dJeeef/"[; r:::a
2J6'II?0//-I-/(;)?
!It>a.5~bar/7 t?,
t/pper Gb//t!?/7
6}vve,Rd': 'pr~'p'
tProre Cb}J'dI',
/-t-tL
-I1ohJ<>1 {JJ1:5-/r,
,.(--t-pL L . /
Tht7l'l1orou!f/1
SuP-t4'y, Vd1I'/d.
r-e C1j/er/;ea~.
w/r>/h,f. cd- .
bal1* /f! Ids
tl-l7detyl"oU,I7L
iou-50S'
f?otvef' aMP1'
;y,!lJ Tef, Co,,{-t-t/
?!e.;,,.PfJ )(
1?efl~/r Frr
c9-!/ted swere.
$au.I1ders r
qa;~mel1
t9/ef? hl/s
+/01)(;(/171'
'1? os & n.;ll-/ 017
tt/m, :7)ul1hd11'n
f7er~/a ,L/h;!//ey
~/(/~tf.e a/?'p$4
F/J1~'7>C1//6e
J,E: Wilsl?Jl /
7?OtrH'.I7,f,,t,b, ^-1
'J? eFt'r tJ";;M3J
eK;!;;;,us-f ,sy~
o,naa/61/1 '7>e.hCi'
Serf/! t6'S bolt/A--.
;])e;d-, pU(;:e/f
;?fed .5e~ ~17/-
ien-f-/ t:Jrff
pu.bl/c mediI?
.2Ye,P6-, 'J?ul>, jf/1;)$.
{FeL
7? e- ;7. () n /.17 f
<r s/te
the Building Inspector, the lowest. tender received for the (aemoiitionof a City-owned house and barn
~ocated on the Upper Golden Grove Road (the former Pansy. Irene Stephenson property), namely, that of Grove
Construction Ltd., in the amount of $1,940.00, be accepted.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Com~
missioner of Community Planning and Development, advising that the Power Commission of the City of Saint
John and New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited are recommending that the City grant a variance to the
subdivider, Lloma Construction Ltd. , in respect of underground installations of power, telephone and,
presumably, cable television, in the Thornbrough Sub-division, and that the variance would allow for back
of lot construction with underground conduit laterals to each building, and that the reasons for the
recommendation are: (1) the area contains severe rock conditions that make it difficult for underground
plant, (2) the area contains severe slope conditions which also make it difficult for underground in-
stallations, (3) the magnitude of the job makes it extremely difficult to co-ordinate buried installations
and the design for the ultimate use of the land, (4) the feeding of the job starting on Thornbrough Drive
at the far end of the Telephone Company's cable feeder makes it impossible to place buried cable if the
subdivider does not plan to grade the area until later on in 1976 or in the following year which is
probably what would happen; and recommending that the Common Council permit the proposed back of lot
construction with underground conduit laterals to each building in the Sub-division -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be granted
for the purchase of a new transfer gearbox for the 1974 vacuum street sweeper Number 732 from Saunders
Equipment of Fredericton, N. B. at a price of $2,565.00, F.O.B. Saint John, plus provincial sales tax, and
for immediate commencement of the necessary repairs to this machine.
In explanation of the problem with the above noted street sweeper, Mr. MacKinnon advised that
this machine was used during the recent flood in the Glen Falls area over a prolonged period and he
believes that subsequently there was some loss of oil and it overheated, and because of that we lost the
gearbox; under normal use, this would not have happened, but in this case, because of the emergency
conditions the unit is now out of service; we have placed the cost of this repair work and new gearbox on
the cost that we are submitting to the Provincial Government with some hope that it may be paid for; in
the meantime, however, we are asking the Council's approval for the parts to begin replacement of it,
immediately.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that Mr.
William Dunham has resigned from Number 1 Company of the Salvage Corps and Fire Police because of family
commitments, and that !4r. Gerald Lingley has resigned from the said Company because he does not have
enough time to attend meetings and fire calls, and that he concurs in the request made by Acting Deputy
Fire Chief A. W. C. Robertson that the warrants of Messrs. Dunham and Lingley be called, be received and
filed and the said warrants be cancelled, and that Messrs. Dunham and Lingley be thanked for their service
to the City while members of the Salvage Corps and Fire Police.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, the proposal submitted by J. E. Wilson Roofing Co. Ltd., in the amount of $14,248.00, for the
supply and installation of a carbon monoxide exhaust system in the City Maintenance Garage on Rothesay
Avenue, be accepted, funds having been provided for this purpose in the 1975 capital. budget.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that he
has been requested by J4r. Humphrey Sheehan, Superintendent of Dorchester Penitentiary, to extend an
invitation to the Mayor and Common Council to attend the public meeting to be held at Keddy's Motor Inn on
December 3rd, 1975 at 8.00 p.m. when the Canadian Penal Services and the Department of Public Works will
present all information on the proposed medium-security penitentiary, be received and filed.
~he Common Clerk advised that, in relation to the above matter, he received late this afternoon
from a courier an application from the Department of Public Works of Canada for re-zoning of land in the
Grassy Lake area.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above item be placed on the agenda of this
meeting.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors M. Vincent and Green voting "nay".
Councillor Cave withdrew from the meeting prior to the question being taken.
Read a letter from ~~. R. D. Hoyt, Regional Manager, Property Services, Department of Public
Works of Canada, Halifax, N. S., dated November 26th, 1975, stating that the said Department, on behalf of
Penitentiary Services) requests that the re-zoning application for re-zoning of 175 acres, more or less,
of land in the Grand Bay by-pass area to allow the construction of a medium-security penal institution as
shown on the submitted sketch, be treated .with utmost urgency, and states that the sale of this property
would be contingent upon the following: (1) the City being able to convey title to the Federal Crown free
from all encumbrances, (2) site zoned to allow the issuance of a building permit for construction of a
medium-security penal institution - and also states that the said Department will, subject to approval,
carry out a legal survey of the site. Enclosed with this letter were five copies of a ten-page brief,
prepared by Penitentiary Services, outlining the major factors associated with this facility.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I.
.
~
r'"
181
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
.7(e-;zo/?/h
liJeL SeCk/",
?f!/? 1'-It?.I71f/
P/~I7J7'
/Jdl//$.
{/tJ/1?m.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named re-zoning application be referred to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that .authority be given to proceed to advertise this
proposed re-zoning.
I
Councillor MacGowan recalled that a letter was before Council within the past two months that was very
similar to the above letter from the Department of Works of Canada, and at that time it was passed that the
Council not deal with this matter until after the public meeting, because the Council felt it should have in-
formation before it dealt with it. She felt that it still follows that the Council wants this information before
it approves anything, or disapproves it - even to advertise the re-zoning.
I
Councillor Higgins pointed out that if any person in the City of Saint John comes in and applies for a
re-zoning - whether it be a garage, a major hotel, or even this penitentiary - it has to be treated with the same
courtesy as any other request, and what the Council is simply doing is, referring the application to the Planning
Advisory Committee, authorizing for advertising the required number of times in the newspaper, and that also
leads to a public hearing in this Council chamber before any final decision is made. He stated he thinks that
this is what the Council is after, anyway. He added that the public meeting on December 3rd, above mentioned, is
more information and this is what the Council has been after, but the said Federal Department has put a cheque in
with this re-zoning application and that application has to be treated the same as anything else.
Councillor Parfitt noted that Mr. Barfoot's letter which informed this meeting of the said public
meeting on the evening of December 3rd that is to be held to present all information on the proposed medium-
security penitentiary, says that a complete package of information will be in Council's hands prior to the
meeting. She stated. she understands that the said information is 17 pages in length and that 250 copies will be
handed out to those who want to attend the said December 3rd meeting. She stated she cannot urge strongly enough
that people attend that meeting, because there will be resource people there from Ottawa, Halifax and Dorchester
and there will be public information and resource people will be there to answer questions. She asked if such
information will be available to Council prior to the said December 3rd meeting.
.
The Mayor withdrew from the Chair at this time, and it was assumed by Deputy Mayor Higgins.
Mr. Barfoot replied to Councillor Parfitt that the information just came in today with the re-zoning
application, and copies of it will be made for Council, or are being made for Council.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that although he voted against bringing this item on the agenda of this
meeting, he agrees with the philosophy of the Deputy Mayor's statement that it is just the right to advertise and
to determine and find out expressions of opinion; however, he recalled that he was led to believe that the
Council was going to be advised by the Federal people as to what their intentions were before an application to
re-zone was brought before Council. He asked when the Common Clerk received this application, and by what
method. The Common Clerk replied that he received it by courier, at 3.00 o'clock this afternoon.
The Mayor resumed the Chair at this time.
I
Councillor M. Vincent stated that before this becomes an episode of great magnitude, involving numbers
of people, he wished to express as he has done, by voting against the placing of this item on this meeting's
agenda, his lack of interest and lack of concern in the project being located in the area intended.
Councillor Davis advised that this project is not really exactly the same as any other: this project is
being built as City-owned land and the City therefore has complete control over this until such time as it sells
the land, so nothing is going to happen until the time when the Council says it will sell this land at so much,
and then, that is that. He stated that no matter how much talking there is, or how many briefs are presente~,
or all that kind of thing, nothing is going to happen until this Council votes on the sale of the land.
Councillor Cave re-entered the meeting.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
.
the December 3rd public meeting.
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until next week, after
Councillor Cave advised that he would have to withdraw from the Council table on the question, because
of conflict of interest regarding the matter under discussion.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with Councillors MacGowan, M. Vincent, Pye and Green
voting "yea" and Councillors Parfitt, Kipping, Davis, A. Vincent, Hodges, Higgins and Gould voting "nay".
Mr. Rodgers stated that he should bring to the Council's attention the fact that the Council is pro-
I ceeding with the authorizing of advertising, as well as referring the proposed re-zoning to the Planning Advisory
t:j'tft1 Committee, and he is concerned about the authorizing of the advertising because that is authorizing the Common
~ Clerk to set a date based on this application. He stated that this is the first he saw the application, and the
SO//c/"lf'or fact that it is an application from an applicant to have land re-zoned that he does not own, he believes there
might be something in the Community Planning Act covering that point - he has not had time to study the matter.
Councillor Kipping noted that we had this clarified, before.
I
Councillor Higgins stated that if there is any doubt whatsoever that this is not the typical move that
this Council makes, he would make the following motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table for one week pending a
report from the City Solicitor so that the Council will know exactly what it is doing when it reports further.
.
On the matter of clarification, Councillor Kipping felt that the Council already had clarified at one
ime, already, when he questioned at one time the wording of the advertisement - some citizens had spoken to him
about the fact that they see advertisements in the paper and it is all a'fait accompli' by the time they see it _
and the Council determined at that time, he recalled, from the Common Clerk that it is not by any means a 'fait
accompli' when it appears in the newspaper - the newspaper advertisement simply states "a notice of intention to
consider the re-zoning" - that is all that will be advertised - it will be just a notice of' intention to consider
e-zoning. He stated he cannot see anything - even any legal implication, although he would defer to the City
Solicitor, on this one - but the applicants have requested that this be handled with great urgency, and he can
see really no reason why the Council should not authorize advertising even if it holds the advertising off until
it has a meeting with the City Solicitor, regarding the actual placing of it.
....
Seconded by Councillor Par.fitt
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
recommending that the property on Brown Street as shown on the submitted print be re-zoned for Lloyd's
heating Service Limited from "R-IB" One-Family Residential to "B-2" General Business classification on
condition that the applicant complies with the present regulations respecting signs - and advising that
j~. L~oyd D. Pierce had applied for the re-zoning of the lot next to the west of 35 Brown (formerly 635)
Brown Street stating that this company plans to enlarge the garage on the lot and to use it in connection
with its business, and that .much of the physical work on this lot enlargement has taken place since then,
and also advising that the Committee's November 12th meeting heard Mr. Pierce and also Mr. William Mintern,
an opposing property owner who lives on Todd Street - both had petitions signed by nearby property owners
either for or against the proposal and the Committee decided to seek the neighbours' views on its own, and
a letter was delivered to property owners in the area and replies by telephone or letter were solicited -
~/t,u~ S /I'd the Committee then found that .the people most directly affected had no objection to the proposed re-
, ~ ~ ,~Zoning, and the Committee itself felt that the proposed re-zoning was not out of place -- be received and
/J1.! J6'/"I//~e .fi.Led:
/~!!d 2),
'lJ/erce
182
l//.;jI')/7, /9dvIS_
(}O.ln.n7.
??e-:ZO/7/n~
,1Je~ S e~a /'J
j/e/J / 'terl'e/dll'<
C/iff ~//~/Ip
PI;;;;IlI?, fldn's-,
CO/>1h1,
J?e-;z()n/J1~
h/t~er ~-
~;;JW ahl~nd',
./;'-Her
2Jy- -<.G?W
~mend-
1eI7Ler~
'J)emo//tIO)?
tf-I/?del"sffi
a l#kKs(/f62.
-0 ,f#
T/~sdnvtd Q'1 (3. eo.
hc. 15; 1'J16"('P~OS;
;fjif~:a"t1.
~/~r .
~rr-zfow/7 '!:i7tdrn
aUI7,,~ (1/1Ice.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost, a tie vote having been created with the
Hayor and Councillors MacGowan, Higgins, M. Vincent, Pye and Green voting "yea" and Councillors A. Vincent,
Kipping, Parfitt, Davis, Hodges and Gould voting "nay".
Question being taken, the motion to refer the re-zoning application and to p~oceed to advertise
the re-zoning was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Kipping, Davis, Parfitt, Gould, A. Vincent and
rlodges voting "yea" and Councillors MacGowan, Higgins, Green, Pye and M. Vincent voting "nay".
Councillor.Higgins asked, for Council's information, could the Council have the City Solicitor's
cormnents for the next meeting of Council, in relation to its actions. 11r. Rodgers replied that if what
the Counci~ did is not valid he will certainly be advising the Council.
Councillor Cave re-entered the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Hodges.
AHD FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as.it concerns re-zoning an area of land located on Brown Street,
adjacent to civic number 35 Brown Street (formerly 635 Brown Street), having a frontage of approximately
50 feet and a depth of approximately 134.7 feet, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "B-2"
General Business district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
'Ehe by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto" was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED
Prohibiting the Throwing or Depositing of Litter
time:
that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
on Streets in The City of Saint John", be read a first
;U;D FURTHER that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting the above named by-law amend-
ment, be received and filed.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Prohibiting the Throwing or
Depositing of Litter on Streets in the City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to AmeT)d a By-Law
Prohibiting the Throwing or Depositing of Litter on Streets in The City of Saint John", be read a second
time.
.. Read a second time the by-law entitled "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Prohibiting the Throwing or
Depositing of Litter on Streets in The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the item regarding tenders to demolish property
on Peters Wharf be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt ~
RESOLVED that the report from the Assistant Redevelopment Officer,
advising that tenders were opened on December 1st, 1975 for the demolition of 9-11 Peters Wharf (the
former Willett property) and the lowest bid, namely, that of Chittick's (1962) Ltd. in the amount of
$3,200.00, was accepted for the demolition of this property, and that this tenderer will be notified
inMediatly of the acceptance of its bid and work will commence when the tenderer has signed a demolition
contract and abided by its conditions, be received and filed and the action concurred in.
Councillor A. Vincent, referring to property at 21 Water Street in relation to demolition of 9-
~l Peters Wharf, asked if a party wall is involved there; he added that he is talking about the Parrtown
ravern property at 21 Water Street which adjoins 9-11 Peters Wharf and he asked, in calling tenders for
this demolition, has the City staff taken into consideration that they may be tearing down half of the
tavern before we get a settlement. Mr. Barfoot replied that he is not aware of this problem - to his
knowledge, the buildings are adjoining. Councillor A. Vincent suggested that if the rent is all out of
it, and everything else, maybe the City staff should take a look and maybe we should purcase the tavern
before we start to tear down 9-11 Peters Wharf or we may have a bill to repair a wall.
Question being taken, Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" because he thinks that before the
Council awards the above named tenders we should acquire the tavern building, because it is just good
business to do so, that is all.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"'"
18~3
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
I RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, to whom
~f,7I7,~~V1~, as referred the request of Mrs. Terrence Robichaud for permission to place a mobile home at 423 Milford Road
/? for a period of six months, advising that the applicant states that she intends to purchase a lot in the spring
L'Il~I?1. and to re~ocate the mobile home, and that an inspection of the property reveals that the house itself and the
~t?~/;Ie shed on the property appear to be in poor condition and that the house is presently occupied by two families,
and that a mobile home on the property would be visible from many aspects, and advising that the .Committee
recommends that the application be denied, the reason being that it is not the policy of the City to permit
obile homes in established conventional housing areas, and that the Committee also believes that the City's
experiences with permitting a temporary use where it would not wish it on a permanent basis all too often
esults in future further applications for extensions of permission or creates other difficulties for the civic
administration, and that such temporary uses should therefore not be encouraged -- be received and filed and the
ecommendation adopted.
. Ot7mm/&e
ft/~~/e
I /l/7t?1101$
,IJamest;
///I-i())?
:l3e1t-fea
C'f7h1mul1,
S~eWtilrt-
lI~r/e!/
I tfO////7?/C/?,
C,101/7les
Gt?r/11C1/1
c'MI/71.Kh.
. t'PUIl, 1JJe
'PIa!?/? ,
/ltflr//S,
I {It?/?1)?7,
1?e-;zol7il2
&cohIJ/fe/J
~/7lel"tNf;.
A-li/.
.
/!I n Y}
lYe;} 6 t?1?
I
jO/71e'
1111'$, ~
jf{)~;c1a~d
.
....
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City. of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, November 17th, 1975, when there were
present Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A.
Vincent and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
~. That the following names for City-owned arenas that have been proposed by the Arenas Naming Committee
of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board, be adopted:-
Site
Lowell Street
Hickey Road
Millidgeville
Arena Name
Hilton Belyea Community Arena
Stewart Hurley Community Arena
Charles Gorman Community Arena
Saint John, N. B.,
lst December, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recom-
mendaton contained therein adopted.
Councillor Pye indicated his displeasure with the selection of one of the above three arena names, and
stated that Hilton Belyea and Charles Gorman were unquestionably two outstanding athletes in this community and
they deserve every consideration - but when the Council selects a third name, such as it has done, and ignores
the illustrious past of our world professional speed-skating, boxing and skating champions, he feels the Council
does them a terrific injustice. He stated that he heartily disapproves of this selection of the third name.
Counci~~or MacGowan made the point that of the people who are living today in this community, the name of
Stewart Hurley means a great deal to the young people of this community and as such, she thinks it is an honour
that we can use his name who was an example to the young people here. She questioned that the persons whose
names are used in this regard have to be a great boxer, or something else, and asked why they cannot just be a
good, Christian, upright man.
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee regarding the application from Scholten Enterprises
Limited for re-zoning of a lot measuring 250 feet by 240 feet at 770 Bay Street to permit the construction of a
building to be used for a food store on the ground floor with a bas gar and apartments on the second floor,
advising that the Committee at its November 25th meeting heard representations from the applicants and several
people in opposition to the proposal, and after due consideration, the Committee resolved to recommend that the
app~ication be denied and that the Common Council be advised that the Committee finds no reason to change its
previous recommendation against the requested re-zoning.
Read a letter from Mr. Lynn A. Nason of Nason & COllier, Barristers, who acts as solicitor for Scholten
Properties Limited, advising that he has learned from the Common Clerk on today's date, December 1st, 1975, that
public hearing took place on this matter on November lOth, 1975, and advising that neither Mr. Nason nor his
client understood such was the case, and asking that the Council again advertise and hold a public meeting in
this matter to allow his client to make its representations before Council. The letter also states that it is
"~. Nason's understanding that the Planning Advisory Committee's report will be before Council at this meeting
of Council, and that he would ask that the Council not consider that report at this time unt.il his client is
given an opportunity to appear before Council, and further states that, if the Council wishes, he, or someone
from his law firm would be willing to appear before Council to explain this matter.
It was noted that Mr. Nason was not able to be present at this meeting and that one of the solicitors
from his law firm was present on behalf of Scholten Properties Limited.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that Mr. Nason be heard at the meeting of Council to be held
on December 8th.
Councillor Parfitt voted "nay" to the above motion.
Mr. Rodgers stated that, for clarification purposes in the above named matter, the Council is putting
!1r. rlason on the agenda for the December 8th Council meeting and the Council is not re-advertising, and it is
not granting a public hearing. The Council members concurred in this clarification, noting that Mr. Nason is
being granted a courtesy in this December 8th appearance before Council, at a time to be set by the Common
Clerk.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Recalling that it was he who brought the above matter to the attention of the Common Council, Councillor
Cave stated that he visited the above named area which is crowded and he noted we need houses and these people
cannot get a piece of land nor a house, yet the Council is refusing their request regarding the mobile home,
herefore he has to vote against the motion.
184
~
J>1cJ1J~, Ildl/is,
~oml?7'
t/aILp .<Z:-d.
'?~!/me>>tf ; n
I/eu. t7~ ;tltv,J-
I/~ j7ul")?()$e
./ar;.r/
2p171 htf
.13:1- ;{.;;;W'
OIhtt?dment.s
C/iff So;; ~/to
1(ee,f1/h!! o-P
d(Jl?les~/c:
ani /71,;;l/.s re
re$/ilef7?:!,
~,.,I/I7!f o-P
trueff I?I1
r('$;del7zf/~/
1t7-c-
?,;/~~ I'e
sireif-I7d1l11ln.!
Ci?t6I1, Pye
Sired-nam; Ilj'
(S {?tl rri-s
!l1a/l//tZ~h
Councillor Cave voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that Caldo Ltd. is proposing two lots on a 40-foot accessway on the westerly side of Hawthorne
Avenue Extension near the entrance to Rockwood Park and that each lot would contain a two-family dwelling;
that the Subdivision By-Law requires that each subdivision provide land for public purposes or, in lieu
thereof, money which is paid to the City and is deposited in a trust account for land for public purposes,
and when money is involved, the figure is based on an appraisal by the Property Management Branch at a
percentage set out in the Subdivision By-Law according to the class of zone in which the subdivision is
located, and in this particular case, the valuation established by the said Branch is $3,800.00 and the
applicable percentage is 8% -- and recommending that the Common Council accept the sum of $304.00 from
Caldo Ltd. in lieu of land for public purposes with respect to the said proposed subdivision -- be received
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
submitting recommended amendments to the Zoning By-Law text, affecting Sections 20, 77, 210 and 216 and
proposed new sections, Section 215A and 224A, be received and filed and authority be given to advertise
these proposed amendments, and, in the meantime, the Legal Department be asked to review the proposals for
legality and language.
I
Councillor Hodges asked for information pertaining to the section in the above named letter from
the Planning Advisory Committee which recommends that Section 20 of the Zoning By-Law be amended by
inserting a new clause (b) "the keeping of domestic animals in conjunction with the residential use of a
lot only", to permit, on the approval of the said Committee, the keeping of "pet" domestic animals such as
a pony on large lots in "RS-2" zones. He asked how much land would be required in such cases, and in a
location such as an area on the Gault Road, Lorneville area, Spruce Lake area, on which to keep a pony.
Mr Zides stated that he did not have the pertinent information with him at the meeting to answer the
question, and that he would be glad to give a report on the matter for the Council's next meeting.
Councillor Hodges asked if the regulations allow chickens and ducks to be kept in these areas, adding that
he does not like a neighbour to have chickens. Mr. Zides replied that a limitation could always be put in
the by-law, if the Council wanted to. Councillor M. Vincent asked if anything in this proposed revision
of the Zoning By-Law affects presently existing. Mr. Zides made negative reply. Councillor M. Vincent
asked if the proposed amendment is retroactive. Mr. Zides gave negative reply.
.
Councillor Green asked how the proposed amendment for a new Section 224A will affect a person
who uses a truck in his business such as hauling gravel, et cetera, and has a large truck of his own by
which he makes his livelihood, and if this amendment will restrict that person from keeping such truck on
his own property. Mr. Zides replied that it does not, because the person could have contractor's machin-
ery or equipment and he would be allowed to remain inside of a building, garage or shed, for example, in a
residential zone - the intent is to keep these people from having these pieces of equipment, et cetera out
in the open and scattered over the property - if they have a garage, that is fine; if the person does not
have a garage or a shed that is large enough to accommodate a truck on his own property (even though it is
a person who is earning his livelihood by the truck, as mentioned by Councillor Green) he has to put that
equipment somewhere else other than his own property. Councillor Green commented that he believes there
are quite a few truck drivers in this area in the city who have trucks and they do not have ~ garage in
which to put them. Mr. Zides pointed out that it depends on the size of the truck. He added that on this.
subject, the Council should also hear what the neighbours of such vehicle and equipment owners (who park
same on their residential properties) are saying - that is the problem. He stated that he thinks that the
intent of this proposed amendment is to prohibit business vehicles from being parked in residential zones
except under certain circumstances - the proposed amendment mentions that they can be placed inside of a
building, which means that you could build a shed or garage especially for the vehicle.
I
Councillor Gould stated that he agrees with the principle of this proposed amendment that is
being discussed, and it is nice to have this regulation in the by-law, but he really doubts whether w~ .
will ever be able to enforce it. Mr. Zides pointed out that in the past there have been a few times when
the City wanted to enforce a by-law of this type, and did not have it - there is a time when the Council
might well want to enforce such regulation.
Councillor Cave stated that he knows of several truck drivers in East Saint John who have to
drive those large tandem trucks and they take them home because it is on their way, rather than drive them
to the truck's garage and drive home from there, and in this way they save gasoline for the contractor.
He asked if these drivers are permitted to park the tandem trucks in their own yards, overnight. He
stated if they are not, he is going to object to the proposed amendment. Mr. Zides stated he would not
mind if there was an amendment saying they could park overnight, but the problem is they park there at I
night and day both, and this is where the objections do come. Councillor Cave advised that these drivers
have been doing this for years, and there have been no complaints. Councillor Kipping made the point that
when these diesel truck drivers park overnight, every night, and they start up these big trucks in the
morning at four or five o'clock, then you get the other complaints, and felt it is something that needs to
be controlled.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green and Cave voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Commissioner of Community Planning
and Development, submitting information relative to naming of streets procedure that is followed in the
City of Saint John, be received and filed.
Councillor Pye stated that in view of the fact that the outstanding achievements of our local
athletes and builders of sport of yesteryear are too quickly forgotten by their fellowmen, he would
propose the fOllowing motion.
On motion of Councillor Pye
.
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as a gesture of appreciation of their memorable
contribution to the world of sport, their memories be perpetuated by having in future the streets of our
frequently-created sub-divisions bear the names of those illustrious individuals:
~
JI"""
185
Cpa)?, 'Jite
. 5i-Met'
/Jam/J7!
(5 f?bl>t-S
/h'LIY; P(tl~A
(lI!ot/tJl7
10 -;-t-)
I
I
.
l1?p61;I7,~j
,(-r;v<.,
hslel"/J
:l3.;;Kel'le-s
.ITa.
1(e-A.Ohl..h4
%17)1, 1J1Ih~
l1om";,,
.
$,:;r;~d,
I T l1:9~e
F/tJd1nt:!e
.:J::k9:fs '75"
{hm, 11-
1//J1cel1t-
,
I Sewer I</F
(wflfldeh) L
/lay mCil1'1f I
$1/;,
t'll!J P'1fP.
[lpu,)J. 4!
1/'/l7ceJ1T
.~kn hiIP-
//oPt:C/Jj/!
;11'?/l'shtrlfl.
ProP. {}ot/l;
mee-li175
(!/~ /lI.fr.
It....
Al~D FURTHER that because of Councillor Pye's knowledge of local sport he be appointed a committee of
one, with power to add, for the purpose of fair and proper selection.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he can appreciate and agree with some of the comments Councillor Pye has
made about paying respect to former athletes and he thinks it is aq excellent suggestion, but he thinks it is
quite capably covered in the above named letter of explanation of street naming procedure that was submitted by
the Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, and he felt it would be outside the scope of the Common
Council to be solely responsible for the naming of the streets in the city when we have a Planning Advisory
Committee; therefore, he cannot support Councillor Pye's suggestion at all, as he thinks it is completely wrong.
~rr. Zides stated that, actually, he does not find Councillor Pye's idea at all at odds with what he was saying in
his letter, or even at odds with practice - if we had a list of famous sports figures in the area, we could
suggest to developers that such names be used, but he is not quite sure we could make it stick. Councillor Davis
stated he does not see why Councillor Pye should confine his idea to sports figures - he suggested that there are
famous jurists, medical people, writers, and so on, whose names could be used - the idea is excellent but he does
not think it should be confined to one particular strata of the community. Councillor MacGowan noted that the
Planning people have already named streets after people who have contributed to the community, and stated she
thinks they are quite capable of doing it. She added that if there are any people who have been, or are, active
in sports that Councillor Pye thinks their names should be recommended to the Planning Department, she feels that
is all that is necessary. Councillor Cave noted that what Mr. Zides' letter relates has been a policy of Council,
and that what Councillor Pye proposes to be done would change the policy - therefore, Councillor Cave thinks that
the Council should discuss this, first. He pointed out that there are many people who do not wish their names to
be used as street names. He felt that the idea of passing some of the names over to the Planning Advisory
Committee along with suggestions may be an appropriate way to do it, but he does not think that the Council
should take any action unnecessarily. Councillor Pye replied that that would all be taken into consideration. He
stated that his plan was to add to his proposed committee these outstanding sports celebrities, living today, to
assist him in this project - to submit names to the Planning Advisory Committee for the Committee's consider-
ation. Councillor Kipping stated he is sympathetic to what Councillor Pye is proposing, except he does not think
that the way he is proposing it is the correct way. He stated he does not believe that the Council should get
involved directly with this, except insofar as the Council members wish to submit names to the Planning Director
for his use as he sess fit - he does not think the Council should have an arm - a committee of one, or any other
kind of committee, since we have all the standing Committees now - he believes that all that is necessary is that
Councillors make suggestions to the Planning Director as they see fit - the Planning Advisory Committee will then
consider them at the appropriate times, and the streets will be named in a proper and objective procedure without
undue "political" interference - in this way, he thinks the Council members would still have their in-put and
Councillor Pye would still have all the in-put he wanted, and there would be no problem. He stated he would like
to see him withdraw the motion as it now stands due to the clarification the Council has received from Mr. Zides
in his letter to this meeting. He added that the street naming system is laid on and it looks very good and he
does not think that the Council should alter it. Councillor MacGowan stated that she is going to vote against
the above motion because she does not feel that the Council should only take sports into consideration.
Councillor Green stated he sees nothing wrong with Councillor Pye and a committee of his own suggesting
names to the Planning people, and he suggested that this be done, noting he is sure that the Planning people
would take some of the names into consideration. He suggested that Councillor Pye withdraw his motion.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with the majority of Council members voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the application submitted by Robbins, Limited and Eastern
Bakeries Limited for re-zoning of the present former bakery property at 406 Douglas Avenue to permit its renov-
ation to 31 modern apartments, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that
authority be granted to proceed with the necessary advertising regarding this proposed re-zoning.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he has an item he would like to place on the agenda conceTning the
Saint John Board of Trade, and he would also like to ask a question regarding Haymarket Square.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the item with regard to the Saint John Board of Trade be
placed on the agenda of this meeting.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that on November 26th and 27th last "Finance Days '75" were conducted in
Saint John by the Saint John Board of Trade and this event brought to our community the leading finance people of
many other communities, and was a real credit to the Saint John community.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the Saint John Board of Trade be commended and thanked for
its efforts in initiating and conducting "Finance Days 175".
Councillor A. Vincent asked how many feet of wooden pipe is the City covering up at Haymarket Square
that should possibly be renewed. He stated he would like to know why the City is covering up wooden pipe that
may, now that the air has gotten at it, have to be renewed within two or three years - if we could not put it
into a capital budget or if we could not get the Province to pay for it, now. He stated he would like to have
that report. He stated he cannot believe that at the Haymarket SQuare by-pass great big pipe is being placed in
certain places and then stopping, and going over and putting some more in because it is not in their contract -
he does not believe that kind of construction should be allowed. The Mayor advised that Mr. Barfoot has assured
him that a report will be submitted on this matter.
Councillor M. Vincent recalled that during the recent flooding at Glen Falls he moved a motion, that
was dulY seconded, and passed by Council (November 17th, 1975), that a meeting be held with the Province of New
Brunswick relative to some of the problems and possible discussion on the remedial steps that mayor may not have
to be taken. He asked if it is still the intent of the Council to hold that meeting or whether ~hat meeting was
considered to be resolved when flood compensation was made available to the residents in the area. In reply, the
Mayor stated that I~. Barfoot assured him that he believed it was resolved by the Province in that the Province
is prepared to pay compensation. He noted that Councillor M. Vincent is thinking of a meeting afterwards to see
what the Province will do to cleaT up the problem. Councillor M. Vincent advised that his intent of the motion
was for compensation - which was resolved at the said November 17th meeting of Council and was excellent, quick
response by both the Mayor and the Province - he also intended in his motion that the Council would have a
meeting with the Provincial officials to look at any help or assistance that may be coming towards rectifying the
problems in the future, and he felt that was a piece of unfinished business which the Council may very well
overlook at a time when the timing might be ideal. Mr. Barfoot replied that the staff will look into it,cer-
tainly; he would think, though, that maybe what has to be done with the Province could be better resolved when we
186
Gl/el7. ~~;; .5
710od/h~
~t'$h aeeA-
}JNP, CO~,
mee-l-iJ1,ff
LEGAL
flUff), /l
It//I//s-f-an
F/o()d/)1 g' / l
~.;f.5ie~ ,^~/(i
e;7f~ sc:It~/6.
C'/i-!f /lJ5r.
FranA-/I/? t?,
,J~e~ S'~
Il:C-I-'JJ7-f/c
tI//;b/eSd/ers
/-I-d.
:ffu"IJJe'$S
a /$l-urkhC!e
1I~~~rKef
Thrott.fJjll1/a~
to& 3;1t ~i-far
C/.f~ .5/:Jltc/:6pr
lledil~ 6~
cr.d~1i ~~hJj7-
Ilk e L:r/slt?
50 - //1/,
36 ():7J e~etoR;; .
I'Tl e n-6- ,.< ~ /<- .
fJ//77 ,;l/t?/-!;zer
1(esc:i;;di!!;z 0/ ce/J.
f:e6. f, 117(,
(p 302, -6))/5 :Book)
(3ty50ltc/:t'pr
.7Jonald /11
(J;II; SI I{, ~
Ol17ef..? ;T/71/ed-
men/$' /-t-tL
Ct7mm, If/ho/e
~
have an idea of the costs involved which should be as a result of the completion of the engineering study
which should be done in February. Councillor M. Vincent suggested that might be a little too late, par-
ticularly in view of Mr. MacKinnon's remarks at this meeting of Council that the City is attempting to get
compensation regarding a unit ' that was damaged in working out in this area. He felt that if the City is
going to do that now, this might be the time to go after assistance or consideration rather than wait - at
least open the doors - perhaps you might finalize something - his point is there is a piece of unfinished
business that was duly passed by Council from the said November 17th, 1975 meeting. The Mayor replied that
a report will be obtained, and arrange for some discussion on this matter.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
I
Councillor A. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Hugh A. Williston regarding flooding
of his property on the eastern end of Mystery Lake, on the Golden Grove Road, and the prDblems he has been
experiencing as a result, requesting that this serious problem be overcome, be referred to the appropriate
civic staff and to the Legal Department, for a report to Council.
I
doting that the above matter has a long, involved history, Mr. Barfoot stated he feels the best
way to handle it is to bring in a report on what has happened over the past several years. Brief dis_
cussion ensued regarding Mr. Williston's comments that are contained in the above named letter. Mr.
Rodgers noted that there would be a report coming from the City 14anager, as noted in the above motion; and
the insurance company might be involved, he added.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Franklin O. Leger, Q. C. of
Palmer, O'Connell, Leger, Turnbull & Turnbull, solicitors for Atlantic Wholesalers, Limited, advising that
their client has instructed them to advise the City that the construction under way at Haymarket Square
has interrupted its business operations in the Save-Easy store at the corner of City Road and Gilbert
Street and that documented proof of such business interruption will be submitted to the City, and further
advising that their client is prepared to make an official of the Company available to the Common Council
to discuss the business interruptio~ claim in detail, be referred to the Legal Department for a report.
.
Read the following letters: from.Mr. William Meltzer, dated November 19th, 1975, relative to an
Assignment given to Heat Craft Ltd. by Mr. B. McGregor of 360 Development Ltd. at the Common Council
meeting of dovember 17th, 1975, stating he understands that the City intends to pay to Heat Craft Ltd.
monies owed by 360 Development Ltd. for work in the Gault Road sub-division, Saint John West, N. B., and
advising that his letter is to protest payment as there are Judgements against the assets of 360 Develop-
ment Ltd. by one of his clients about which he can supply details upon request, and further advising that
monies should be divided amongst the creditors of 360 Development Ltd. and not just Heat Craft Ltd., and
stating that he is awaiting the Council's reply before proceeding with further protest; from the City.
Solicitor, noting that at the Common Council meeting of November 17th last, the Council adopted the
recommendation of the City Manager to pay $4,500.00 to Heat Craft Ltd., as a negotiated settlement for a
lift pump station, and that payment was subject to documentation satisfactory to the City Solicitor, and
further noting that the above mentioned letter from Mr. Meltzer is requesting that payment not be made to
Heat Craft Ltd., and stating that the City Solicitor is studying the matter further, and he is requesting
at this time, that the Council adopt a resolution in Legal Session delaying payment until his study is
completed, and further advising that if everything is in order, he will be reporting back to Council in
Legal Session for authority to pay -- if, however, legal ramifications come to light, he will be bringing
the matter back to Open Session of Council for rescinding of the November 17th resolution.
I
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the request made by the City Solicitor,
payment of monies to Heat Craft Ltd. regarding the sewage lift station on the Gault Road in a sub-division
that was being developed by 360 Development Limited, that the Common Council agreed to pay by resolution
of November 17th, 1975, be delayed until the City Solicitor has completed his study on the matter of
creditors of 360 Development Limited and has reported back in this regard to Council in Legal Session:
.
Al~D FURTHER that the letter in the above matter from Mr. William Meltzer, Barrister, on behalf
of his client who is a creditor of 360 Development Limited, be received and filed.
I
Councillor A. Vincent re-entered the meeting.
Mr. ROdgers advised that he was at a meeting today in Fredericton with Mr. Donald M. Gillis,
Q. C. when they met with the solicitor for Omega Investments Ltd. to discuss the action that we are
presently involved in. He stated that Mr. Gillis and he have reached the stage now where they would like
to come to Council to discuss the matter in Legal Session.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
"
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the .Common Council meet in Legal Session at 4.00
p.nl. on December 8th next with the City Solicitor and Mr. Donald M. Gillis, Q. C. to discuss the legal
action in which the City of Saint John and Omega Investments Ltd. are involved.
1he Council members decided that when the above named December 8th Legal Session is completed, a
Committee of the Whole session will be held prior to the 7.00 p.m. open session of Common Council on that
date.
Councillor Kipping advised that the residents of Willie Avenue, besides experiencing a low water
pressure problem all along, now have a problem of sediment in the water supply - so they have been told by
~~rf~~re their plumbers - which has damaged their pressure valves to the extent that they have had shut-offs of
furnaces and flooding because of malfunction -- this being because. of sediment in the water. He stated
~ljI;j~ ~P'~ that apparently these residents would have no problem proving that there is a great deal of sediment in
,/ their water and they get it very frequently. He stated he was approached by two different people today,
fflafer Gctflfll:f who claim to represent at least a half a dozen people who had furnace shut-downs on account of this
II71!gN-f,y
.
~
r-
187
problem and furnace repairs which will cost them about $300.00, according to their plumbers, and they are quite
concerned about it, and one of them is circulating some kind of a letter or petition to be signed, out there. He
stated that they are concerned over the low water .pressure and are scared of no fire protection, and dirt in the
water system. He noted that apparently there is. a number of new houses going in just below these residents,
somewhere, and these residents say that when those new houses go in they will never have any pressure; right now,
they only get pressure once in a while, and in the summertime almost not at all; if the fire tankers are down
below filling up from the hydrant it cuts them right off as Willie Avenue is on a high elevation; also, they get
live things in their water, as well as sediment. ,He added that these residents are afraid there will be a
complete loss of their water pressure, with the co-operative housing that is being built in this vicinity. He
asked that Mr. MacKinnon give him some information regarding this matter, and added that he wanted the Council to
know about it, as well. He noted that it appears we have a problem, and that the City is going to have to spend
some money to overcome it - and fire protection is a bad problem, he added. He stated that these residents think
that the City water supply is at fault in respect to their present problem of sediment that is affecting the
valves. In reply, Mr. MacKinnon advised that recently he was at a meeting with the Department of the Environ-
ment, the Provincial Laboratory, the Medical Society and the Department of Health with regard to inspection,
testing and sampling of the City water supply, as a result he made to the Council and the City Manager three or
four months ago, and following that, there was an interim report made by Atlantic Analytical Services concerning
the water supply and the quality of the water - at that time, the sedimentation was not a problem, specifically _
however, the Laboratory says that there is a great deal of sedimentation - their filtering system is magnified
quite a bit more than what you would see in your own homes - for example, you do not see any of the sedimentation,
at all; the testing that the Department of the Environment are hoping to do is going to cover chemical and
physical analysis and physical observations - it is meant to do all of this at the source and that it is in the
lakes - specifically, the Loch Lomond lake will originate the testing in that area; because the one sample can be
tested for a number of things, they are going to cover a wide range including testing for metals, et cetera; the
meeting he speaks of took place about four days ago, and they are going to get back to him with a job specifi-
cation as to what they are going to carry out - once we get that back and depending on whether or not they have
the total manpower to do the job, it is a seasonal thing covering the various seasons and they will be able to
assess when we are getting any high in-puts of coliform - coliform is not related to any particular viral in-
fections nor is it proven that it is communicable - however, it is hoped that the testing that will be done will
enable them to isolate all these various things, and during the various stages it is hoped that anything that
they see that is of a specific nature, that had a reflection on the quality, that they are going to pass it along
to the City so that we can take immediate steps - for example, if there was a septic tank in a specific area on
the lake that was bad, they in turn would relay that information - that, by the way, is not to indicate that is
what is the problems; in the lines, there are two problems - first of all, the problems at the source, and
secondly, the problems in the lines - in the lines there are the materials in the water and the method of trans-
mission which sometimes causes the water in the line to create tuberculations and they are just heavy material
inside the pipes - depending upon the time of the season, it is our assumption that coliform colonies can get
inside these tuberculations and if you have an increase or decrease in pressure you can shake that tuberculation
off and, as a result, you might shake off the coliform colony which in turn, in the summertime, might grow and
give you a high coliform count - the coliform count is not a reflection of anything in particular - it is just a
count of the coliform and need not necessarily be something that is related to anything that the doctors may see
around - an epidemic of influenza, or anything of that nature, but they are saying that the possibility is there
and they would like to be able to say that it is not the water, so that is what we are trying to do. He added
that, with that, they are also going to look at the sedimentation - we are treating the water with chlorine - we
are not testing it for sedimentation - we are not filtering the water for sedimentation and it has never been
considered something that was a problem - this testing that they are going to give us now might indicate whether
or not this is a problem - at the same time we are going to have to assess whether or not in the immediate stages
it is a cost that we can incur - the cost of filtering is very high so you have to realize that sedimentation in
the water has to be extremely high before you actually get into it to have something in it and it does not
necessarily mean that there is something wrong. Councillor Kipping stated that the residents of Willie Avenue
figure that the sedimentation is directly related to the low water pressure, and that the sediment settles during
a period of low pressure, and when there is enough pressure to bring up their pressure to an acceptable degree
that surge of water brings the sediment with it. He stated that, whatever it is, their specific complaint is
damage to their appliances including washing machines (one housewife called him today and said her washes are all
ruined) but the furnaces are being ruined - the valves - that, plus the fire protection idea. Mr. MacKinnon
replied that he is familiar with one problem they had last year with a fair amount of sedimentation which would
be caused from a number of things. He stated that the pressure is not a result of the sedimentation - it is a
result of the fact that they are much higher than the system. He noted that there is a pumping system at the
bottom of Lakewood area. Councillor Kipping, noting that the said pumping system obviously is not adequate,
asked if the department is working on any improvements in the system. Mr. MacKinnon stated that there is in the
design a standpipe - or, at least, it is in the preliminary stages - we have already assessed where it would go
and we are going to have to look at the capacity of it - all that is in the Comprehensive Community Plan. He
stated that the Department knows that the water pressure problem is there, and the problems they had last year _
last year the extremely high heat caused a malfunction in the equipment which was down for several hours and as a
result, at that same time, because there was no pressure they also got sedimentation in the lines. He knows the
problem of sedimentation is there and he is not sure what is causing it - he is not familiar with the problem of
sedimentation. Councillor Kipping stated the reason he brought the subject up in Legal Session and did not want
to have it open anywhere because there may be a liability on the part of the City. Mr. MacKinnon stated that the
matter of corrosion of water inside the valves of furnaces does not happen only in the Lakewood area - it is
happening in many parts of the city - the valve is probably not functioning because of the action of the water
and the chlorine on metals - it is a corrosion that acts inside the valve. In the matter of what is being
planned in the way of improvements, he stated that the Department is looking at a standpipe for the back portion
of Willie Avenue on the high piece of land and is looking at the planning for the placement of it at that location
we have to design the capacity of it and also the pumping system to get the water up there - all that will give
you is adequate pressure in the area and would also give the residents the fire protection they are looking for,
but there would also be an extreme high cost to it - you are looking at probably $500,000.00. He felt that this
proposed standpipe will probably be brought before Council in the 1976 capital budget for Council's consideration.
Councillor Kipping stated that he has gathered enough information on the subject to enable him to advise the
Willie Avenue residents what the picture is.
III /? /1 Councillor A. Vincent advised of the problem of rat infestation in the Mountain Road area and stated
(..tJttl?, ,..,-,. that since the City stopped baiting traps out there the rats are coming up and plugging the residents' sewers
t;j'I7~e/.?~ there; also, these rats find their way up the toilet bowl of houses there and get caught there and plug the
-,0 ~ toilet bowl. He asked that the City Manager tell him why the City stopped the practice ,of putting out rat poison
0,;;j ~-.L' out in that area, particularly around the two pump houses where the rats are. Mr. Barfoot replied that possibly
1)1~5'~/0).1 we have exceeded the budget for rat poison this year, but he is sure it is something that can be attended to.
;r,1ptc~~/'f7 Mr. MacKinnon added that he was not aware there was a problem in that area, and that he will have to check into
J1(.~ t?a the matter. Councillor A. Vincent noted that these are apparently sewer rates, and are coming from the race-
~,01r track, and that these rats are more active now since the recent flood in the area. He asked that this problem be
looked into, which is causing great concern to the residents of the area.
.
W////e
/It/e,
Wale r
jJN'SS u/'e
I 9-
IMjJt//I"/fy
I
.
I
.
I
· (];<<11, //!;yd
Gt?U/~h
tJa//Jra/-tA
tlmStfrae,
Mlr&-" ///e.9-'"
...
Councillor MacGowan noted that something was to have been done about Galbraith Construction Ltd. on
Fairville Boulevard. Mr. MacKinnon advised that Mr. Galbraith was supposed to have done that work SOme months
ago - the only reason he was delayed on it was that he had a contract going on at Lepreau and the City recognized
hat and allowed him to put it off - however we did get back to Mr. Galbraith about two or three weeks ago, after
(
1St;
.~
6l!;t .JO'/; c/-6or
2h~d',.f! b!/4's,
etal tJ.
,(.!Jt7fh/e'A I/S.
(/me4<i/ -'.I11/~d-
mel'f6s '(-rfd'.~ at-.
am/?? , If/htJle
1Yd-/~e lJ-f'
/i11d/on
:iJ"~e-c-
'J>khh. ,LJd t//s.
CO/77rl1 .
J?e-~on/n.ff
Ill,PhOJ .Zwt!?d--
l71eds -r--
I?-ftenc/es ..(-r!-L
/I1/11t4evi//e
b-ld-es ;prof?
November 9th, and asked him to start. He added that he has not been over to. check on it, but he can re-
check it, again.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
fI;t~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the eighth
day of December, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
MacGowan, Parfitt, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
and F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor
"
At this time, in Legal Session, the City Solicitor and Mr. Donald M. Gillis, Q. C. gave a
resume of proceedings in the matter of Claude Lanthier and John J. Saia & Associates vs. Omega Invest-
ments Ltd. and The City of Saint John as the Third Party.
A Committee of the Whole was then held, and at 7.00 o'clock p.m. the Committee arose and the
Mayor assumed the Chair in Common Council.
Present in Common Council from City staff were Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park,
Commissioner of Finance, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Depart-
ment, M. ~ides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, E. Ferguson, Chief of Police, and C.
Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks accompanied by J. Brownell of the Recreation and Parks Depart-
ment.
~he meeting opened with silent prayer.
The Mayor gave notice of a proposal for a motion for the next Council meeting, concerning the
Councillors' knowledge of the balance in the City's budget, as we move on into a new year.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising took place for Alpha Investments & Agencies Ltd.
regarding the proposed re-zoning of an area of land with a width of approximately 215 feet along Univer-
sity Avenue and a frontage of approximately 910 feet on the easterly side of a new street, Royal Avenue,
running northerly from University Avenue, to permit the erection of apartment buildings. He stated that
no written objections had been received regarding this proposed re-zoning. It was noted that no person
was present to offer comment regarding the said re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that in view of the letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee, advising that the Committee is not prepared to make a recommendation on the proposed re-zoning
re~uested by Alpha Investments & Agencies Ltd. until the applicants have disclosed their intentions for
the whole of the not yet developed portion of the Millidgeville Estates property; that Alpha Investments
has approached the Committee about this development; that at that time, the Committee felt that it could
approve the idea of an apartment project in principle subject to a revised plan; that the Committee was
then not in favour o~ further development until the applicant or the owners of the land disclose their
intentions with respect to the remainder of the land rather than proceed by applications for pieces of
the area involving changes of densities or other departures from the plan which was prepared for Millidge-
ville Bstates; that the Planning staff then worked with Alpha Investments Ltd. consultants for.a revised
plan of the property which Alpha Investments Ltd. wishes to have re-zoned now; that when that plan was
made sufficiently acceptable in itself, it was discussed by the Subdivision Review group; that the City's
Engineering and Works Department and the utilities companies expressed strong concern over the continuing
increases of proposed densities in the area and the lack of an over-all firm advance design and density
plan on which they could base their long range planning for the provision of services and utilities; that
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"..
189
.
1- ;qd~h :r
$t'e?he17
1?e-;zol7lJ?
I~ba
:LIJPe~~
.y ItfelJ~/6'$
./ -t-L.
/Il/II/cqe-
vl'/Ie ~.?-
t-d-l?S ,/-.
· Ill//t'rl~e'-
I////.e T$-
t-a-fe s
.st(~-L/v.
I
.
I
I
.
....
the School Board also expressed some.concern because the new proposals for apartment type buildings are trending
towards higher density and it will become necessary to review these carefully with the view to finding an
appropriate school site somewhere in the area; that the Committee still supports the principle of some medium
density apartments close to University Avenue but feels that there is considerable justification for the pos-
ition being taken by the School Board - the Committee believes that the public interest would be served if the
planning for the area could be determined and generally fixed now to avoid complexities, bad design and costing
problems for the various involved agencies and developers -- the matter be laid on the table pending a recom-
mendation from the Planning Advisory Committee.
(Councillor Gould entered the meeting)
Mr. Ralph J. Stephen, Barrister, was granted permission to speak at this time. He advised that he is
solicitor for Alpha Investments & Agencies Ltd., and, also, he is a shareholder of the people who own the lands
around this parcel where the re-zoning is being sought, and that before the Council takes a vote on the above
motion he would like to bring the Council up to date on what the developers have done since they were aware of
the Planning Advisory Committee's letter. He stated that another shareholder of the company, Millidgeville
Estates Ltd., and he met with Mr. Zides on December 5th last and they in some general way discussed further re-
zoning applications in this general area - they heard Mr. Zides' comments, and he thinks most of them Were well
taken insofar as they are concerned about eventual numbers that are going to be in that area and the utilities
people want to be aware that they have sufficient services to meet the demand. He stated that it is very difficult
for him to say at this time exactly how the remainder of the land is going to be utilized; however, they have now
prepared to step forward to look at the plan in conjunction with the City and the other public utilities people
and to come up with something, they hope, which would be mutually of benefit to everybody - and probably there
would be no further demands for re-zoning until next spring when they hope that this plan will then be completed;
unfortunately, he cannot say at this time that there will not be any more apartments behind this area - he cannot
say that - but he would say that they are going to re-evaluate the present plan and they will bring it up to meet
the demand plus whatever good planning is designated.
During ensuing discussion, Councillor Higgins explained that the above tabling motion tables the re-
zoning, but does not either accept or reject the proposed re-zoning - it is just a tabling pending a recommend-
ation from the Planning Advisory Committee at the conclusion of the planning of Alpha Investments & Agencies Ltd.
l~. Rodgers reminded the Council members that if the said Committee does not respond with its views on the
proposed re-zoning within thirty days from the date of the first advertising notice date, the Committee is deemed
to be in support of it - in other words, the Committee has a responsibility to give its views - it does not have
to give its views, but they are not received by the Council within the said thirty days mentioned, then the
Committee's views are deemed to be in support of the re-zoning.
Mr. Stephen advised that he does not think the re-zoning proposal of Alpha Investments should be treated
in connection with a possible re-design of the other lands, as he understands initially the Planning Advisory
Committee was prepared to go along with a recommendation provided that this would be the last parcel to be re-
zoned and from that point they would then not recommend any further re-zoning until, say, a plan for all the area
remaining would be put before them. He stated that his proposition here is: he would like to have the Alpha
Investment re-zoning application considered and treated separately than the disposal of the other land but as
back-up information to the Council an actual re-design or a re-evaluation of the present plan is actively under-
taken by the company; what he is saying is: he thinks the Council can consider an application for re-zoning of
this parcel of land made by Alpha Investments knowing full well that before any further applications are going to
come before the Council a re-evaluation or a re-design of the plan will be undertaken by the company.
Councillor Higgins further explained that his motion for tabling was based on the Planning Advisory
Committee's letter now before Council which advises that the Committee is not prepared to make a recommendation
on the said re-zoning until the applicants have disclosed their intentions for the whole of the not yet developed
portion of the blillidgeville Estates property (the applicants being Millidgeville Estates and Alpha Investments &
Agencies Ltd.) -- that the matter be tabled pending a recommendation, which he thinks would be forthcoming after
further negotiation between Mr. Stephen's group and the Planning Advisory Committee -- that is what he based the
rnotion on. Councillor Davis stated that he seconded the motion because in the Committee's letter it says that
the City's Engineering and Works Department and the utilities companies expressed strong concern over the con-
tinuing increases of proposed densities in the area and the lack of an over-all firm advance design and density.
He felt that we are just getting into more and more trouble unless we know this design.
l~. Zides advised that the said letter from the Planning Advisory Committee in this matter, which is
dated November 28th, 1975, reflects the views of the Committee. He stated that at the December 5th meeting
referred to by Mr. Stephen the said letter was discussed, and he himself was not really sure after that meeting
what would happen because he had the impression that perhaps the developers would be following the lines of this
recommendation, but on the telephone today Mr. Stephen told him that he would be at this meeting of Council to
make his presentation.
For clarification purposes, Mr. Stephen advised that Millidgeville Estates owns the adjoining land
referred to in the said letter from the Planning Advisory Committee; initially, Alpha Investments made application
for re-zoning of a parcel of that, of five acres of land which is under agreement to Alpha for ownership - and,
initially, when the request was referred to the said Committee the Committee recommended re-zoning of this five-
acre parcel; from there on in, the Works Department and various other civic departments became involved in the
planning of maybe construction on this site; then, the whole problem of design of services became a major con-
sideration; the Planning Advisory Committee recommended, initially, re-zoning based on the fact that this would
be the last application that the Committee could recommend without knowing an over-all picture of the remaining
lands. He stated he would ask that the Committee consider re-zoning of this five-acre parcel of land by Alpha
Investments & Agencies Ltd. - and saying in small print that they do agree in principle that before they come
back with any other applications they will look at the plan and they will come in before the Planning Advisory
Committee with a tentative plan, seeking approval of that. He stated that he does not want the actions of one
company to be hooked on to the actions of the other company - he is just simply saying that he cannot really find
fault with what Mr. Zides is saying there, and he would say that in the future, before the developers ask for any
further re-zoning that they will have another look and re-design the plan.
In reply to Councillor Davis' question as to how many acres are owned by Millidgeville Estates in this
area, Mr. Stephen stated that there are about 100 acres left. Councillor Davis noted that Alpha Investments owns
five acres and Mr. Stephen is saying that Alpha wants to develop these five acres right now, so Alpha does not
own any more land. Mr. Stephen replied in the affirmative. Councillor Davis asked, in that case, how can you
come back. I~. Stephen pointed out that, initially, he qualifed his position by saying he was speaking in a dual
capacity, for both Millidgeville Estates and Alpha Investments. Councillor Davis noted that it is an "arm's
length" situation and the Planning Advisory Committee and our engineering people, and everybody else, know this,
and they say before we let Alpha go ahead with five acres with a condition that the company comes back for any
further development, later on, and before we start installing sewers and watermains, and the School Board is also
questioning the density of that 100 or so acres, that there should be a plan for the entire development - and
Councillor Davis thinks that is absolutely right - he sees no reason why we should begin with a very dense
situation and then find ourselves stymied later on, farther up the hill - it seems very clear and he can see no
other way of handling the situation - that 105 acres, or whatever it is, will hold so many units and that should
190
~
tJordPJ? ~ks
/l~J;DI h;J/e'pc--
/7%?l/ts +-
/J.fr'tJ1e/es /-I-L,
J?e- .zP/J/i?ff
/J1/I// ctfe't// / /e
Edak.s ..t-l-L
$tt~-<<I'Y;
;l)~J? .11 ,
/le/t//s, tb/l/h7,
7(e-;Zl?lli175
(~WJ7ep.5h; p._
d Ian'" ) I ' -"
{!/f!f SO;Jc/t(}
~t'tI,.$ ecur.
pel7ifed/QJr.f/
be designed complete with. modifications to be made, later - and he cannot see any other way. Councillor
Gould added that if jus~ five acres are re-zoned, and if there are another 95 acres to be re-zoned at
some time, the whole sewage system is messed up if planning is not done now; he further stated that the
Council gets in this trouble every time it does this for developers. In reply, noting that the Regional
Hosp~talJis going out in that area, Mr. Stephen felt that that is probably pretty good services design
out there now when you consider it is going to be New Brunswick's largest hospital and this area is
adjacent. Councillor Gould stated he was not referring to that - but was referring to the area Alpha
Investments will be developing and for which the company will be putting the services in, which the
company will turn over to the City, and all the flaws and mistakes because of the poor planning in the
first place, the City will have to assume when the company turns over its streets to the City after the
development is done; the City has gotten into that before and is being careful, and does not want to get
into it, again. In clarification of this point, Mr. Barfoot advised that in a sub-division, the develop-
er's responsibility is to construct the sewers according to a design approved by the City - at the
completion of the work and on the acceptance of the work by the City's engineer and the completion of all
the. .work in the sub-division agreement, the City takes over the respons i bili ty of maintenance. Councillor
A. Vincent felt that this proposed development is different from a sub-division in which services are to
be installed, and then turned over to the City, because this development is apartments which will connect
into an existing sewer in University Avenue, he understands. He asked that the City Manager supply
information on this question, to assist him in voting. Mr. Barfoot stated that he did not have the sub-
division plan before him, but he thinks it is 200 feet on University Avenue and 910 feet on a new street,
and he would think there were some new services involved. Mr. Zides advised that this development will
involve an extension of a relatively new street called Royal Parkway which runs north off University
Avenue some several hundred feet (not 900 feet because there is a beginning there, now), and will involve
six buildings, four of which will have 12 units each and two of which will have 30 units each, making a
total of 108 apartments. In further explanation of the Planning Advisory Committee's views, Mr. Zides
advised that the Committee approved in principle having a multiple low-density apartment project in that
area but wanted a revised plan, and as the revised plan was being worked out it was brought into con-
sultation with the various other bodies that the Committee consults with when it is doing sub-division
reviews - such as the City's Engineering and Works Department, power, telephone, and so on, and that is
when the Committee started showing its concern; the Committee still says that it favours the principle of
having a.certain amount of multiple-family zoning but it says it is not going to recommend for this
because it does not know exactly what it is leading other people into.
.
I
I
.
Mr. Gordon 14yles, President of Alpha Investments & Agencies Ltd. stated it is his feeling that
this company is being married to Millidgeville Estates Ltd. in which he holds no shares, and no members
of Millidgeville Estates hold shares in Alpha Investments & Agencies Ltd.; he has five acres of land
under agreement of purchase that he is obligated to exercise, and he feels he is being restricted because
of the fact that the City does not have an over-all plan for Millidgeville Estates. He noted that he
does not have any control over what Millidgeville Estates does and he has no in-put into what that
company's over-all plan may be. He stated that he went to the Planning Advisory Committee and through
what he felt were the proper channels, to obtain agreement to build 108 units, and that there is a vital
need for apartment buildings in that area - and he believes he got tentative agreement - tentative
agreement, to him, means that he can go in and clear a site and hire engineers to provide engineering _
which he has done and it has cost him a considerable amount of money - he stated he was present at this
meeting to say that he has five acres of land out there under agreement of sale, he has his people readyoo
and his engineering. done - it is not complete, but it has cost him a lot of money and he has spent a lot I
of time with the town planning and the company has tried to meet every requirement of all the departments
(telephone, hydro, Police, Recreation and Fire) and the company has lived up to all those things, and .he
thinks he is being restricted at this Council meeting and being tied to a string that belongs to Millidgeville
Estates. He stated that the shares he held in Millidgeville Estates Ltd. he sold some six months ago,
and he has no in-put in that company, whatsoever, in what it does. He stated he feels it is not proper
to tie Alpha Investments & Agencies Ltd. to Millidgeville Estates Ltd.
Councillor MacGowan asked the following question: if these two groups are not in any way
associated, then would the onus be on town planning to come up with a plan of what would be acceptable
for that area, because if they are not working together, how can we expect them to work out a plan? Mr.
Zides replied by noting that Alpha Investments has an agreement of sale regarding the five or six acres
of land in question (Mr. Myles pointed out that an agreement of sale is the same thing as being under
option to the company). Councillor MacGowan asked if what Mr. Myles is saying is, that Millidgeville
Estates might come up with a plan, if they presently own that land. Mr. Zides replied that the point is
that there are a couple of little technicalities involved: (a) the land is being bought from Millidgeville .
~states - there is an agreement for sale ~ it has not been severed or approved as a severance. Councillor
MacGowan raised the question that this land has been cleared, physically, to which Mr. Zides noted that
when you have an agreement for sale sometimes you have the right from the owner even before you have
ownership of the land, to go on and do certain things on the land.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Cave, A. Vincent and Green voting
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letter from the Planning
Advisory Committee be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to have a legal oplnlon that, in the future,
whether the Council is re-zoning land that is owned by the property owner or owned by other people __
because in four years the Council has re-zoned an awful lot of land and apparently the ownership comes up
and it is very important sometimes to know this - so, he would like to clear the air, once and for all,
as to whether the Planning Advisory Committee has the right to question the ownership. He stated that he
would like to have that opinion so that the Council will know what to do in the future, regarding everybody.
He stated he knows of cases when people have come in and re-zoned land they did not own, and it was never
questioned, and he thinks that we should do one thing or the other. Councillor Davis pointed out that in
regard to the matter p~esently before Council, it was he who questioned the ownership, not the Planning
Advisory Committee. Councillor A. Vincent maintained that it was Mr. , Zides at this meeting who talked
about the ownership of the land. Mr. Rodgers stated that without getting into any specific cases, he
belieyes he has covered the point of re-zoning of land as related to ownership, in his report to Council
at this meeting with reference to the City-owned land on which the Federal Government proposes to estab-
lish.a medium-security penal institution, which report deals with procedure. Councillor Kipping noted
that the.number of units proposed was changed (the re-zoning advertising refers to nine 12-unit.apartment
buildings) as well as the disposition of the units, and stated he thinks that unless Alpha Investments
ants to suffer another thirty-day delay later on, after the matter is brought back off the table, that
had better be straightened out, and the re-zoning had better be re-advertised to correspond to the number
of buildings and units now proposed, as referred to earlier in this discussion, so that the advertising
I
.
~
r'"
19.1
.
I
I
.
J? e- 20/7 /n
I
/lca~;Gl
ell 171/1;;; c -
-1-0)"1$ ~-t-~,
.
'P/an/7 ,
It-dn '$, Co/1J.
I
I
:/).;;J/l?1ac
~ -t-~
. 7?e- ';<01'7 in
ll....
is correct, with reference to the concentrations of units even though the re-zoning category has been advertised
correctly for this project.
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary.advertising was completed regarding the proposal to re-zone
for Acadia Contractors Ltd. a property with a frontage on the westerly side of Forest City Street opposite the
property at 35-37 Forest City Street and with a frontage opening onto Pleasant City Street, to permit the erection
of one 12-unit three-storey walk-up apartment building. He stated that no written objections were received
regarding this rezoning. No person was present to speak either for or against this proposed re-zoning.
Councillor Cave advised that he had received a lot of calls from people regarding this proposed re-
zoning, although the Planning Advisory Committee letter of November 28th, 1975 says that the Committee's recom-
mendation for this rezoning is based largely on the generally favourable reception to the proposal by the people
in the immediate area and that there was one objection and several people had concerns which could be alleviated
by the conditions on the re-zoning. He therefore proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that this matter be
laid on the table, because the Council will have all kinds of expressions of opposition to this proposed re-
zoning.
Mr. Gerald LeBlanc of Acadia Contractors Ltd. advised that the company appeared before the Planning
Advisory Committee regarding this re-zoning which was advertised at the time, and the company canvassed the area
and had no objections from the adjoining property owners to this apartment building. He stated that the company
is aware of the three conditions set forth in the November 28th letter to Council from the Planning Advisory
Committee regarding this re-zoning, and the company has accepted the conditions and has agreed to them (the
street widening, the sidewalk, the privacy fence, and these different things) - the company discussed the widening
.of Forest City Street with the Works commission and has agreed to put in sidewalks to meet their requirements and
standards for this 12-unit apartment building - the street in question is being widened by the company in front
of the building in accordance with the plan which will be given to it by the Works commission - this matter was
before the Planning Advisory Committee and the company has agreed to put the sidewalks in front of the building -
the 160 feet that the company has agreed to widen on Forest City Street takes up almost the whole length of the
street.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning a property with a frontage of
approximately 160 feet on the westerly side of Forest City Street opposite the property at 35-37 Forest City
Street and with a 30-foot frontage opening onto Pleasant City Street, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential
district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a first time.
Councillor Cave voted "nay" to the above motion.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning a property with a frontage of
approximately 160 feet on the westerly side of Forest City Street opposite the property at 35-37 Forest City
Street;;and:with a 30-foot frontage opening onto Pleasant City Street, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential
district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a second time.
Councillor Cave voted "nay" to the above motion.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
November 28th, 1975, recommending that the area indicated on the submitted plan be re-zoned.for Acadia Cont-
ractors Ltd. from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" Multiple Residential classification subject to
a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act that (1) Forest City Street be widened and a sidewalk
added to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering and Works Department, (2) a privacy fence be erected along
the northern and southern boundaries of the property, (3) there be no access off Pleasant City Street -- all in
accordance with the plot plan of the development which is being filed with the Common Clerk; and advising that,
presumably, the last point would involve the erection and maintenance of a permanent fence or some similar
construction; and that the City not permit access to Pleasant City Street; and further advising that Acadia
Contractors Ltd. applied to Council for the re-zoning of a parcel which is made up of two parts - one part has a
frontage of 160 feet on Forest City Street and a depth of 100 feet - the other has a frontage of 30 feet on
Pleasant City Street and a depth of 100 feet - and Acadia Contractors Ltd. propose to erect a 12-unit apartment
building consisting of 11 two-bedroom units and one bachelor unit, and the building would be brick veneered; and
further advising that the property lies in a two-family zone and is surrounded by such zoning - front and rear
yard variances are also required - the Committee's approval or recommendation would of course, clear the minor
front and rear yard variances which are required; and stating that the Committee's recommendation is based
largely on the generally favourable reception to the proposal by the people in the immediate area - there was one
objection and several people had concerns which could be alleviated by the conditions on the re-zoning -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
The Common Clerk advised that, with regard to the proposed re-zoning for Dalmac Limited, of property on
the easterly side of City Line known as 460 City Line, to permit the erection of one 12-unit apartment building,
advertising took place, and no written objections were received. It was noted that no person was present to
offer comment with regard to this proposed re~zoning.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the property on the easterly side
of City Line known as 460 City Line next to the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family
Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
192
~
/fe-zo J?/hff
.JJOi/J?7OlC /Td.
?4nn. 4tL (//3,
CoM rn,
$r-reer
t?/p~ /h.f'
,{oNe// Sr.
~j/~hore Ifd.
S~I'~
e~5/n~
/oU/e// $7f;
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the property on the
easterly side of City Line known as 460 City Line next to the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks, from "R-2"
One- and 'l'wo-Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a second time.
.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
with reference to the application of Dalmac Ltd. for the rezoning of a triangular lot of land at 460 City
Line, situated on the eastern side of City Line at the intersection with the Railway, from "R_211 to "RM_lll
classification, advising that this company proposes to erect a twelve-unit apartment building (eleven 2-
bedroom and one bachelor unit) and that the timing of development is a December 1975 start with completion
in the spring of 1976 and the building now on the property would be demolished to make way for the new
building - and recommending that the area so indicated on the submitted plan be re-zoned from "R_2" One-
and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" Multiple Residential classification -- be received and filed.
I
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was completed for the proposed stopping
up and closing of portions of Lowell Street and Bayshore Road, and that there had been no written objections
received in this regard. It was noted that no person was present to speak either for or against this
proposed street closing, as noted.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of
Section 187 of the j\lunicipalities Act, R.S.N.B., 1973" with respect to the closing of the following
highways:-
.
Lowell Street - That portion of the existing Lowell Street commencing at its intersection with Bayshore
Road and proceeding eastwardly a distance of approximately 650 feet or to a point on its northerly side
having N. B. co-ordinates of E. 1,110,892.40; N. 544,109.31, for its entire width being approximately 25
feet; also, that portion of the right-of-way of Lowell Street having a width of 25 feet more or less and
lying south of the existing road, running to the easterly sideline of Bayshore Road, being unused as a
road and forming part of the Canadian Pacific Railway rail yard;
Bayshore Road - That portion of Bayshore Road for its entire width of 65.32 feet commencing approximately
30 feet south of the existing Lowell Street or at a point on its eastern boundary having N. B. co-ordinates
of E. 1,110,327.29; .N. 543,970.83 and on its western boundary having co-ordinates of E. 1,110,261.99; N.
543,988.94, proceeding thence southward approximately 893 feet to its termination at the shore of the .Bay
of Fundy, being unused as a road and forming part of the Canadian Pacific Railway rail yard -- be read a
first time.
I
Councillor Green sought assurance, as follows:- that the 650-foot closure of Lowell Street will
not preclude the citizens from gaining access to the City arena in that area by means of Woodville Road
and Beaconsfield Avenue - that is, they will be able to encroach on part of the new area of the arena area
in order to come in and go around that area without going through Beaconsfield Crescent. He asked if
these points are covered by the recommendation for this street closing. In reply, Mr. Zides stated that
he knows very little about this street.closing item; he is assuming, however, that what Councillor Green
is saying is that even though this portion of Lowell Street is closed out the City could still make it
available for passage. Councillor Green recalled that at the meeting of the Land Committee at which this
street closing was discussed, he impressed upon the Land Committee members that there are times when it is
not possible to get up Lowell Street due to a storm, and so on, and that at times that area has been
neglected as far as ploughing of snow and salting is concerned, and some of the residents are concerned .
that they would not have access to get down and come up Lowell Street, going in a southerly direction -
easterly, you can come down Beaconsfield Avenue or Woodville Road and swing to the left with no problem in
stormy weather; however, he was assured in the Land Committee that the residents would be able, through
the City providing a new road, swinging further to the left facing the coast, to get in to the arena
without going through Beaconsfield Crescent, and also to get access to Lowell Street. He stated he wants
to make sure that this arrangement is not left out. Councillor Davis stated that he thinks the solution
to this problem was that the arena parking lot will be situated in such a way that it will be a vast
improvement over the present Lowell Street that is being closed - that is a very narrow road and it has
quite a grade - it will be taken into the parking lot and the opening to the parking lot will be shifted I
down so that, in fact, there will bea better access to that Lowell Street that needs this access, than we
presently have. He added that there is quite a grade coming up the other way so that on slippery days,
the people on Lowell Street have a hard time going in the westerly directions - so this really means they
are going to have a road about 100 feet wide instead of 30 feet wide. He added that we will have to watch
this matter. Mr. Zides stated that Mr. Nicolle has told him in this regard that there is no problem in
meeting the outline as explained by Councillor Davis. Councillor Davis advised that the Canadian Pacific
Railway has co-operated with us in every respect, so that this property will be very nice.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Stopping Up I
and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 187 of the Munici-
palities Act, R.S.N.B., 1973".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by'Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of
Section 187.of the Municipalities Act, R.S.N .B., 1973" with respect to the closing of the following highways:-
Lowell Street - That portion of the existing Lowell Street commencing at its intersection with Bayshore .
Road and proceeding eastwardly a distance of approximately 650 feet or to a point on its northerly side
having N. B. co-ordinates of E: 1,110,892.40; N. 544,109.31, for its entire width being approximately 25
feet; also, that portion of the right-of-way of Lowell Street having a width of 25 feet more or less and
lying south of the existing road, running to the easterly sideline of Bayshore Road, being unused as a
road and forming part of the Canadian Pacific Railway rail yard;
~
~
19:3
51-reel-
. do~/)7~
23a~$,JtJl'
Rd',
I
I
l?e-20J7/h
. SC'ho/CeJ?
;f'derj?r/se.
/t-d.
/.Y17f/}, A4Sa
I
.
I
l7?cdl7o/ J,
&3///;5
.:zJenh/s
{j,rm/i!?Y'
.
.....
Bayshore Road - That portion of Bayshore Road.for its entire width of 65.32 feet commencing approximately 30
feet south of the existing Lowell Street or at a point on its eastern boundary having N. B. co-ordinates of E.
1,110,327.29; N. 543,970. 83 and on its western boundary having co-ordinates of E. 1,110,261;99; N. 543,988.94,
proceeding thence southward approximately 893 feet to its termination at the shore of the Bay of Fundy, being
unused as a road and forming part of the Canadian Pacific Railway rail yard -- be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Stopping Up and
Closing of Highways in The City. of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 187 of the Municipalities Act,
R.S.N.B., 1973".
Councillor Higgins noted that at its last meeting the Council passed a motion to allow the solicitor
(either Mr. Lynn A. Nason or Mr. Douglas Evans) to make a representation at this meeting of Council on behalf of
Scholten Enterprises Ltd. with reference to the company's proposed re-zoning at 770 Bay Street (to permit the
construction of a local grocery store and gas bar thereon). He noted that Mr. Rodney J. Gillis, the solicitor
for I~. Dennis Cormier, who has submitted a letter for this meeting of Council asking that he be permitted to
appear before Council in the same re-zoning matter, and stated he thinks it is only fair that possibly Mr.
Gillis representing Mr. Cormier On the other side of the matter, should be given the same opportunity. He
stressed that this is not a public hearing of the proposed re-zoning as that public hearing was held on November
10th last, and he thinks it is only fair that both lawyers present their cases and let it stand at that because
he thinks it would be unfair for those who, over the years, have either missed public hearing or have been
turned down at public hearings and were not given a chance to be heard again - he stressed that this particular
appearance is a courtesy that is being given by the Council and he hopes it does not turn into a cliff-hanging
type of battle when it is not even a public hearing; he would like to hear from both solicitors as a common
courtesy, and let the Council make the decision based on the information it receives.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the same courtesy be extended to Mr. Rodney J. Gillis as was
extended to either Mr. Nason or Mr. Evens in making a presentation regarding the above named proposed re-zoning,
and that this is not a public hearing in the matter, and that the said sollcitors be asked to keep that point
into consideration.
14r. Lynn A. Nason, Barrister, representing Scholten Enterprises Ltd., spoke further to the brief
submitted by him, dated December 5th, 1975, which thanks the Council for the courtesy extended by Council in
allowing him to present his client's submission concerning the said proposed re-zoning, and which submits the
following documents for the Council's perusal which may assist the Council in arriving at a decision favourable
to his client in this matter:- (1) letter from Carl E. Howe, Councillor for the City of Fredericton, recommend-
ing Scholten's 8-10 grocery stores; (2) letter from the Clerk of the Village of Quispamsis sho~ing Scholten's 8-
10 to be an asset to that community; (3) a letter supporting Scholten's 8-10 stores from the Town Clerk of the
Town. of Oromocto; (4) petition signed by interested persons in the area of 770 Bay Street, supporting the
establishment of retail gas outlet and grocery store ~ith up to three apartments; (5) petition signed. by roughly
180 interested persons in the area of 770 Bay Street, supporting the establishment of a retail gas outlet with a
retail grocery outlet; (6) pictures of Scholten's 8-10 store from various vantage points inside and out, which
are pictures of a store without apartments; (7) a sketch of th~ area where a Scholten store is proposed, .which
sets out distances to adjoining properties, et cetera; (8) nine letters from interested citizens in this area
asking that his client's store be permitted; (9) copy of the lot plan showing the proposed location of the store
on the lot; (10) copy of a letter from Environment Ne~ Brunswick to Mr. Alexander Scholten of Scholten Properties
Ltd. stating that it does not appear that a stream alteration permit is required before the lot at 770 Bay
Street is filled. He noted that his client has been before the Planning Advisory Committee twice in this matter
and that the Council has before it two recommendations against re-zoning of this property; and with regard to
the Committee's recommendations and its reasons against the rezoning, he stated he wished to make the following
comments: the Committee states it believes this is a poor location for this type of store and it also believes
that the traffic in this area is too congested for a store - he pointed out that the speed limit in this area is
30 m.p.h. and the area where the store is proposed is the longest straight stretch on Bay Street and the location
of the store directly across from the Gault Road is also another problem with the Committee felt was insurmountable
he stated that the statistics from the Saint John Police Department point out that there have only been three
accidents at tnis Location during 1975 out of a total of 2,400 for the City of Saint John, so the accident rate
in this area appears to be fairly low; also, the Committee stated it did not believe that there was enough new
construction or enough customers in the area to support this store - he stated that his client has made a study
of this area and believes that the store would be a viable operation and that there would be enough traffic
travelling on Bay Street up past this location, to Morna, Acamac and other areas, that would support a corner
grocery store of this type. He stated that his client has also received petitions from people in this area
supporting it and at least thirteen citizens were present at this meeting of Council in support of the rezoning
application, and that, also, there have been numerous letters and telephone calls to various City bodies sup-
porting the application. The Mayor noted that the property in question is in an area that floods frequently in
the spring. 14r. Nason replied that is correct, and his client has had a study done by A. D. I. Limited which
shows the amount of fill that is required and the type of retaining wall necessary to protect the store location
from the river. The Mayor asked if Mr. Nason has heard the rumour that there may be a larger store built in
another area not too far from this location. Mr. Nason replied that he understands there may be a store built
to support another sub-division, or a new sub-division going in that area.
Councillor Davis noted that this courtesy was given because Mr. Nason said there was new evidence, new
facts, and he asked if the Council has heard any new facts in this presentation. Councillor Higgins recalled
that when 14r. Nason advised the Council there was new information, the Council referred the re-zoning matter
ack to the Planning Advisory Committee, and even with this new information before the Committee,. the letter
came back from Mr. Nason again, and the Council was asked to defer a decision until he had a chance to speak.
Mr. Rodney J. Gillis thanked the Council for the courtesy extended to him in permitting him to make
his presentation on behalf of l~. Cormier. He stated that Mr. Cormier owns and operates a store similar to the
store Scholten Enterprises Ltd. proposes to operate, his client's store being just up the road from 770 Bay
treet. He pointed out that the Council has a petition that his client obtained, and added that he has present
t this meeting representatives who are people from the area and people in the gaSOline industry, including
eople who live adjacent to the 770 Bay Street property. He stated he would that, for the following reasons,
his re-zoning application should be rejected:- firstly, regarding the location at the intersection of the Gault
oad - he thinks that the figure of 2,400 accidents mentioned by Mr. Nason for the 8-month period of 1975 in the
ity of Saint John is probably closer to 1,000 accidents for that period in this city - but even so, it is his
submission that location in this area directly across from the Gault Road is not advantageous to the flow of
raffic and, indeed, it is a very dangerous intersection - if those three accidents that occurred in the period
f eleven months had been fatal accidents there would have been three deaths there - the road is extremely
arrow and even with a low speed limit and a straight stretch right at this intersection there are still a great
any accidents; secondly, he would submit that the area is adequately served - and this is where he is making
is representations on behalf of his client - his store is located six-tenths of a mile from where this operation
.s intended to be constructed - his client is a young man and put virtually every cent he has into his store
hich is what you would call a corner store with gas pumps outside - he does not have the resources Scholtens
ould have - he does not have stores in Fredericton or other communities - it is Mr. Gillis' understanding that
194
~
J? e-;<: 0 17/ hf/
$c'/o/t'-e n
E/7ferj?ri.ses
'/-t-d.
1?et:'/1, ."t %rA-s
/Jdt//s, :BL
-<'jht-in~' o'P
/!Jt?/ntll"/al
Held bse-
}
bPlI/~ .5o-#k/t
/i eld
t!/m,:;;1J/c &ffl;h
$.:7:11 ect>ea!ion
.:J)~f/ e/l:>? /'77 e/7r
C'&?h7h7,
the applicant in these areas sells their gas at a reduced rate to encourage business in the store - his
client could not afford to do that and still stay in business ~ he needs every cent that he can get - he
believes that more competition in the area would force his client out of business - Sobey's, Dominion, .
Stores, and all these other supermarkets are within a mile or so away from his client's store - there are
gas stations within a few miles that adequately serve the area, and it is his submission that there is no
need for another gas pump outlet. Mr. Gillis submitted that the Planning Advisory Committee considered
this re-zoning application twice and his client presented his case to the Committee once, and the second
time a number of residents in the area presented their caseS - the Committee refused the application
twice - we are here approaching Council to again refuse it, but the applicant has not satisfied the said
Committee -- it is his submission that the Committee has gone into the evidence much more than he could
present at this meeting, although he could call all the people from the area that are against it -- and
in view of that, he believes the Council should turn the application down. He noted that Mr. Landry from I
the Maritime Retail Gasoline Dealers Association was present at this meeting, and he gathers that Mr.
Landry is against the re-zoning application for the same reason Mr. Cormier is against it as regards the
operation of more service station outlets when there is no demand, it is not going to provide any facilities, .
there is no mechanic,. no work-bays - he suggested that possibly Mr. Landry could enlighten the Council to
a greater extent as to the need of a gas bar as such located on this extremely narrow road. It was the
concensus of opinion among the Council members that the Council has the decision.and has the background
in the matter through hearing from both sides during these two courtesy appearances. Councillor Davis
felt that if this re-zoning is approved it does not automatically give Scholten's permission to sell
gasoline - he felt that is an entirely separate thing, in certain parts of the city. Mr. Zides was asked I
to clarify whether the re-zoning means that the permission to Scholten Enterprises Ltd. to sell gasoline
is automatic, or would it have to be the subject of a separate application, and he stated that he takes
it that when.you are considering the re-zoning application you should also consider the fact that they
are mentioning the fact that they want the gas pumps there.
The Mayor noted that the Council will render a decision, later in the meeting.
Consideration was given to a letter from the Chairman of the Recreation and Parks Advisory
Board, Councillor Gould, advising that the Board met on December 2nd last with representatives .of the
Saint John Recreation Development Committee to consider the proposal, submitted with the letter, for
lighting the baseball and softball facilities at Memorial Field in Saint John West, and that the Board
reviewed the project in detail with staff and recommends the adoption of the report with the recommend-
ations contained therein, and that the Board recognizes the time and effort required to put this proposal
together beginning back in the summer following approval of the budget by Council on July 21st, 1975, and
the work yet to be done to make the project a reality. The letter notes that this is a unique effort on
behalf of sport and in these times of restraint, community effort to effect considerable savings in
worthy projects, should be supported, and that the amount of $50,000.00 being required falls within this
category.
.
At this time, Mr. William J. McCarroll, Chairman of the above named Saint John Recreation
Development Committee, presented the Committee's proposal, for the Council's consideration and support,
to use the allocation of $50,000.00 in the City's 1975 Capital Works Programme of the Recreation and
Parks Department for lighting of the baseball-softball facilities at Memorial Field, Saint John West, in
accordance with the summary and recommendation contained in the said proposal. Mr. McCarroll advised
that the Committee was set up some months ago in response to a need in the community for a lighted
baseball-softball facility and the Committee met with a maximum allowable amount to deal with and arrived
at a final proposal which is included in the report submitted.
I
The Council members spoke in commendation of the Committee for its efforts in promoting this
proposed project. During ensuing discussion, and in response to questions put by various Council members,
l~. McCarroll provided the following information:- the total cost of the items recommended for purchase
(lighting standards and wiring) is approximately $43,000.00 and the Committee is confident that the
project can be completed within the $50,000.00 that has been allocated in the above named Capital Works
Programme of the City; with regard to whether or not the proposed number of lighting standards is suf-
ficient to afford the desired level of lighting, the Committee has had the benefit of the services of Mr.
John Campbell, who is an expert in this field, and this question has been looked into thoroughly - the
Committee was working towards a lighting power of 30 and 20 which is an acceptable limit and which the
Committee feels is capable of handling any type of competition on any level up to and including inter~
national tournaments - the lighting that is planned in this field will satisfy the requirements for this
type of competition; with regard to parking in the greater Memorial Field area, there is presently
available the rink parking lot and the area behind the rink with the tennis court, and there is a lot of
space in the general area on both sides of the street and the Committee had in mind that parking could be
developed - perhaps not just where it is already developed, but to carry it a little bit further; with
regard to the question of whether the approximately four lots along Dexter Drive that are on the ball
park would be used for parking, and the concern of residents there that those lots not be used for
parking in this residential area as it would create a problem (noise of cars and extra traffic), it is
not the intent of the Committee to do anything of this nature that would interfere with the enjoyment of
the residents of their property, and the Committee certainly has no intent to turn any area into a
parking lot - the Committee set up its report. based on the facilities that are there, not anything the
Corrrmittee hopes to put in there; with regard to the question as to whether a problem would be created for
residents of the area by the lighting at this Memorial Field being on late at night, this lighting being
very bright - and whether this lighting would be on later than midnight, the Committee could not anticipate
these lights being on later than midnight; the Committee's report lists by way of copies of letters some
of the people from whom it has received commitments - Mr. Norman Francis has committed assistance to the
Committee in the lighting and wiring side of the project, the Power Commission of the City of Saint John
has contributed a great many things and a number of the Commission's supplies at cost, and, also, the
Committee hopes to have the labour, as well - Mr. Harry Stephenson, the manager of the Saint John Dodgers
and l~. Vie Fitzgerald, the manager of the Lancaster Expos, are both going to supply labour through the
various teams with which they are involved - Messrs. Charles O'Brien, Wayne McLellan and Doug Foster have
indicated their support and that they will have the backing of the softball people - in addition to this,.
there are other people in the city who have committed themselves to helping the Committee carry out the
suggestions in the proposal - however, for one reason or another, some of the people are not in the city
and the Committee was. not able to get the letter and affix it to its report, but there have been verbal
con@itments to ~ssist - Mr. Ryan has agreed verbally to assist the Committee with the trenching, digging,
and so on - again, the Committee has verbal commitments from many citizens with smaller pieces of equip-
ent who are going to bring their backhoes over, and so on.
.
I
I
Councillor Davis raised the question that the Committee is looking for 30-foot candles in the
infield and 20-foot candles in the outfield and the Committee has a low bid of 85-1500 watt fixtures, but
in its quotation Westinghouse says the Committee needs 98-1500 watt units to build up to 30-foot candles ~
and 20-foot candles, and whether Mr. Campbell is satisfied that 84 is sufficient when the others quote on
98 at a slightly lower unit price, and if anyone checked out on whether the Committee will get the proper
delivery. In reply, Mr. McCarroll stated that the Committee was assured that it would get the full
ighting power - in fact, there is a letter from Mr. Robinson who is a resident of the city - and, again,
e thinks that is an important consideration, as well - and Mr. Robinson did ensure that the lighting
~
r'
195
.
I
I $:T'1?eCJ1.
:J)etlel am.
,/ I~/;I-/~
!J1emo/, j<>J I
~/el //,
6a.se6<7l//~
.50#661//
-/-'/eld
I ?e/71J'f!./
cMt"t?rv,e:a
6la5t:?/ine I
oils
.
that the Committee requires will exceed the 30-foot candles that we need in the beginning and that the figure of
30-20 that he has quoted is a maintained lighting over a number of years - this is the type of guarantee he has
given the Committee; he knows that the other proposal suggests that we need more lights but Mr. Robinson from
the company with whom the Committee hopes to deal has definitely said and guaranteed that we will receive the
30-foot and 20-foot candles. Councillor Davis .pointed out that conditions are not always one hundred per cent
and if you have a slightly foggy situation you may just cut it down enough so that it is uncomfortable. He
added that he is sure the Council looks favourably upon the proposal, and it is very nice that there have been a
lot of volunteers on the job and a lot of the work is going to be done at cost, but he knows that the Council is
sincere in this matter, and if the 98 is going to do the job and the 84 is not, he feels that the Committee may
as well expend the other $2,000.00 and have a real good job. Mr. McCarroll stated that the Committee was
concerned when it saw the difference in the figures. Mr. John Campbell, a member of the said Committee, advised
that the question raised by Councillor Davis was brought up in the Committee with all three proposals, and the
discrepancy in the total number of fixtures was noted and it was for that exact reason the Committee went back
to Mr. Robinson of Robinson Carruthers - since he had the lower price the Committee asked for this guarantee _
Mr. Robinson is an engineer who specializes in lighting and has done several lighting sports fields in the
Maritimes of very high quality and is doing the lighting for the 1977 Canada Games in Newfoundland, and it is
based on his experience that he issued this guarantee over his own name, so the Committee accepted that under
good faith.
The
there, to the
lives on the
time because
be changed.
them, also.
Mayor asked: where the back-stop is, near Greendale Crescent, would it be possible to move it from
other side where it faces on the Dever Road, in compliance with the request made by a citizen who
corner. In reply, Mr. McCarroll stated it would not be possible to shift the back-stop at this
the field has been re-sodded and the back-stop is fitted into place now and there is no way it can
The Mayor noted that residents are also concerned about parking in the area and a ball going over
Mr. McCarroll replied that what they have in mind is they intend to use the rink parking space.
Councillor A. Vincent asked how the Committee came up with its proposal without hiring a consultant.
j~. McCarroll replied that it was very fortunate to have Mr. Campbell working on the Committee, who provided his
time and any questions of a technical nature involving lighting and wiring that the Committee had, Mr. Campbell
was there to answer these; the Committee also went to the various parks throughout the Maritimes (Truro, Charlott_i
town, Moncton, Marysville) and discussed the matters with the people there, who went through the same thing
there that the Committee is going through, now, and drew on the expertise that these people had, as well. While
expressing his support of the proposal, Councillor A. Vincent stated he hopes that $50,000.00 will do the job,
and added that as far as he is concerned that if the Committee finds the project wanting another $5,000.00 he
would rather the Committee come back to Council before the job is completed, and he will support it - but do not
come back, afterwards. In response to this question, Mr. McCarroll advised that he has been assured by Mr.
Campbell, who has been assured by Mr. Robinson, who is the engineer who has put his guarantee to this project,
that if, in effect, there are any problems with it whatsoever, that they will provide any extras, free of cost _
in other words, they are guaranteeing the job for the prices that they have given the Committee.
The Mayor thanked the Committee for its presentation and advised that the Council would be making a
decision in the matter, later in the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the. City Manager and the Purchasing Agent
in the summary of bids submitted by the City Manager's letter of December 4th, 1975, tenders for the supply of
gasoline and oils for the period January 1st, 1976 to April 30th, 1977 to the City of Saint John, the lowest
bids received, as shown on the said summary, be accepted.
Councillor Kipping asked why the City is buying so much high-test, rather than regular, gasoline, and
noted there would be a fair saving in purchasing the regular gaSOline, of about $19,000.00 according to his
calculation. He stated that he did not know that most of our vehicles used high-test gasoline, these days. Mr.
Barfoot replied that most of the City's vehicles have been using this high-test gasoline for some time. Councillor
Kipping asked, why; and added that it is his understanding that vehicles are made mostly for regular gasoline,
these days. Mr. MacKinnon advised that the majority of the City's equipment is heavy equipment, of large
capacity - the City has very few small vehicles that would use the regular gasoline and the City finds that
converting gasoline - for example, in a large car (such as a Chrysler or Buick-type) in most cases it is advisable
to use the high-test - and in the City's case most of its equipment is large - that is the only response he can
give to the question; all the City trucks use high-test. Councillor Kipping asked if it is recommended by the
manufacturers that high-test gasoline be used for the heavy vehicles. Mr. MacKinnon stated, that, specifically,
he cannot reply to that question.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
~, Seconded by Councillor Higgins
ne-;{On/n. RESOLVED that as a result of the following three important factors
~e~t?/~e)1 brought to the attention of the Common Council, namely:- (1) the location, (2) the adequately served area, and
~ ~ ,(3) the fact that the Planning Advisory Committee rejected the application on two occasions, the application of
1",17 elJ7rlfe.. Scholten Enterprises Ltd. for the rezoning of the property situate at 770 Bay Street from "RS-2" One- and Two-
~:t-a. Family Suburban Residential district to "B_2" General Business district to permit the construction of a local
grocery store and gas bar, be denied.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
--- RESOLVED that with regard to the proposal submitted by the Saint John
~.I, ~E?t"~ Recreation Development Committee in a report, dated December 1st, 1975, addressed to Councillor Kenneth Gould,
I :J)et/I!?/ fPon, Chairman of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board, which Councillor Gould as Chairman of the said Board has
~ 17L. / directed to Council, for lighting of the baseball and softball facilities at Memorial Field in Saint John West,
een ~ ~I1YJ off the Dever Road, the following recommendations that are contained in the said report be adopted, namely:- (1)
/1"1//5, ~- that authority be given for the purchase of the lighting fixtures from H. M. Hopper Co. Ltd. as per low bid from
~/~J.f~//7~ the company dated November 14th, 1975; (2) that the lighting standards and wiring be purchased through the Power
;r,re~t?)wle~ Commission of the City of Saint John as outlined in the Commission's letter dated December 2nd, 1975; (3) that
'-/~~/~eS costs of these items be charged against the $50,000.00 that has been alloted in the City's 1975 Capital Works
r-I ~~ rogramme in the appropriate capital budget account - the total cost of these items recommended for purchase
~;?,7.~j9~~ eing approximately $43,000.00; (4) the Committee is confident, at this point, that the lighting project can be
C'tl,~~p{_ completed within the amount of $50,000.00 presently. committed with community support noted in the Committee's
eport of December 1st, 1975, and notes that such support includes major contributions in the in the following
... }?C>UV61r ~~'" areas: (a) volunteer unskilled and semi-skilled labour (players, coaches, and other interested citizens), (b)
~~ y'~~J' donation of equipment, operators, and materials required to carry necessary trenching and back-filling, (c)
onation of equipment required for erection of standards, (d) donation of technical personnel such as electricians,
~~e~ 0 provide the installation of electrical equipment and materials:
II...
AI1D FURTHER that the said report, which advises that the Committee commits itself to gladly serve to
196
~
/"/lier 2y-
0/ hJ'{? n d Y17 e n-t-
~'i!f St?I/c/ftlr
Sj7/'tt~e ~lre
I1der 11l1e
tfl4n /f./I///
;J1urJ1;:l!f S ,{1171o.
1?e/east? t? ~
Ti'0Jd.-~ wa!j
M@, II~, f!o~,
C;i-y Sole/lor
#rbye tJn51rue
,1-6- ~.
JJelJ1o//~/()n
losses
/~ .7Joc/r S-t-,
t/rbdlJ? ~Q.I16'{#01
{7/!1/ /1 j'r.
(Joun. {1,ve
1l.e-;;?onln5
IJ/ed', Sf?t:~",
p:?JJ/-Ien-t-/Clry
.L n-t~ri?d5
pt/sd'/osed
oversee the fulfilment of this project and possibly other Recreational developments for the City in time
to come, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Prohibiting the Throwing or Depositing of Litter on Streets in The City of Saint John", be read a third
time and enac~ed and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
.
Councillor MacGowan advised that she does not think that "litter" covers gravel, but along
Chesley Drive. this evening she noted that there is a disgraceful amount of gravel on this street and that
it would cost the City a lot. more than $50.00 (the amount of the maximum fine in the above Litter By-Law I.
amendment) to clean it up, she felt. She stated that she hopes that the Police Department will enforce
the Litter By-Law as far as the gravel is concerned, too, off trucks.
'J'he by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend'a By-Law Prohibiting the Throwing or Depositing of
Litter on Streets in The City of Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above
resolution.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, with regard to
a Release of Right-of-Way that has been submitted to the City for execution in respect to part of an
access to the waterline right-of-way from Spruce Lake to Church Avenue, advising that according to the
City's Engineering and Works Department the right-of-way shown in red on the submitted plan which was
intended for use as an access road to the pipeline, is not required for this purpose - that this Release
of Right-of-Way is in respect to an access way to the waterline over the adjoining properties of Allan R.
Hill and Murray S. Linton, which access way was acquired by the City'in 1898 - that in 1953, a new access
way to the waterline was acquired from Mr. Hill over what is known as Stewart Street, in exchange for
which the City released to Mr. Hill its interest in part of the right-of-way originally acquired on Mr.
Hill's property, thus leaving the remaining portion of the original right-of-way physically inaccessible -
that since the land over which this remaining and unused right-of-way is now required by New Brunswick
Housing Corporation, the solicitor on behalf of Murray S. Linton is requesting execution of a Release -
that the City Solicitor has examined the correspondence and after discussion with the City Manager and
the Engineering Department, he recommends that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the
necessary Release form subject to such documentation being approved by the City Solicitor -- be received
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, with regard to
the recommendation made by the City Manager to Common Council on October 20th last that payment of
$2,000.00 be made to Grove Construction Limited for losses "suffered by the Company when it was unable to
continue removing salvage under its contract to demolish the property known as 15 Dock Street previously
owned by E. S. Stephenson & Co. Ltd." and the information from the City Manager to Council that the Urban
Renewal Co-Ordinating Committee have already granted their approval of the payment, advising that the
matter was referred to the City Solicitor in that it was believed that part of the delay in demolishing
the building surrounded the vacating of the premises by a tenant - advising that he has examined the
correspondence and it is his opinion that any outstanding issues between the City and the former tenant
of the building have been resolved, and noting that the City Manager's letter of October 14th, 1975 to
Council in recommending the payment of $2,000.00, stated, among other things, "Unfortunately, one of the
tenants was delayed in relocating and the tenant's legal representative was reportedly preparing lawsuit
against the City for damages to his client's business and stock. It, therefore, seemed prudent to the
City to request the contractor to cease working in the buildings until this problem had been resolved."
and advising that in view of the foregoing comments of the City Manager, and what he has previously
stated, it is his opinion that the recommendation by the City Manager is in order -- be received and
filed and payment of the said $2,000.00 be approved, as requested in the City Manager's letter of October
14th, 1975 to the Common Council.
At this time, copies of a letter from Councillor Cave were distributed to the Council members.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above named letter from Councillor Cave be placed
on the agenda of this meeting, at this time.
Councillor Cave read his letter
advisor, Councillor Cave having disclosed
issue. Councillor Cave withdrew from the
to the meeting.
his interest in
meeting at this.
The Mayor noted that, according to the legal
this matter, is not prevented from voting on an
time.
Op motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor Cave, dated December
8th, 1975, advising that the Common Council presently has before it correspondence from the Federal
Public Works of Canada requesting .the Common Council to take the necessary steps to re-zone a parcel of
land in West Saint John to permit a medium security penal institution, and that he understands the Public
Works of Canada are also negotiating with the City to purchase this parcel of land; and further advising
that in the event that the said Federal Department of Public Works and the City do not reach a satis-
factory settlement with respect to the acquisition of the land, he, in his capacity as a real estate
agent, might become involved with the said Public Works with respect to an alternative site; and noting
that a regulation passed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council and contained in 67-10 states, "Where a
member of a Council of a municipality has an interest with any person having dealings with the munici-
pality, he shall forthwith disclose his interests in writing to the Council.", and that in view of the
foregoing and the cited regulation, his interest in this matter is hereby disclosed -- be received and
filed.
Councillor Cave re-entered the nleeting at the request of the Mayor, to answer the following
question that is put by Councillor A. Vincent: is this above mentioned letter from Councillor Cave
indicating that the. present parcel of land, Councillor Cave has no interest in. Councillor Cave replied
that he has no interest in the present land; the land to which his letter refers is a separate piece of
land, altogether. -He added that his statement in his letter explains clearly that if this land is not
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....1
"...
.
I {i/I
St?"I!c/'-/or
'R-e-7.M!h.
refut!'$-t-
V'/{//Jt?r 0
j?ro"Po>r6 !f
l;1Jetl.geC'ul',
j?o6'l7/'l-ed/
.7Jep/-, 1Ju-.6,
IYpr! 5
XIJI?/ntj
:E3!:f- /;RJV'
01 h7 (?l7d mJ!,
. P/a/Jl7, /Jdv/
C7Rh7)n,
I
.
I
I
197
approved and the City turns it down - or it is turned down - then, he may be interested in selling the Federal
Government a parcel of land, and, therefore, he cannot vote. He stated that he is told, according to the
Municipalities Act, regardless of the letter which he has already submitted, that he can vote - he is not going
to vote because he does not think it is fair - he added that the legislation must be changed. He explained that
he does not think it is fair for him to vote on the issue of the City parcel of land becuase if he voted against
that land he could think to himself that if the City land was turned down he could sell his parcel of land. The
Council members accepted this explanation.
Councillor Cave withdrew from the meeting.
Read a letter from the City Solicitor with reference to the application received at the December 1st,
1975 meeting of the Common Council and an application fee of $50.00 payable to the City of Saint John with
respect to the re-zoning of a parcel of land owned by the City adjacent to Green Lake off the Grand Bay By-Pass
in West Saint JOhn, advising that Section 10(4) of the City's Zoning By-Law states "10(4) An application under
subsection (1) requesting the re-zoning of an area of land from one type of zoning district to another shall be
signed by the owner or anyone of the owners, or the authorized agent of one or more of the owners of the.
property which is the subject of the application.", and that the application received by the Council at the said
meeting was not signed for obvious reasons, in that title to the land still vests in the City and thus the
applicant, not being the owner, was not able to sign the application; and advising that while the applicant is
not the owner it does seem reasonable that the correspondence from the Federal Department of Public Works may be
treated by the Council as a request to the Council to amend the Zoning By-Law - and also advising that based
upon such a request, it is his opinion that the Council in treating the matter as a request may now take steps,
if it so wishes, to consider its intention to amend the Zoning By-Law so that a medium security penitentiary
might be permitted on property presently owned by the City, comprising 175 acres more or less, adjacent to Green
Lake off the Grand Bay By-Pass in West Saint John, and refer the matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for
its views and authorize the Common Clerk to carry out the necessary advertising under the Community Planning
Act -- and further advising that, in the meantime, the cheque payable to the City of Saint John which is pre-
sently in possession of the City, ought to be returned to the said Federal Department of Public Works.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the matter of the request made by the Department of Public
Works of Canada that 175 acres, more or less, of land owned by the City of Saint John in the Grand Bay by-pass
area be re-zoned to allow the construction of a medium security penal institution be referred to the Planning
Advisory Committee for its views and that the Common Clerk be authorized to carry out the necessary advertising.
Councillor M. Vincent asked for clarification in this matter. Mr. Rodgers stated he is not saying the
re-zoning cannot be done - he is saying that when the Council did it at its December 1st, 1975 meeting it is
questioned because of the fact that the Council was doing it on the basis of an application from an applicant
who could not sign the application because the applicant was not the owner - on that basis, the Council can
treat it reasonably as a request for the City to take the necessary steps, which is in the form, now, of Coun-
cillor Kipping's motion. He added that he believes that the said motion should include authorization to return
the $50.00 application fee to the Federal Department of Public Works. In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's
query, the Common Clerk advised that at the December 1st, 1975 Council meeting, he was authorized to advertise
providing it met with the legal responsibilities, and the matter has not been advertised, to date.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to know how the City has re-zoned in the past, land that
was owned by other people - and he noted that people go and take an option on a piece of property subject to
having it re-zoned. He stated that he knows of many properties that have been rezoned that was not clearly
owned by the parties developing the land (one such case is that of Brunswick Square, he noted, for the office
tower). Stating that he thinks that the Council is going from the ridiculous to the sublime in this re-zoning
matter, Councillor A. Vincent indicated that cannot support it - and if so, if he could take, say, ten properties,
and pay for the search of the titles, and could prove they have been resold, he asked if the Council would then
guarantee him that the City would re-zone it back, because it was zoned under false pretences, or false infor-
mation. He felt that the Council is getting into difficulties in this matter, and stated that he wants no part
of it. lme. Rodgers stated he does not believe that the Council should get into a discussion on what has been
valid Or invalid in the past - he thinks that the Council should deal with what is before the Council now, and
he noted that he has cited for the Council the section in the Zoning By-Law governing it.
Councillor Kipping stated that the above motion is based upon the fact that the Council is treating
the matter as a request, rather than a formal application, and going ahead and referring the matter, and author-
izing advertising, so that he sees no conflict and contradiction there; the City of Saint John is the Owner of
the property, the City has had a request to re-zone it, the City is advertising its intention to consider the
request, and that is all that is to it - it will not be rezoned, indeed, until the requester has bought the
land.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that the City is.now going to return a $50.00.cheque that came from the
Federal Department of Public Works, and he asked if that means that the City is going to take the responsibility
of paying for the advertising, itself. Mr. Rodgers made affirmative reply, poining out it is because the City
of Saint John is the owner and the Federal Department of Public Works does not have an option on the land or an
agreement to purchase, as he understands it. Councillor A. Vincent stated it was his understanding, from a
motion that the Council passed some months ago, that the Council agreed in principle that the Federal penitent-
iary could go there. In reply, the Mayor and the other Councillors pointed out that the Council motion in
question of August 25th, 1975 states "in the area" regarding a Federal penitentiary being established. Coun-
cillor A. Vincent stated that the point he is making is, that, never before when other people came in here and
wanted to re-zone, including banks, did the Council question the ownership - but now, does it mean that in
regard to every application is he supposed to ask for the deed, and is he entitled to do that. In reply, Mr.
Rodgers stated that his only comment is that every applicant should comply with the law. Councillor A. Vincent
replied that he thinks the City Solicitor should inform the Council about the law, too, at this meeting.
Councillor Green stated that he feels that to build a penal institution in the Green Lake area is
wrong - he has strong feelings on it - therefore, he intends to vote against the motion.
J)epl, ?U/?, Federal
Jfio rfs ( li>>d
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the Council received in writing a request from the Department of
Public Works to re-zone the area. Mr. Rodgers replied that he interprets it as an application.
.
....
Councillor Kipping felt that something has been said here that is not in accordance with the facts.
He stated that the effect of the motion under discussion will in no way mean that the penal institution is going
there - all it means is that it is being advertised that the Council will consider the rezoning of the property
so that it can be sold and that the penal institution might be built there - but there is a whole public hearing
and great, long ordeal, he;.~agines~togo through yet, before this is done - and his making the motion in question
does not imply in any way that he is in favour, or not.in favour, of the thing here - he is just trying to get
the matter brought to a head. Councillor Green stated that, in no way does he want to get mixed up into it,
whatsoever - he does not think it should go there. Councillor MacGowan noted that this is a necessary step
1198
, .
~
-Z)~ 7h~, jRj-s
(Fed!
cA(?t?u.p "..<2
re-~())-;/J?~
/l1e<<:st?car,
'pel7/ie'/?zf/<9~
(J1l/7?m/-rtfee
ff/Ap!e
Sc:7/Q/'1/e$
IVon-~//)n
~;' v/e e/17~/o.r-
~tt )1.11
t//hct?d
$OJ/Glr/es
C/V/e
el7'}'? /t?!fees
7n;;#'c "Y
C't?m,m.
//l?I#J~~ -.
$~ /1m/is
~61!f .sf,
lI1ti/n~~st'e1' II{/. \
before the Council has its public hearing, so the Council has to have it if the Council is going to
conclude it, anywhere. Councillor Kipping noted that the Council first has to solve the problem.
.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green, M. Vincent and A. Vincent
voting "nay".
Councillor Cave re-entered the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the cheque payable to the City of Saint John that was
submitted by the Federal Department of Public Works with the request that re-zoning of the City-owned 175
acres of land, more or less in the Grand Bay by-pass area be carried out to allow the construction of a
medium security penal institution, be returned to the said Department of Public Works.
I
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as fOllows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
I
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, December 1st, 1975, when there were
present Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and
recommendation, namely:-
1.
That long service pay be paid to non-Union employees as follows:-
commencement of fourth year and including seventh year ~ 1% of gross annual earnings;
commencement of eighth year and including eleventh year ~ 1.5% of gross annual earnings;
commencement of twelfth year and including fifteenth year ~ 2% of gross annual earnings;
commencement of sixteenth year and including nineteenth year ~ 2.5% of gross annual earnings;
commencement of twentieth year and beyond ~ 3% of gross annual earnings -
.
with eligible gross annual earning to be limited to $12,750.00 for 1975 and 1976 (this figure based on the
amount paid for 1975 to a first-class fireman).
Saint John, N. B.,
8th December, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that in making a motion in Committee of the Whole in the above
matter, he thought he had said something else regarding the motion, and he would therefore like the matter I
to be tabled for one week until he could speak on the matter.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above report be laid on the table for one week.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors A. Vincent, Green, Parfitt, MacGowan
and Kipping voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Davis, Higgins, Gould, HOdges and M. Vincent
voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent explained that he meant, in the above matter, that he said when this long-
service bonus for civic employees was implemented our civic employees were probably considered as second-
class citizens, but wage-wise they now take the lead, and he had no idea that this long-service earning
was not attached to the seventeen per cent increase, plus some civic. employees, plus five on top of the
seventeen - now, what he is saying is, that he thought he made - he discussed it - and he states it
publicly, that for this year and for next year the rate be treated as first-class firemen ($12,750.00) for
1975 and 1976 and that all parties be notified that it be discontinued and negotiated out of the collective
agreements at the end of 1976. He stated that is what he said in the December 1st, 1975 Committee of the
Whole meeting, and what he thought the Council agreed on, in Committee of the Whole, and he moved that.
Councillor Higgins stated that he moved the Committee of the Whole report in the same light as Councillor
A. Vincent's remarks. He added that he thinks the Council is obligated to do it. Councillor A. Vincent
stated he would like f9r it to be on record that it ceases in two years' time, and he is asking that the
above Committee of the Whole report be amended accordingly.
.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the
recommendation contained therein adopted.
,
Question being taken, Councillor Kipping stated that he thinks that the long-service pay to non-
Union civic employees stems from an out-dated but very present provision in the Union Working Agreements
to which the Council is bound by Council's acceptance of the settlements, and Council now finds that in
order to give approximately equal treatment to all employees, it is necessary to do this. He stated that,
in his opinion, the fundamentals of the settlement were wrong and he continues to vote against them on
that principle.
I
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Higgins, Cave M. Vincent, Hodges and
Davis voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Green, MacGowan, Parfitt, Kipping, Gould and A. Vincent
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that with regard to the letter from the Traffic and Safety
Committee, recommending that the Traffic By-Law be amended to delete the following streets from Schedule
"14" - 40 m.p.h. speed limits:- Bay Street, from Manchester Avenue to South Bay Bridge; Manchester Avenue,
from Manawagonish Road to Bay Street -- and advising that the submitted copy of letters on this subject
.
~
,..
'Pe-t-;i/tJ/? rf!!
. ~t"ed 11m!
:tf~!I .5;f./
/IJal1eA 6' sit?
/lVI?,
C1/e'fZ--?d::
II"":;; -rf'1t! 7'--
SOI-/'d-J: (Z;.,;
C/l-t; Sc.r1i!/-
:1 / zf~r
I
(//V~ - s.:r
Cdh7PUS' /p
1(e/deu/fA
repOJ'1t;
( :OeLf-isch)
. Jfe,Prt
tI;1/13 - s,:T
sfulf t! nls
{!:BC
7(ad/o
I" 17t!1-/#IJI"K
(s~te///~
~tvflJ?,,}'It-aa
FIY/- .>k/'po
Sf/u.-Morh
h>e.
eec
I!/fJ1, a/llf1l~
~atloJ1S
/fl, J! [;lIck
. Ii .;u1,del'S r
ItI e.;d-her
I"ef?t>r-b-s
I knfrj,<I/tIa
.2)~,
~l1oWef' lee
et?nfh// /
m:;;;l1u~
1- . M/t/tJJ1 f?
" fJl70W C't>nlhJ
%.C,n6-lJerl.
%,
pe.I-;i-It>17 r
. overq i "IJ-t-
~rl(lI7$:
'/J/e>(Ci~~
5-{-;
517P/4/ /
CPhtfro
-<:hfJ"fA /(/PI'.
c?A/~~~
Trqrrl'e4-:5J;l
-t-~ C!omn.,
ll...
1'99
addressed to the Chairman and Secretary of the Committee and to the Police Department contain 23 signatures which
"represent the majority of residents living on Manchester .Avenue, West" prompted review of the letters' contents
by the Committee with staff representatives of the Police Department and the Engineering and Works Department;
and further advising that a substantial increase in residential land-use in the area, the lack of sidewalks in
some sections and blind intersections indicate that motorists should be cautioned by a reduced speed limit,
cautionary signs and patrolling that they are passing through a residential zone, and that in order to avoid
leaving a short 40 m.p.h. zone between Manchester Avenue and the South Bay School where a 30 m.p.h. zone is
posted, the Committee further recommends extending the 30 m.p.h. zone to include all of Bay Street and Manchester
Avenue, and also advising that the streets are Provincial highways and the amendment to the by-law requires
Provincial approval -- the petition referred to therein be referred to the Chief of Police, the Traffic and
Safety Committee, the Legal Department and all other departments concerned, for a recommendation.
Consideration was given to the Report of the University of New Brunswick Saint John Campus Review
Committee. The Mayor advised that this group of students was looking for support from the Common Council, and
the Council did support the Deutsch Report on the status of Saint John campus of the University of New Brunswick;
the students want to make sure the Deutsch Report is implemented, in accordance with the Report. Councillor
Davis stated that he is not so sure about supporting the students - he thinks that the Council should support the
recommendation - that this Report be accepted, as written - there are modifications being made - he does not know
what the students have done. The Mayor advised that the students are accepting the Report. Councillor Davis
pointed out that he cannot vote for it because he does not know what the students have done. The Mayor replied
that the students want this Report implemented, in its entirety.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the City of Saint John adopt and support the Report of the
University of New Brunswick Saint John Campus Review Committee (The Deutsch Report) in its entirety.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the students of the University of New Brunswick in Saint
John be informed of the above action of the Common Council, and that the Common Council supports the students
fully in this matter.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has now officially gone on the air with the first
satellite supported frequency modulation stereo radio network in the world, stretching some 5,000 miles across
Canada;
AND WHEREAS this new frequency modulation radio network connects Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
frequency modulation stations from St. John's, Newfoundland to Vancouver, British COlumbia;
AND WHEREAS the system links Canadian Broadcasting Corporation-owned stations in Vancouver, Calgary,
Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Halifax and St. John's;
AND WHEREAS the major City in the Province of New Brunswick, the City of Saint John, and in general,
other parts of the Province of New Brunswick, are not able to receive this programme source:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of Saint John, on behalf of all the citizens of this
area hereby respectfully asks the Senior Officials of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, as well as the
Federal Minister of Communications and the local Member of Parliament to take whatever action is necessary to
ssure the availability of radio facilities to serve the southern part of the Province of New Brunswick so that
the people of Canada living in this area may e~ually enjoy this radio marvel of the future and become part of a
really remarkable Canadian Broadcasting Corporation technological achievement."
Councillor MacGowan noted that Saint John, New Brunswick does not get any publicity whatsoever in the
weather reports from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and stated that she thinks that something, at the
same time, should be done about it, by the Council.
Mr. Barfoot advised that the Common Council members Were given copies of the Snow and Ice Control
Manual with the information correspondence for this Council meeting inadvertently, and that this item should have
gone on the Council agenda, so that it may be publicized by Council.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Snow and Ice Control Manual, which is a report on snow
removal procedures prepared by the Engineering and Works Department, be supplied to the Common Council members
and to the news media, and that the Council accept the said report in its entirety.
Copies of the said report are to be given to the news media by the above named Department.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the petition from residents of St. Catherine Street in Saint
John East, who request that when the snow is ploughed on this street, it be ploughed and piled on the east side
up against the hill where there are no more than two or three driveways, be referred to the Engineering and Works
Department for a recommendation and action.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the petition from residents of Alexandra Street, advising
that they have spoken to the Traffic Department and have met with the Chief of Police requesting abolition of
over-night parking on this street but the only concession to date is yellow marking at the head of the street
where they were having difficulty seeing oncoming traffic on Douglas Avenue when emerging - and noting that the
yellow marking is persistently ignored, with no-one checking offenders per ticketing, et cetera; and further
advising that during snow storms with cars parked on each side, it is almost impossible to obtain exit from this
street as City ploughs are helpless to operate, and, consequently, several residents are forced to leave their
I~ .~o. '0.
IN..
~
/Y, 1?,.lI'tJ<<tJ/1
r: (l ni- ro I (!P/71,hr
~/'1<<N' ;;~i?hS
';;jJfJ//CdI-/ons:
7A /5-/ Ie CO'/'/h
C/ab ..L.nc,
$m/#!fs 1>u
:,(~I'I.
S~iJoo/ 3oc7n/i
t!ur/,ew ~!f-'/Cil
t!h; el' d"
Ptt//(!e
jJ/; $ ,,0futfrr
C iPJ7-prp( 61o/,Pf.
-'/qtdr //eens
.;Jfl?/; cCJ-I- /p J?
. /1.2)-41 1/o/HI'nf:
. ,,(tf-p(
COM/71/#ee C7
tvl;r;lle
LEGAL
cars home; and advising that it is mainly Douglas Avenue cars parking over-night and at times, two or
three days without moving, on Alexandra Street; and requesting that in addition to their request for
abolition of over-night parking on Alexandra Street they would request prompt ploughing and/or sanding of
this. street -- be referred to the Works Department, the Chief of Police and the Traffic and Safety
Committee for a report.
.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the New Brunswick Liquor Control ,
Commission giving notice of a public hearing by the Licensing Board on December 12th, 1975 of the ap-
plication of Thistle Curling Club Inc. for a club license for premises located at Dufferin Avenue, Saint
John, N. B., to be held in Fredericton at 10.00 a.m., at the Commission's head office, be received and
filed.
I'
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the New Brunswick Liquor Control
Commission, advising that Smitty's Pub Ltd., East Mark Drive, Saint John, N. B. has requested that their
application be re-opened and re-considered by the Licensing Board and the said Commission has approved
their request, and further advising that this application will be heard by the Board at 2.00 p.m. on
December 12th, 1975 at the Commission's head office in Fredericton, N. B., be received and filed.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of School Trustees of School
District Number 20, advising that at its meeting held on November 26th last the Board received the report
of its Public Relations Committee relating to student disciplinary problems in our schools and that,
frequently, investigation reveals the source of these problems to be drugs and the late hours kept by
these young people, and further advising that, under discussion, it was noted that the City of Saint John
curfew' by-law appears to have very limited enforcement and, by resolution, the Board decided to request
of the Common Council improved enforcement of this by-law, be referred to the Chief of Police for a
report.
.
During ensuing discussion, Councillor Hodges felt that this letter should be referred to the
Legal Department, and Councillor MacGowan felt that as the by-law is on the books the Council should be
considering the Board's request, itself, and she suggested that the above motion be changed to include
"for consideration of enforcement". Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to know why this School
Board would write such a letter to the Common Council, knowing that the Council's hands are tied, finan-
cially; he added that. the Council members know what we are asking the Chief of Police to do an impossible
mission unless we hire 50 more policemen and have 10 more patrol cars, which is what Councillor A. Vincent
feels it is going to cost to enforce the Curfew By-Law. He added that the said by-law is not enforced
because the Chief of Police does not have the manpower to do it, and he felt that it would cost the City
$100,000.00 a year to police the Curfew By-Law provisions. He recalled that the City is told by the I
Provincial Government that it has to cut its budget and that it has to live within a fourteen per cent
increase, and stated he.does not agree to cutting services, Speaking in commendation of the Chief of .
Police and his efforts to step up the City's Police Department, Councillor A. Vincent stated he thinks
that the School Board is showing a bad light on the Police Department by writing such a letter. Coun~
cillor MacGowan spoke in support of enforcing the Curfew By-Law from the viewpoint.that it may cost money
to enforce it, but on the other hand it would .save the City much more, financially, to enforce it, not to
mention a great deal of crime and many problems in the community. Councillor Green could see nothing
wrong with the City looking into the request made by the School Board and seeing if the City can do
something. about the problem referred to in the Board's letter, and stated that if the Chief of Police can
find means within his efficient organization to do something about it - and he stated he knows that the
Chief can - he looks forward to seeing if the Chief cannot carry this out. Councillor Cave spoke in
support of the motion. Councillor Kipping felt that if the only effect of the School Board's letter ts
to remind our policemen.that the Curfew By-Law is on the books and that they have the authority to tell
young people of a certain age, under a certain age, on the street that they have to go home at a certain
time, then he thinks' it will have served its purpose. .
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay'~ to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the New Brunswick Liquor Control
Commission advising that the application of A.D.M. Holdings Ltd. for a tavern license for premises located
at 2 Charlotte Street, Saint John, N. B. will be heard at a public hearing of the Licensing Board on
December 12th, 1975 at 2.09 p.m. in the Commission's head office, Fredericton, N. B., be received and
filed.
I
Councillor.MacGowan enquired as to whether the above noted applicant was before the Council for
re-zoning. Mr. Zides replied that it appears to be the same building where the Bosun's Chair is, at the
corner of Union and Charlotte Streets, and that it might be a renewal of license or a change of owner-
ship - he does not know. Councillor Kipping asked: if our staff does not know what establishment. ,. this
is, then should the Council not' direct that someone be up at the above named hearing in Fredericton on
December 12th to find out just what it is.
I
Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed the
Chair in Common Council.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
The Mayor withdrew from the meeting and Councillor A. Vincent assumed the Chair. The Mayor re-
entered the meeting and assumed a seat at the Council table.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Mayor Flewwelling
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. A. J. Callaghan, P. Eng., of
~
"..
/IT&/~~~
.f9.,T &1/9.?h.=7
9'- /l 5S PC'.
Ct?I1S~/-fal7
/t. 2J.L ,(-1 t:t:
1IJ;11i'<<"ffe VI l/t
SeHQ/fe -/;
me/jlf- j?,h/7,
I
I amp;. ff/)t?1e
C'h/d o-f?
'Pdl/ee
'j)"t?ce,t/.6j7e
rt! 5r/l!J/q,
(/,.lef/;;;J)7ct?s
,?t?I/~e :2Je:
.
b!-r/eval7ee r
f/acai-foJ1s
$J:?o//ee
I Jrcrfedlve
IlGSI>~'1 ;Vo.6
Ronald (l;
L/s-fer, tI,e.
.
201
A. J. Callaghan & Associates, in regard to the engaging by the City on December 1st, 1975 of A. D. I. Limited as
engineering consultant for the design and construction supervision of the Millidgeville sewage treatment plant
and associated works, advising that there is a much more efficient and economical method in which to execute
this project which he is prepared to discuss privately and which he feels the Council should consider, especially
in these times of economic restraint, be received and filed and the Common Clerk make reply on behalf of the
Mayor and Common Council that this job has already been awarded and that measures will be taken to see that it
is done as economically and as efficiently as possible, supervised by the City's staff, and that the Common
Council will not. be discussing the matter with Mr. Callaghan.
Councillor Green felt that even though the above work has been awarded to A. D. I. Limited by Council
resolution, until the contract has been signed by the City with this firm of consultants and the consultants
notified of the December 1st, 1975 Council resolution, he personally would like to have heard what Mr. Callaghan
or Mr. W. R. GOdfrey had to say - along with the City staff - he is open to any other suggestions regarding
where the City can save some money; therefore, he will have to vote against the motion.
Councillors Green and M. Vincent voted against the above. motion.
Mr. Rodgers advised that the next item on the agenda, that of grievances of the Police Department,
concerns in particular the opinion that he gave to the Council some months ago with respect to an interpretation
of the Working Agreement dealing with the first step in the grievance process of the Grievance Committee meeting
with the Chief, and the Council's resolution adopting that opinion and instructing staff to carry it out. He
stated that what he became concerned with at the December 1st, 1975 Committee of the Whole meeting was the fact
that noenecessarily his opinion was not being followed but the fact that the Police had numerous grievances
pending based on the fact that the Chief of Police at the first phase was defying the Council order -- that
becomes very important and very serious in that the matter itself is insignificant but defying of the Council
order can be serious at a later stage, whether publicly, before arbitration, or even at the Council level; so,
on December 5th last he had discussion with the Chief and explained the philosophy behind his opinion - that it
was not a hearing, that it was a very informal matter, it was an attempt to settle a problem in a labour relations
appeal before it became a problem, that he could have a meeting, he could have the door open, he could sit there
and listen and not say a word and talk to whomever he wanted to talk to afterward, and make a decision in four
days; the Chief admitted he was treating the matter too seriously, and Mr. Rodgers understands that the Chief
has gone back to the Union and they have both reached satisfactory arrangements and the grievances are being
withdrawn, on that point. He added that he understands the Chief is dealing with a new Grievance Committee, as
well, but the Chief also has understood that it is really just a request to have a meeting and if the Grievance
Committee starts to abut that there will be problems which we will have to take care of later - at this point in
time, Mr. Rodgers believes that both sides should be trusting each other rather than setting up the atmosphere
of distrust - earty property should be given the benefit of the doubt, at this stage. He added that he has
discussed this matter with the City Manager. The Council members advised that this agenda item is being treated
as information to Council.
Mr. Rodgers distributed at this time copies of his letter to Common Council, dated December 8th, 1975
regarding the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. grievance on annual vacations,
Article 16(1) under the new Working Agreement, which submits a copy of his opinion to the City Manager respecting
this matter (dated November lOth, 1975), together with a copy of the independent legal opinion authorized by
Council. He noted that his opinion said that the Working Agreement, because of the wording, was entitling the
employees in the Union who were reaching the stage where their annual vacations were changing. He noted that in
the opinion of Mr. Ronald G. Lister, Q. C. there is the paragraph, "We have no hesitation in concurring with
your opinion.." and that Mr. Lister goes on to say, "... it is our view that the City is obligated to either: (a)
grant, in 1975 or 1976, the vacation with pay provided for in Article 16 to the employees qualifying therefore;
or (b) pay such employees vacation pay in lieu of any vacation entitlement not taken by such employees. In
either event, resolution of the question should be effected with the concurrence in writing of the union so as
to avoid the possibility of further grievances if a unilateral remedy is effected by the City.". Mr. Rodgers
advised that the Council is free to reject both opinions if it so wishes and still go to arbitration - that is
the Council's right. When asked if it is his opinion that the Council does not have any hope of being success-
ful, if it went to arbitration, Mr. Rodgers repled that in the face of his opinion and in the face of Mr.
Lister's opinion, it is impossible to predict what this Arbitration Board is going to get involved in and it is
a question what the Board might bring out; his point is, the future is unknown. He added that it is his opinion
that the City does not have "a leg to stand on" in this matter if it went to arbitration. Councillor Cave noted
that it is also the opinion of Ikr. Lister, and that what the solicitorsare saying in effect is that the Council
is obliged to pay these employees vacation pay as laid out in points (a) and (b) of Mr. Lister's letter, for
1975. Mr. Rodgers replied that point (a) is vacation and point (b) is paying and the solicitors feel that the
City is obligated to do one or the other. He noted that this opinion of Mr. Lister came in late today and the
City Manager only saw it this afternoon, and he felt that the City Manager should examine the two alternatives.
He reminded the Council that the Working Agreements with Locals 486 and 18 have the same wording regarding
annual vacation; he states as a lawyer that if you have a legal obligation and you are entitled to something,
you are entitled to it, and he does not think that the Council should wait, even, for a grievance.
On motion of Councillor Green
{l;'-f!1,Slefb
I'C/t-!/ Il/~r,
{'pmm, lY,It?A Manager
tIa tafit' 17 $
I:
.
ll.....
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the solicitor's report be turned over to the City
for study and a report for the next meeting of Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Barfoot asked if, in making the above motion, the Council wishes him to take this up with Local
61, for instance. He supplied the following summary, to let the Council know what the result of this is going
to be, with respect to Local 61: Local 61 has grieved; the effect of the solicitor's opinion is to uphold the
grievance and no doubt we will be able to work out something.in the nature of time off or vacation pay, with
them based upon the Council's concurrence in this opinion or the Council's upholding of the grievance; Local
771, the Fire Fighters' Association, have also grieved - that grievance is on his desk and he has to reply by
tomorrow as to this grievance - but they are in a slightly different position where their working agreement
expired the middle of the year - he is not altogether sure whether the same opinion really applies to them - it
is a different situation; .Local 18 and Local 486 have accepted his judgement, however erroneous it may have
been, and have accepted the ruling on when they were due to vacations; in both cases, vacations were asked for
or taken, denied, and they were penalized for having taken that vacation, so no vacations have been taken in
Locals 18 and 486; from a legal point of view, he supposes that the time for grieving that ruling has expired so
he presumes the justification for granting Locals 486 and 18 the vacations would be regarded on the grounds of
equity or justice rather than legality. Councillor.Cave suggested that the City Solicitor and the City Manager
talk this matter over and come back with a recommendation. In reply to Councillor Hodges' question regarding
what is to be paid to the Policemen in this regard (how many days' pay), Mr. Barfoot stated that is why he
thinks that the suggestion of Councillor M. Vincent is about the only thing we can follow - that is, to give
them time off, sometime - this does not have to be given before December 31st, 1975, he noted. Councillor
Hodges questioned that the time can be given in 1976, and asked if the Union is willing to accept it, and if the
Union does not agree to it, what is the City going to do. ,Some Council members expressed the view that the
Union heads have to be given the explanation by the City staff that the City is in a bind financially - take
these Union heads into their confidence. Councillor Kipping felt that all the Council needs to do is pass a
I ')f!l9
IJIWUIIiW
~c;iiI/t7n$'
'P(/!/ ~e- :00/1':
r:/re e);/t?-f"
'l. CIO/rk
(J.JJ,!lG5fl(!.O-,c
FI file C'h /&?i$ Zh e
V/el!- Pres,
~
resolution as to whether the Council accepts the legal oplnlon, or not, and then pass it over to the
staff to implement it in a proper way. Mr. Barfoot stated he believes the situation with Local 61 is
that a grievance from the executive of the Union is before Council which actually requires a decision by
Council to the executive even if that decision is to uphold the grievance and arrange for the City
Manager to work and negotiate with the Union on it. Recalling that Mr. Barfoot in referring to the other
Unions said we work on a justice situation, not a legal situation, Councillor Davis noted that although
the time has expired for this if we agree with Local 61 and with Local 771, it should go to Locals 18 and
486 - otherwise those two Unions will be angry with the Council, for no reason - just because of their
own stupidity, or whatever you want to call it. Councillor MacGowan felt it would be wise to pursue with
Local 61 the line of reasoning that the Union might co-operate knowing that the City is hard up financially
and knowing that the City has been good to. the Union -- pursue that line before doing anything. 14r.
Barfoot replied that he tried that, already, and his reply is a grievance.
.
I
Councillor A. Vincent noted that the above motion is for the City Manager to report back ne~t
week to Council that he could, or could not, work out a solution based on the legal opinion, and then the
Council will decide whether it is going to continue the grievance, or notify the Union that the matter is
settled. Councillor Kipping agreed to this procedure, noting that it is as long as the City Manager
reports back or investigates while preparing his report with the Chief of Police what is the best thing
to do - is it best to pay them, or is it best to give them time off. The Council members concurred in
this being the procedure that will be followed, as outlined by Councillors A. Vincent and Kipping.
On motion
I
The meeting adjourned.
.
I
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the fifteenth
day of December, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
ROdgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief
Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administra-
tion and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department, 14. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis, Building
Inspector, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, E. W. Ferguson,
Chief of Police, and C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks
.
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held
on December 1st last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
'I
December 8th last, be confirmed.
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
The Mayor advised that Councillor Gould, who is liaison Councillor with the Fire Department,
wished to introduce an item of business at this time. Councillor Gould advised that he would like to
bring to public attention a letter received from the Canadian Assocation of Fire Chiefs Incorporated,
addressed to Mayor Flewwelling by the Executive Director of the Association, which advises that at the
recent annual meeting of the Association held in August in Mississauga, Ontario, Mr. Percy Clark, Fire
Chief of the City of Saint John, was elected Vice-President of this large, national, public service
organization. The letter describes Mr. Clark as a most knowledgeable and astute leader of the fire
services in Canada, and as a real asset and credit to the said Association, and expresses confidence that
Mr. Clark is the same to the City of Saint John.
.
....1
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved
invoices for engineering services with regard to projects that have been undertaken under the Department of
Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
C~<<S6'Jt/al/ 1.
ci/'pflt'ocilche.
AT
~11~a.
'/J S5t?e
".
{'(1)11M1~.b
. --&//?)f S
'P C/~rk
(J; 17, 1'955 t;J
Fpeal ',q-f's
~J?C,
I Tender
&jt!t1'-ep-~d'
.Ia>7cas-ler
/.;J~O())? //
st-,;;rh'on
I S /m ?-S~J?
Cllh5i-rud,
~-c-d,
. Creenhea.
'Rct,
1.7>.RFF
Ch'1I>1j?J;,;17
A~lrewt'pd
. Co//. Sewer
'?rt?c#t?/7 <I-
If' eL' -HI"I? /1.
/!l//.,c"r-a; d,
setver
Gks"P1?
I an-d/'t~c:--I.
C1Ijt?t?mfer 4.
,?,4~e ~/'-/'-t-
.9tod/t? n
Mk ~NI?
I ~I/..". 4s.>0
{?;J//7f~ /
?rtJ/ec'-~ .s
1.
;?,1~MS JJr.
eG2aJ"l1eH- ~
U/a terl?7~/
~Ia :r
~yal7 ~-
A'-t-L
~
20~3
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that a letter of congratulations be sent from the Common Council
to Mr. Percy Clark on being elected Vice-President of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs Incorporated.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the Lancaster
lagoon lift station is primarily proposed to pump the over surcharged sewers from the Fairville Boulevard
valley, Milford-Randolph-Greendale area, South Bay and Spruce Lake Industrial Park; that the project was approved
by Common Council on July 22nd, 1974, and W. H. Crandall and Associates (Management) Ltd. were hired to design
and supervise the construction of this project; that when tenders were first called On September 10th, 1975 only
one tender from Frecon Ltd. for the amount of $678,130.00 was received, and the consultants estimated the cost
of construction to be $488,000.00 - and on receipt of one tender, the consultants reviewed their estimate, which
worked out to be $527,800.00 and also negotiated with Frecon Ltd., who reduced their tendered price to $628,880.00,
which price was still more than twenty per cent higher than the revised estimated price - and it was, therefore,
recommended by the consultants that the contract be retendered and the Common Council approved retendering of
this contract on October 6th, 1975; that in response to the tenders which were called again on November 26th,
1975, tenders were received, (1) from Simpson Construction Ltd. for $589,600.00, and (2) from Frecon Ltd. for
$697,380.00, and the consultants revised their estimate to $557,200.00 (the lowest tender, of Simpson Construction
Ltd., was 5.8% higher than the consultant's revised estimate) - the consultants recommended that the price of
Simpson Construction Ltd. was reasonable and be accepted; and further advising that the Liaison Committee has
approved the award of contract to Simpson Construction Ltd., and the Engineering Division of the City's Engineering
and Works Department is in agreement with the consultant's recommendation; and further advising that the City
Manager and the said Engineering and Works Department, Engineering Division recommend that the tender of Simpson
Construction Ltd. of Fredericton, in the amount of $589,600.00, be accepted -- be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
Expressing her concern about the Greenhead Road, Councillor MacGowan asked if we have to wait for the
above named group to get working before the Greenhead Road will be remedied; she added that it is OVer a week
since she mentioned it and had a report from the City Manager to take urgent action there, and still nothing is
done. Mr. Barfoot replied that he will check this matter with the Works Department, again, and that there is no
reason why that problem should not be looked after. Councillor MacGowan asked if it definitely is the City's
responsibility. Mr. Barfoot replied that it is the City's responsibility to have the contractor erect the
proper barricade. Councillor MacGowan, noting that they have a barricade but that it is not the answer, stated
that it needs to be filled in - a barricade is not the answer, and it is right out into the road. Mr. Barfoot
advised that he will obtain a further answer regarding this question.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
A. J. Callaghan & Associates
Engineering services for eastern approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 43,
dated December 1, 1975
$ 143,008.48
$ 1,060.00
2.
Champlain and Lakewood Heights Collector Sewer
Proctor & Redfern Ltd.
Engineering services for Champlain Heights portion of system
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 30,
dated November 21, 1975
$ 2,423.43
$ 197,268.71
3.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Sewer System
Gaspe Construction
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 8
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 8,
dated December 8, 1975
$ 233,768.70
$1,463,230.25
1,099,969.55
164,995.43
701,205.42
Carpenter Place Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 13,
dated November 18, 1975
$ 88,514.32
$ 5,271. 33
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor j~. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval
for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering
with regard to Capital projects:-
be given
services,
Myles Drive and Garnett Road
Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
10-inch - 8-inch sanitary and 8-inch watermain
Total value 'of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
$ 76,812.50
85,296.25
12,794.44
37,457.37
$ 35,044.44
approved
payment, PTogress Estimate Number 2,
dated December 11, 1975
204.
~
C4,P/i-,;;;J/ 2.
pNj f!?CJ6s
/lrel?C1s
1(6?CCCl a/?~
,(-6~
CO~llunity.Arenas
(a) Rocca Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 11
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 11,
dated December 2, 1975
$ 2,959,495.80
2,959,495.80
443,924.37
2,526,890.46
$ 1,305.37
$ 2,959,495.80
2,939,495.80
97,284.87
2,528,195.83
(b) Rocca Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 12
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 12,
dated December 8, 1975
$
334,015.10
NOTE:
Payment
receipt
Deeds.
to be released on or after December 17, 1975, subject to
of a certification regarding no liens from the Registrar
All other conditions have been met.
the
of
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that Lloma
~~tG-~/'L/, Construction represented by Mr. Lloyd Paul, is developing approximately 125 feet of Michael Crescent, 700
~ feet of Nason Road and 325 feet of Martha Avenue, and that the area will consist of eleven lots to be
dl~/1t!!?e'meJ7 used for twelve unit apartment buildings, and further advising that the developer's servicing plans have
~~e1Pf~ ~Al/ met with the approval of the Engineering and Works Department, and that according to the City's sub-
;/ /7 ._J.. division policy, the City will be responsible for the following costs:- (1) water materials (watermain,
,,t{/P/71a1 LIlIJ.5z;lT.t. .gate valves, et cetera) $16,400.00, (2) sanitary sewer materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $6,600.00,
and (3) storm sewer materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $19,150.00 -- making a total of $42,150.00 _-
and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water and sewerage materials to be charged
to the 1975 Capital Budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division
agreement in due course with regard to the said development, which is known as Silver Falls Park, Phase
VIII, and also recommending that the said agreement be conditional on satisfactory arrangements being
made with Mr. H. C. McNamara for the upgrading of the existing sewage lagoon.in compliance with Pro-
vincial and City regulations, so that it will handle the projected increased loading -- be received and
filed and the recommendations adopted.
$//I/~Y' ~//S
1;;;}k $uJ-R6v.
c /. /, () '7 bf,,1e
S8'e' ~t?ftto)
~rt;/d
Il/ e IYamar<ri
C/i!j 417CJ!fe.
Councillor MacGowan advocated changing the wording of the above motion's second recommendation
to read; "that the said agreement be conditional on satisfactory arrangements being made with Mr. McNamara
for the upgrading of the existing sewage lagoon in compliance with Provincial and City regulations before
development commences", because after we start doing things we have difficulty, very often, in getting
done things that are supposed to be done - therefore, she feels that if it is a condition that this is
done, why can't it be done first - she therefore would like to make an amendment to the City Manager's
recommendation on this point. Mr. Barfoot stated he would think that the arrangements have to be made so
that the equipm~nt that has to be installed in this lagoon is in place before the housing which is
contemplated in this sub-division comes on line - this would be the general idea of the above proposal -
however, he did not have with him all the details on this project. Councillor MacGowan stated she would
like the recommendation changed to the wording she has suggested, if possible, because, then, we are
sure, she thinks, that development does not go ahead until the developer has brought the sewage lagoon up
to the proper capacity. Mr. Barfoot replied that the wording "that the upgrading be done prior to the
approval of the sub-division agreement" could be used. Councillor MacGowan felt that in addition to this
suggested wording being included - that is included that before we do it you can agree but before the
City carries out its end of the agreement Mr. McNamara must carry out his end of the agreement. Mr.
Barfoot replied that he is sure this can be incorporated. Councillor MacGowan noted that this would
therefore call for an amendment to the motion, to incorporate such wording. Councillor Cave stated he
feels that the City Manager's recommendation covers the requirement - this agreement is conditional and
satisfactory arrangements be made with Mr. McNamara to take care of the sewage disposal, as recommended
by the City Manager - it is conditional. Councillor Pye stated that he has been in communication with
Lloma Construction who are doing the development in that area at the moment, and the company informed him
that the dimensions of the lagoon would be increased by approximately twenty-five per cent, and the
company had been in communication with Government engineers, et cetera, and the whole matter had been
taken care of, except the company just had not made a start at the moment - but it definitely was going
to occur in the proper time. Councillor M. Vincent stated he was satisfied that the above motion was
broad enough to cover what Councillor MacGowan was referring to, but he could see no reason why the
Coun~il cannot change the motion - however, he was under the impression that the upgrading and improve-
ments are contingent upon the actual development, itself. Mr. Barfoot replied that the reason for the
upgrading is to handle the increased loading from the development; the two go hand-in-hand.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Councillor Green felt that the above motion, which provides that the agreement is conditional
upon satisfactory arrangements being made between Mr. McNamara and the City Manager, would cover all
points. Councillor Hodges asked if this arrangement, which was made previous to a start, will be verbal
or written, noting that the City gets stuck on these verbal arrangements. Mr. Barfoot replied that he
will have to see what can be worked out in that regard; he added that he thinks the intent of the re-
commendation is that these things proceed hand-in-hand, and we do not get committed to a big sub-division
without Mr. McNamara doing the work that has to be done on the lagoon. He stated that he will attempt to
work this out. Councillor MacGowan stated that her point is, "arrangements being made" is not the same
as "arrangements being achieved" - she wants to make sure that the lagoon work is done, and she felt that
if this is the belief of all the Council members, as well, there is no reason why this cannot be incor-
porated in the motion.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until the
Council receives more clarifying information from the City Manager on the required wording of his recom-
endation to Council.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors Cave, Davis and M.
Vincent voting "nay".
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
......
. Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
~~ ~ RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, further to
Common Council resolutions of August 11th, 1975 regarding allocation of Neighbourhood Improvement Programme
If'e/~~~~!1- funds for the year 1975 to the North End area described in the said resolutions and in :he presentation made by
L ~j ~ the North End Neighbourhood Association, advising that the Council was subsequently advlsed by The Honourable
nt'~~ -L~J7 ~odman E. Logan, Minister responsible for housing, by letter of September 18th last, that the Clty would be
/,7~~}P)1o- allocated $700,000.00 in grants, and $204,167.00 in loans from the Federal Government, to which would be added
)?r~h?~l? grants from the Province of an additional twelve and one-half per cent or twenty per cent depending on the type
A/...jj ~ j of work undertaken; and further advising that meetings have been held with the said Association and the citizens
Ir~~~)7~ organization is prepared to participate in the planning and implementation of the programme, and the City has
I~;'AL~~~~ obtained a field office and subject to staff availability, the City is prepared to start work on planning and a
~/~ programme of residential rehabilitation assistance immediately after Christmas; and further advising that in
rT~Spe. order to receive a funding advance for this a Council resolution will be required to support an application to
~~~/'~e>~/~ the senior levels of Government for funding, and that a suggested format for the application is submitted as
./ / ' well as a map of the intended area; and recommending that application be made as suggested, for programme
f76?I107~,C7S~/. planning funding for the North End Neighbourhood Improvement Programme -- be received and filed and the recom-
-tahc!e mendation adopted.
dj?"PltCCl-t-/O
17el1derdt::,
.7Je/J?oll -/
SUl?r/se
KC;aif" Lbt
~Z .l3rt7d?d
,...
. /J1(l)J-t~1y
l'ej70)17f-
I
~/u/J?bl/?!f
j?erM/-:t-S
11~t?d-/o/ "
aU)?, /l
VJ/1 e ed-
HIla/neld/
S~temt?17t:
SAM/if
bOo-b-S
flam;
. R~5$
li/t?hl-/; Itt
re;pPt't-
I
1?efclhdii?
mol/on
.2Jemo//-6o.
~-II ~
I t/J!;c;/?-P
Ch//6c.KS
(/fIb z) -<ift.
.
.....
~o-
2::)
On motion of Councillor Kipping.
.,
;'
On motion of Councillor Gould
the
bid
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager and
Building Inspector, the tender of Sunrise Equipment Ltd., in the amount of $1,450.00, which is the lowest
received, be accepted for the demolition of the City~owned property located at 48 Broad Street.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report for November of the Division of Technical and
Inspection Services, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to have a report about "bootleg" plumbing permits because
he understood, during the years he served on the former Board of Health that plumbers are licensed, and so on,
in a municipality - now, we have a Master Plumbers Examining Board where a master plumber must take out a
plumbers license and he must do the work; he added that it is well-known fact that there is more than one person
around town who is selling permits and, to him, that is "bootlegging", and he wants charges laid, now. He
stated he is asking for a list - how many "bootleg" permits were issued last month. Councillor Cave, who is a
member and Chairman of the Master Plumbers Examining Board, advised that at the present time the Board's solicitor
is looking into the possibility of laying charges on two particular plumbers for a violation. He stated that
Councillor A. Vincent's information is correct - one of these plumbers has been getting the license and selling
it; there will be no more permit for those two particular individuals; in the meantime, the Board is contemplating
action. He stated he would ask for support from this Council in this matter. Councillor A. Vincent stated it
is his understanding that this has been going on for some time, and he certainly wants to give full support to
the said Board in the action being taken by the Board. Councillor Cave pointed out that action is being taken
and the Board has to do it right, and it is in the hands of the Board's solicitor.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the month of October last, be
received and filed.
In reply to a query from Councillor Parfitt, Mr. Barfoot explained the policy of the City in making
compensation to employees in the purchase of safety boots, as covered in the Working Agreement with Saint John
Civic Employees' Union, Local 18. Councillor MacGowan noted an item in the above Financial Statements of
payment for smoked ham, and eggs, in the amount of $29.70, and stated she would like to receive background
information regarding this purchase. The Mayor noted that the City Manager will provide a report in this regard.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the reports for the months of October and November last
of the Water and Sewerage Division of the Works Department, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, with reference to Common
Council resolution of December 1st, 1975, which accepted the tender of Chittick's (1962) Ltd., the low bid, for
the demolition of 9-11 Peters Wharf (the former Willett property) for the sum of $3,200.00, advising that Mr. G.
Gordon Chittick has advised by letter dated December 3rd, 1975 that this bid was inadvertently based on the
wrong building, 9-11 South Wharf, and he assumed this to be the structure to be demolished as it was in a
dilapidated and abandoned condition and as he did not know the exact whereabouts of Peters Wharf, and that he
cannot honour his tender at the figure of $3,200.00 and that the City is at liberty to retain the tender deposit,
but that, however, should one of the other bidders accept the job he hopes that his deposit cheque will be
returned; and further advising that with reference to the Council's concern that there may be a "party-wall"
problem, the Urban Redevelopment Office has been given assurance that the Parrtown Tavern is a building of
recent vintage and while it will cause portions of the demolition to be carried out possibly by hand to avoid
any damage to the Tavern, nevertheless, the Peters Wharf property in question can be demolished with no detrimental
effect to the Tavern; and recommending that the said December 1st, 1975 resolution awarding the contract to
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. be rescinded and that the contract be awarded to Paul's Trucking & Demolition Company
Ltd., in the amount of $4,500.00, subject to that company re-submitting its tender deposit, and also recommending
that in view of the explanation given by Chitticks (1962) Ltd. concerning their bid, that favourable consider-
ation be given to the return of their tender deposit -- be received and filed and Council resolution of December
1st, 1975 awarding the demolition of 9-11 Peters Wharf to Chitticks (1962) Ltd. be rescinded.
Prior to the above motion, Councillor A. Vincent had noted that 9-11 Peters Wharf is one of the better
pieces of land that the City owns, and the building on it is good, and now with the "tight" money policy and
everything, he suggested that the City determine whether it is really going to use the land in the next twenty
years, and if not, that the City rent it, there on the waterfront, for dead storage space, rather than tear it
down. /1r. Barfoot replied that it was the desire to get these buildings down as rapidly as possible and not to
rent them. He felt that this particular property could be used for parking if the building was torn down and the
space occupied by the building used for parking revenues. Councillor Higgins advanced the suggestion that the
206
~
f-II '?del"s
/1/ /; Cll"-P
C~/#;cJ5(/f'6:Z
A -Id.
C~ef'ae
rt?ittl'hed' f?e
demtJIII-/oh .{/
;If, U/ Gaf1~
/lssoc.
/:J~- /6t?
?I", IVrn, Sr-:
7?ej/a/rs ~
.s /'IIetu' ~/ A-
s.,;;.fel-y
bal"r/ C"ak
C'1/1t/2k5((f"#fJ
,( t-IK .
C!A/#/CKS .S:lndo
62-~ye/
Stfo/"Jr?i'7 (!Ol7str.
Co, A.-6L
:0. /4l6Ht?~ hl
s'T:Frdfqm
Spn ^ 17~
/l.P.Z ~Fd~
2)ex(;-er c:bh-~2a.
4efr.? and/',
..I.-t-TL
;'Jfa:/pr
7f,ucks
7?en~.!?d eY<6~
Re-:2tlJ7/h!f
.JJp;/mac .A+d.
1?e-;zon/hj'
11eaa;/e;
C'o ,If-6"I1;Je,-tft; I' S
,( tvi.
City Manager's three-part recommendation in this matter be dealt with by rescinding the said December
1st, 1975 resolution, and wait a week to get further information or a recommendation in the light of what
Councillor A. Vincent has said.
.
Councillors MacGowan and Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that a report be provided to the Council on the
usability of the building on the City_owned property at 9-11 Peters Wharf.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the deposit cheque in the amount of $960.00 which
accompanied the tender of Chitticks (1962) Ltd. for demolition of 9-11 Peters Wharf, be returned to
Chitticks (1962) Ltd.
On motion of Councillor Cave
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that
there was no response to either of the City's tender calls which closed on October 22nd and November 5th
last for the repair and making safe of the upper four feet of the City-owned building at 154-160 Prince
William Street, and that following this two responses were received when a number of contractors were
contacted for bids for this work, and that because of the wide variation between the bids and of the
considerable expense involved, a meeting was held with the low bidder in an attempt to ensure that the
City was getting the right work done for the best value, and that Mr. M. W. Garnett, one of the two
bidders, has comeback with a proposal for doing the work on a cost plus basis, retaining the original
ornamental design and most of the original brick work, making safe and repairing the building, and guaranteei~
that the cost will not exceed the original quotation price of $10,375.00 - and advising that, in the
meantime, in order to ensure the safety of the area, the City has erected a safety sidewalk in front of
the building -- and recommending that the proposal of M. W. Garnett & Associates, dated December 12th,
1975, for the repair and making safe of the 154-160 Prince William Street on a cost plus basis, not to
exceed $10,375.00, be accepted -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following invoices, namely:-
I
Chitticks (1962) Ltd., dated December 1, 1975
Chitticks (1962) Ltd., dated December 1, 1975
Chitticks Sand & Gravel, dated December 1, 1975
Stephen Construction Company Limited, dated December 1, 1975
D. Hatfield Ltd., dated November 19,1975
D. Hatfield Ltd., dated November 4, 1975
S.T.E. Fetterly & Son Ltd., dated October 8, 1975
A.D.I. Ltd., dated October 31, 1975
Dexter Construction Ltd., dated December 3, 1975
Metro Construction Ltd., dated December 2, 1975
$ 4,061.00
$ 2,334.80
$ 4,661. 60
$ 28,151. 91
$ 9,385.72
$ 14,119.95
$ 5,226.83
$ 4,073.90
$ 26,014.29
$ 210.00
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the City pays Sales Tax on rented equipment. Mr. Barfoot
replied that the City pays such tax, just on an item that is rented without an operator. Councillor A.
Vincent asked if the City is exempt from paying Sales Tax for its own rental when it is putting the
operator on the piece of rented equipment. He stated that he understood that if you rented a mechanically-
operated vehicle that you are exempt from the Sales Tax, whether the City pays him, or....it is not like
something else. He felt that the Council should check into that point, stating he cannot see the differ-
ence between renting a truck at so much more for the driver than we are supplying the driver. The Mayor
replied that this question will be checked on. The Mayor asked that the City Manager make a note on the
following: there are three trucks, he understands, with sanders on them standing idle in the eastern
sector, in the North End, and in the western sector - the City is paying rent on them and they have not
moved. He asked that Mr. Barfoot check on this matter, as well.
.
On motion. of Councillor Hodges
I
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the property on
the easterly side of City Line known as 460 City Line next to the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks, from
"R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential distri~t to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a third
time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments I
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning a property with a
frontage of approximately 160 feet on the westerly side of Forest City Street opposite the property at
35-37 Forest City Street and with a 30-foot frontage opening onto Pleasant City Street, from "R-2" One-
and 'No-Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a third time and
enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. filmeh;ceL tP!f C c.tJ. Ja/1- /~, /'17 b , :Pelb?: -Chi$
~tJA:)
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior .to the adoption of the above resolution.
.
Consideration was given to 'a petition from residents of Lowell Street and City Line protesting
~
,..-
207
.
I
S tJ1t?d
I O/oSiJ7.f
.iClU/e//
$-1:
:J),i1ySht?J4
Ifd:
'jJBI/tip)?
re' 5ah'7e
.
;Pefl ;'t?/11i!?
hank
Godsoe
%/;ee
1l?11~//:lJ1 ~
Ad!?/! a/J?/?1
l7710mas
/l1e t:-f9-t-h
,<( oc4 ~h1{)h
~iel?>kd
.
JJ,huh,t:I/o h
ff pV:ifi!t?",-
154 ea f'rOfrl
pO//u-f-/Cl)?
I
the closing of a portion of Lowell Street and a portion of Bay Shore Road, thus making Lowell Street a dead-end
street, and requesting that this petition be dealt with. to the satisfaction of the petitioners. The petition
states that a traffic hazard would be created on Lowell Street and City Line with the making of Lowell Street a
dead-end street, as all of the traffic will have to use City Line and Lowell Street because the entrance on
Beaconsfield Avenue will have been closed; the petition further states that Lowell Street and City Line were not
built for this kind of traffic as they are residential streets and on Lowell Street there is a heavy incline and
several times during the winter, on account of ice and snow, the residents are forced to use Bay Shore Road and
Woodville Road for an exit. The petition further states that the residents were informed that the accessible
route would be through the entrance to the arena, but this is certainly not acceptable as it is too hazardous
for their children.
Councillor Green advised that he took up the matter of the said street closure with the City Manager,
who conferred with the Commissioner of Engineering and Works. He added that due to the fact that so many of the
residents of Lowell Street are objecting to the proposed closure of a portion of Lowell Street there has been a
plan prepared but it is not completed as yet for the residents to see. He advised that, in consultation with
Mr. Barfoot, Mr. Barfoot has suggested that third reading not be given, and that the matter be laid on the table
for another week.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter of the proposed closing of a portion of
Lowell Street and of a portion of Bay Shore Road be laid on the table for another week.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named petition from residents of Lowell Street and
City Line protesting the closing of a portion of Lowell Street and a portion of Bay Shore Road, be laid on the
table for one week.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of Trustees of the Civic Employees'
Pension Plan, recommending the retirement of Mr. Frank Godsoe of the Police Department effective January 1st,
1976 in accordance with Section 9, Sub-section I of the Pension Act, he having complied with the provisions of
the said sub-section by providing medical reports as to his permanent disability, be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
the three-eighths interest in approximately 36 acres of land at Second Loch Lomond, in which Mr. Thomas McGrath
has title to, be purchased from Mr. McGrath for the appraised value of $2,500.00.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if there is any portion of the land on the periphery of the lake that is
not in the City property, and is any of the portion of the land that the City is considering purchasing, outside
the boundaries of the City of Saint John. Councillor Davis replied that, with reference to this particular
land, it is all on the lake, but is outside the City limits, which means that the City, in fact, is purchasing
land outside the City limits. Councillor Davis explained that the watershed is largely outside the City limits,
and there are approximately 600 properties that the City does not own, that drain into the lakes - it has become
a major problem. He noted that the Water and Sewerage Division monthly report at this meeting of Council
indicated that that water is improving whereas the water in West Saint John is requiring considerably more
chlorine than previously. Councillor Hodges stated he has been given to understand that the City owns half of
this property now, and he asked when the Land Committee is going to arrange for the City to purchase the other
half. Councillor Davis replied that it is a very complicated Estate - there is no record of anyone owning the
other half - the City owns the two adjoining properties and the one across the road, so this property is a-
vailable now and there is really no reason to postpone it because if the City did, someone might turn up with
the other half and then own most of it. Councillor Hodges noted that the Environment people tell the City to buy
it all - everything it can on the lake, at the present time. Councillor Davis replied that the Land Committee
cannot find out who owns the other half of this property - it is a family matter; if he remembers correctly, Mr.
Thomas McGrath pays the taxes and has been doing so. He added that before these transactions are completed the.
City Solicitor checks the deeds. Councillor Parfitt asked what guarantee the City has, in buying these pro-
perties, that people do not stop polluting, right there. The Mayor replied that the only guarantee the City has
is that people cannot go on these lands and build cottages as the City owns the land. Councillor Parfitt asked
who is going to police these lands. Mr. Bar~oot advised that there is a caretaker in the Loch Lamond area and
one of his responsibilities is to patrol the lakes, particularly the City-owned property. Councillor Cave noted
that the only reason the City is purchasing land here is to protect the watershed, and the City expects to spend
a lot more money to pick up all the land, eventually. Councillor Davis advised that because the watershed is
largely outside the City limits we do not have any particular jurisdiction over those .lands - however, the
Province does and they have been doing a little bit, but not very much about it; the Land Committee expects to
be able to inform the Council in early or mid-January of a meeting with the various departments from the Pro-
vince (the Environment people, the land registration people) and all those involved with Loch Lomond; it is
becoming a serious problem and we are making every effort to solve it - we have a list of the properties and we
are trying to acquire at least the first 500 feet around the border of the lake, but that is going to be a long
and expensive job. In reply to Councillor Parfitt's query regarding results of appealing valuations on City-
owned lands on the watershed, l~. Park advised that a number of the property valuations were appealed because of
the increase in valuation and, as he recalls it, the appeals were disallowed, with regard to the ones he has
seen dealt with. He stated that if a complete report is needed in this matter, it can be made. Councillor
Parfitt felt that it does not seem fair that these property valuations be increased when the City is buying them
to protect the watershed. Councillor Davis replied that it is hoped that will be cleared up at the above
mentioned forthcoming meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
P/aI7J1, 4,(w'
~~~ Seconded by Councillor Hodges
~~ l7~~. RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recommending
e.'/re that the Common Council permit the conversion of the rear portion of the ground or basement floor of the Dr. L.
... U/1ti'e)?I)?~ Freedman building at 108 Waterloo Street to a one-family apartment (the portion of the building in question is
/t:l&'~~~ at its rear along the Richmond Street frontage and is presently mostly used for storage) and advising that the
~ Council's permission is required under Section 61 of the Community Planning Act relevant to the City's Deferred
~r. ~ Widening By-Law for the southerly side of Waterloo Street on which this building in question is located, and
,- . __/.' further advising that the Committee does not believe that the amount of money involved for the simple conversion
r"€eU~h
~
90 C'
.,;;; a
~
I(?g #'aier/oo
S-t:
:zJel'G'rred
w/den/hy
2J/"j, Frt?ed-
mOl)?
5, T IIsff CZnp
J)eve/t;"Pmed
of land cI-
pllfi!l$" $,;;na
L?t?ve Rtf pro
'?ro/,t>$~/s
~tIt'l/erf/seL fZ.
5: .T Ik~, cb/??,h'J
(!a/J, H'd, ~.;;yf)r.
..,/I!uhS./)6,
1?e!J/tlI7 Gmh1-
lIou$ I 'n.1' ~f'/f?
ammo h~J7~
:&~d(P~p
eX'f'6'U/.,f~reL )
rr'!?fJP1"T;"S'
/tlagpr
of the present storage and/or unused space to a one-bedroom apartment warrants entering into an agreement
on the write-off of the costs involved -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's question as to the amount of money involved in the above
matter, that the City is waiving with respect to entering into an agreement on the write-off of the cost,
j~. Zides advised that this entails the conversion of 900 square feet of space to a one-bedroom apartment
and the cost involved is approximately $4,000.00 to $6,000.00, and the conversion work involves putting up
a couple of partition walls and installing a bathroom and a kitchen set-up to make it into a one-bedroom
apartment. In regard to the question of why the City would not be entering into a write-off agreement
regarding these costs over a period of time, Mr. Zides reminded the Council members that at a recent
meeting the City Manager brought in a policy statement suggesting that if the cost figure is $10,000.00 or
less there be no agreement, and that was agreed to by the Council. He added that the cost of converting
the portion of the building in question to a one-bedroom apartment should be well under $10,000.00.
I
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
The Mayor asked that two items from the Saint John Housing Commission be added to the agenda of
this meeting, these having been introduced by Councillor MacGowan, a member of the said Commission.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Pye I
RESOLVED that the above mentioned items from the Saint John Housing
Commission be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission,
dated December 15th, 1975, recommending that the Commission be authorized to publicly advertise for
proposals for the development of the property formerly known as the Annex Property, Sand Cove Road,
consisting of approximately 3 acres, such proposal to include the rehabilitation or demolition of the
existing buildings, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
During ensuing discussion regarding the above matter, Councillor MacGowan advised that a group
met with the Housing Commission at its meeting today regarding the said property, but the Commission felt
public proposals should be sought, to make the best use of the land; the Commission received rather a
lengthy report from the Fire Department and Building Inspector on the question of whether the existing
buildings on this property could be rehabilitated and it was suggested.in that report that some of the
buildings could be rehabilitated possibly because the walls are good and the lower portions of the buildings
could be rehabilitated - the Commission wants to determine whether anybody is interested in doing that, or
wants to clear the land of the buildings and put up housing or whatever the public would come up with, if
anything; the Commission wants to obtain development proposals and the City would then consider selling
this City-owned land, if that is what is required.
Read a letter from the Saint John Housing Commission, dated December 15th, 1975, advising that I
the Commission has learned that the Atlantic Region Committee of the Canadian Federation of Mayors and
Municipalities is requesting submissions to prepare a position paper on housing, and that the Commission
would enquire if the City will be forwarding a submission, and, if not, whether.the Council wishes the
Commission to endeavour to make a submission, as requested. Noting that December 26th, 1975 is the
closing date for submissions, Councillor MacGowan felt that possibly we would have to. ask for a longer
time in which to make a submission. The Mayor suggested that the Commission should be submitting a brief
of some type, and possibly the City staff should be submitting one. Mr. Barfoot, on being asked whether
anybody from the City staff is presently working on such a brief, stated he would have to determine this
and he thinks there has been some discussion between Mr. Jones and some members of staff on the housirig
situation but he does not believe as yet a formal position has been prepared. Councillor MacGowan felt it
strange that the Housing Commission would not have been informed that such a request might be forthcoming.
Councillor Cave suggested that the Housing Commission submission be passed over to the Council because he
feels that some members of staff will be working on it, also, to further the submission, rather than have
the submission go directly to the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities; in this way, by
passing it over to the Council, the Council will have staff do work to add to the submission, if neces- .
sary.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Se onded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the Saint John Housing Commission endeavour to make a
submission on housing to the Atlantic Region Committee of the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Munici-
pali ties.
Read a letter from Mayor Flewwelling submitting a proposed resolution regarding budgetary
I
control.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
, RESOLVED that the Commissioner of Finance be asked to bring
forward to Council a suggested manner in which each operating expenditure for approval allows the Council
to be informed of the total amount in the budget, the amount requested for approval, and the balance
remaining:
I
AND FURTHER that the letter from the Mayor in this regard, be received and filed.
The Mayo~ explained that he checked with the City's computer operator and learned that the data
he is seeking can be provided from the computer, and he also talked with the City Chamberlain, and the
Mayor set up a request that the Commissioner of Finance can set up some information that would allow the
Council to understand on a progressive basis what the balance of the budget is after each expenditure.
Councillor M. Vincent concurred in this idea of providing information for Council as being a good idea as
it would put the Council in the position of knowing how the departmental operating budgets are and where
they stand, but he is rather concerned that with this type of information the Council might have a tend-
ency to become involved in the agreement of spending or not spending departmental budgetary money and, in
some cases, perhaps .even interfere with the direction of the departments by the Directors, themselves. He
stated he would think it is wise for the Council to know how much money is in departmental budgets, what
is being spent and what the end result is going to.be, but he thinks he can see that the time could come
when the Council could start supervising to a degree that is not desirable - the spending of the department's
money and actually taking over the role of that particular department head; he felt that if the Council
.
......
JI"'"
208
.
1
(j~h,
7Jc;V/S
1
:BuP(!l~t-
(prtl~I"R~S'
e)(' re:r;d! -
-iu ;'Ie
rq.?tlJ1-6s)
(!/i-!f
. botthM rle.
ifrOj/o.sed
aeCl"eRSe
. ,
/J1s/xe-
rl-f! C/-6 '1)
I
.
'/1?r,st?nhe /
ah/m,
I',
{!o h? J-YI ,
I. ftlht?/e
SdY/ar/es
/V'tm- (It? /0
~m,P/()!fees
.
~
members are concurred in their thinking that this.is not going to happen, then he thinks that this is an excellent
recommendation. The Mayor replied that he believes that the City has a good Finance Committee and the City's
staff is capable, and between them they will keep the Council informed; he added that what the Council needs is
information for its own use, and that is the intent only of the above resolution.
Councillor Davis read the following statement he had prepared regarding the above subject:
"Your Worship, in this resolution you have touched upon a principle of major importance, and that is,
the careful examination of the City's expenditures and obligations. We must also examine very carefully how the
senior governments have manoeuvred us into an impossible situation: the City has been saddled with a huge
financial responsibility as a result of the growth centre concept - perhaps twenty million dollars; now the cost
of the so-called infrastructure will be a burden to us for many years but the developments by which the senior
governments justified these expenditures will never materialize because, firstly, the Province has abandoned the
growth centre complex by creating ten industrial regions all controlled from Fredericton by the new Department
of Commerce and Development - no consideration is given to our investment - and, secondly, during 1975 the
Department of Regional Economic Development has refused all grants to firms wishing to establish in Saint John,
and indications are that this policy will continue through 1976; thus, both senior governments will effectively
nullify the growth assumptions made in the preparation of the Comprehensive Community Plan; its value is virtually
destroyed and the anticipated population growth will not take place as forecast. Unless we take certain action,
the City will pay a high price for these changes in government policy. It is certainly true that the northern
part of the Province has been neglected, but so has the southern part; this city has shown growth because of the
activities of a few industrialists and developers; we have received no special treatment. This city exists
because of salt water, fresh water and deep water. Provincial and Federal funds spent here are investments, not
gifts; therefore, since the Province did not assume its share of the responsibility by refusing to adjust the
Unconditional Grants, and has placed the onus on the citizens of this city, it is obvious that we cannot depend
on the senior governments for financing, then the only logical conclusion is to reduce the city to a size that
can be managed by the citizens. Those living in the outer districts are not satisfied in their treatment by the
City, and rightly so; there is no reason why this can be expected to improve in the next ten years. Meanwhile,
those living outside the city's boundaries are quite satisfied with their situation; both Renforth and Grand Bay
have asked for boundary adjustments. The City uses its financial resOurces to try to service the outer districts
but cannot raise enough to do so, adequately; meanwhile, funds must be diverted from the inner zones for that
purpose, resulting in inadequate services for the inner zones; nobody is happy with this. Now, Your Worship and
Councillors, I should like to point out that the City of Saint John has 125 square miles of land; Quebec City
has 28, Regina has 30, Saskatoon has 37, and Halifax has 24 square miles - Saint John has 125; Saint John has
715 people per square mile; Quebec City has 6,745, Regina has 4,728, Saskatoon has 3,460, Halifax has 5,045.
This city, to be managed efficiently, should remove 85 to 90 square miles from our municipality; we should go no
further west than the Gault Road and up to Saint's Rest marsh" we should not go much further east than McAllister
Drive, nor any further south than Hazen Creek. We should do this, at once - claim for any expenditures made by
us in those areas, and relieve those living in the outer areas of paying tax to the City. As your resolution
implies, Your Worship, we must assume control of our expenditures, and we must assume control of our city - we
cannot control a city of 125 square miles that is so sparsely populated, and I think it should be Our policy to
make a move, at once, to bring this city down to size so that we can govern it ourselves, without having to
depend so much on the senior governments."
Councillor Kipping felt that Councillor Davis has made a very scholarly analysis of a problem and has
come up with a very interesting proposition, which Councillor Kipping feels the Council should study very
seriously. He proposed that the Council take Councillor Davis' proposition and all the information that is
contained in it under very serious consideration in the Council's very next Committee of the Whole meeting. He
stated that his reason for suggesting Committee of the Whole consideration on the subject is because there will
have to be a lot of information fed in, which involves the City staff participation. Stating that he agrees
with Councillor Davis' statement, Councillor Cave recalled that the Provincial Government forced us into amal=
gamation, and that we were told to amalgamate, or else, and now we have 125 square miles in the city's boundaries.
He noted that the boundary line of the former Parish of Simonds extended as far as the Garnett Road which is
just about 100 yards the other side of the boundary of McAllister Drive, which is being suggested by Councillor
Davis.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that if Councillor Davis wanted to put the item regarding size of the
City of Saint John on the agenda, he would certainly support it, and take some action. The Mayor advised that
the Council would discuss this matter at the end of the present meeting.
Read a letter from Councillor Green, Chairman of the Personnel Committee, advising that as there seems
to be a misunderstanding from the Committee of the Whole report from Council's December 1st last Committee of
the Whole meeting, which recommended long-service pay to non-Union employees, he would like to speak on this
matter at this meeting of Council. Councillor Green stated that as Chairman of the said Committee, has was
visited by a delegation on December 11th last, and it has been found, also, that some of the employees on the
lower eschelon as far as pay scale is concerned, abide by the Saint John City Hall Employes', Local No. 486,
C.U.P.E. working agreements, and so on, and are subject to them, but outside of long-service pay they are left
to a motion of Council that they should receive it. He stated that he proceeded to listen to the tapes in the
Common Clerk's office of the said December 1st meeting, and there was reference to what was spoken of by Councillor
A. Vincent at the December 8th last meeting of Council (regarding discontinuing after 1976 the policy of making
long-service pay remuneration to the civic employees) but it did not Seem to be included in the motion that was
adopted at the December 1st last Committee of the Whole meeting regarding service pay for the non-Union employees,
as many of the Councillors had anticipated that it would be; so, he feels that the Council is leaving some of
the staff out, and in checking on some of the amounts of service pay that they would receive the highest that
would be paid would run to about $280.00, if the Council had accepted the full Committee of the Whole report in
question On December 8th last.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report from the Committee of the
Whole held on December 1st, 1975, long service pay be paid to non-Union employees as follows:-
commencment of fourth year and including seventh year = 1% of gross annual earnings;
commencement of eighth year and including eleventh year = 1.5% of gross annual earnings;
commencement of twelfth year and including fifteenth year = 2% of gross annual earnings;
commencement of sixteenth year and including nineteenth year = 2.5% of gross annual earnings;
commencement of twentieth year and beyond = 3% of gross annual earnings _
with eligible gross annual earning to be limited to $12,750.00 for 1975 and 1976 (this figure based on the
amount paid for 1975 to a first-class fireman):
AJID FURTHER that the said Committee of the Whole report be received and filed.
Councillor Hodges advised that there are people who, because of the Labour Relations Act, are excluded
from joining Unions, and the City has six employees who are in that category who would not have been receiving
their share of this type of remuneration along with their fellow workers, and, to him, this is discriminatory.
He stated that as a former civic employee he worked for the City for a long time and he is well aware of how the
210
~
C.?ulJ./lbdj'6'S
,(P)J .1'- se/?I//de
POl!! /or e/v/
€"m//p!/ees
5'a/al'/es
/VOJl- tin/on
emf?/tl!fees
long service pay procedure came into effect. He stated he is against it as it exists today because it
discriminates between employees - the employee must five have four years of service and be a permanent
employee to qualify for long service pay, whereas the non-permanent employees, some of whom have been
working for the City as long as twenty-five years, do not receive this type of gratuity, and he is
against it on that reason. He noted that some of the Councillors have thought and have said they feel
the Council has been over-generous in its awards to the City's employees, but at the same time he noticed
that none of them are willing to see the City's employees go on strike; when there was a strike situation
confronting the City, it was solved, as the Council members know - the Councillors did not want it. He
felt that if the Council members were not prepared to let the City's employees go on strike, or to lock
them out, then they should see that all employees, from l~. Barfoot down, are treated in the same manner.
He stated that as long as he is on the Council, there won't. be any difference in his treatment of employ-
ees - they are all the same to him, and he thinks they should be treated alike. He added that if the
Council wants a change of this type, the proper and right manner to proceed is next year, when the
working agreement comes up, the Council should render a counter proposal. Noting that Councillor A.
Vincent and he have repeatedly spoken of having personnel people maybe to do the City's working agreement
negotiations, Councillor Hodges stated that at this time he wished to pay a little compliment on our
negotiations the last time - Mr. Barfoot and his fellow negotiators were negotiating last time under
difficulties because the civic employees know just what the City had in mind for them, which made the
City's bargaining position difficult. He stated he was rather shocked that there were not sufficient
Council members at the December 8th Council meeting who would prevail to do what was right and proper _
to treat all employees in. the same manner.
Speaking in support of the above motion, Councillor M. Vincent commented that there were some
comments that the figure for long service pay might be in the $600.00 to $800.00 range, and his own
figures show that the highest it can be is $318.75; his second comment is that there are approximately 60
people involved, so the Council is talking a total cost of somewhere in the vicinity of $19,000.00. He
stated he has to concur with Councillor Hodges, also, in the fact that the Council must treat the City
employees of equal status and structure, regardless of whether they are unionized or not - the Council
did, by its actions at the December 8th, 1975 Council meeting, penalize some employees who certainly
should not be penalized because they were exempted from being Union members due to their confidentiality,
and yet had to follow the working agreement of a Local in the City structure - and the employees of the
Union were entitled to a recognition - the non-Union employees because of their expertise as being
confidential employees, were not allowed to receive the same benefit, and, therefore, he could not
understand this Council at its said December 8th meeting going contrary to a decision that was made in
Committee of the Whole in having it reported .out and voting the opposite in open session.
.
1
1
.
Councillor Parfitt advised that she checked on the matter of long service pay since the last
Council meeting, and learned that it has come a long way since its original intent around 1962; she
checked with the Mayor and one of the Councillors of that time; it was a good thing to help those in the
low eschelons who were in a certain position for several years - over the years she would say it has been
abused and corrupted, and now it is just an accepted thing to get around Christmas. She had felt that
this remuneration was received for long service. She stated that she feels such remuneration is greedy,
unpatriotic, when everyone is called upon to sacrifice, and that she only hopes that all who get this
"wind-fall" will share it with people out there who are less fortunate. She stated she would like to see
long service pay voted out of the next contract, for these people are certainly not in the low eschelon,
now, because she feels that everyone at City Hall is getting a good wage for what they are doing, and I.
they will get another hefty increase January 1st, 1976.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she will have to vote against the motion. She stated that the
mere term, "long service pay", indicates that that is what it is for. She stated that she did some
~uestioning, too, and was told that this long service pay system was set up many years ago when possibly
a constable - taking a constable for an example - might. be twenty years in one position and no hope of
rising any further, but they felt he was doing a good job and he would never rise about that rank because
there were too many above him, so it was to encourage him - that he was doing a good job - as a con-
stable - but now, there is opportunity for advancement and the City does not have any real low salaries;
she does not know of any other business in the city that pays a Christmas bonus of this degree, and she
will have to vote against the motion because she thinks that we are not a good example to the other
citizens - it is not fair to all the citizens.
Councillor Cave stated that he voted against the motion to give the non-Union employees the
long service pay, at the December 8th Council meeting, because he felt it is discrimination, right fr~m
the word "go". He pointed out that these people are not able to protect themselves - the only recourse
they have is to apply to the City Manager who is only one person - there is no alternative but for those
people who can to join a union - it would appear to him that this is the only solution they have. He
stated he is supporting the motion.
Councillor Davis advised that it does not really matter how long service pay got started - the
fact remains that this Council voted for this four times for four Union negotiations - and he thinks it
is straight discrimination to vote against it now - the Council sets a pattern the first time it votes,
he added; you vote for one Union, and that is it, for the rest of them, so why break the pattern, now.
He stated that he cannot understand it.
Councillor M. Vincent pointed out, for clarification purposes, that the long service pay is not
a Christmas~bonus.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Kipping, MacGowan
and Parfitt voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was seconded by Councillor Parfitt, that all
parties concerned be notified that at the end of 1976 the long service pay be discontinued. Councillor
~PI.7t1_~6?I't/I'~eHodges pointed out that when the City has a counter proposal, it negotiates it out of the agreement, but
;t "this is not the time to do it. Councillor Kipping asked for the Council's advice on the Question of
~.!f frJ'7 {!IV/C whether it would be the time now to give some formal direction to the City Manager that the Council wants
6'n?/.?),?k(~eS" it negotiated out, if possible, when there next are negotiations on working agreements, at which time it
/? ;-" 1I~.~' will also terminate for the non-Union employees. Councillor Hodges noted that that is generally done in
GP<<I1, ' I ~ee, / Committee of the Whole.
C'e:>Mn1,l'//hP/e
(Jpu.n, .J]c;V/.s
/7/r j?0Jrt-- :JJ6'I/6',I,
Clt:m?771.
----
:/)e;d-- 7 J'WtSf/~
/;/d.p)?
R /C'J,tiJntS'C?J?
~~~/:bn5.
Read a letter from Councillor Davis, advising that the Airport Development Committee met with
representatives of the Ministry of Transport on December 12th last to discuss the Ministry's Airport
Master Plan for Saint JOhn, which is a detailed plan to upgrade all the facilities over seven. or eight
years, at a cost of at least $20,000,000.00 for all this work. The letter states that at present the plans
are in Ottawa and are being actively discussed by staff before formal presentation to the Minister early
in January, and that the Committee has information (but not official) that construction of a new mainten-
ance garage on the other side of the air strip has been approved. The letter submits the following copies
of correspondence: a letter from Mr. Eldon Richardson, a member of the said Committee, dated November
18th, 1975 and addressed to Councillor Davis, Chairman of the Airport Advisory Committee, regarding the
.
'I
I
.
....1
JI"'"
.
I
/1/J1j?t?rt-
(Af/~N/b~
I
.
/1//1 'p~p l-
I J)(f'f/P/. a/??""
C''''tvn, :JJaf//
. (lt7,m.m '
"fCQ)1, 7Jen?.
/1//1 j70ff
fltl/.~r';;~//7
.
Pete,. .5.
0?-len17/e
'R-e- ;zonlh
I
Ro611hS
A-t-d.
~sierJ7
:l301he)'l/es
L-t-tft.
I
II 12/ n z
FI ec:A-eJ7sIeJ.
k"/ler6/e
;z>/aee S'ub-
;6'v,
1?e~C7h//:7'l
ct 6!'veJ. ,P/.;fn
vaJ1 /61/)~e
'Plann, /Jk/,
C'c;mfr1.
S~II ies
.
S/)?1()MS
,(/0 J-1 S ex
....
211
proposed improvements to the Saint John airport, submitting suggestions for presentation to the Ministry of
Transport in this matter; a letter, dated November. 19th, 1975, from Councillor Davis, Chairman of the Airport
Development Committee, addressed to Mr. T. H.' Prescott, Atlantic Region Administrator, Commercial Air Trans-
portation Administration in Moncton, N. B., expressing the Committee's pleasure that the Airport Master Plan has
finally been prepared and is ready for presentation to the Administration's headquarters in Ottawa, and also
expressing the Committee's disappointment that the implementation of the planned improvements will extend over so
many years, and that some of the improvements are not as extensive as the Committee feels they should be. The
letter from the Committee dated November 19th points out that forecasts and projections of airport activity have
been consistently below the actual and this has meant that service has never been completely satisfactory and use
of this experience in making projections has produced figures that would have been somewhat greater if service
had been better; the letter states that it is the Committee's feeling that air service has been inhibited and the
projections based on these figures, unless modified, will have the same result; the letter points out that the
said plan is developed with the assumption that there will be no extension of the role of the airport in the
economy. The letter notes that the Administration's report shows the extension of Runway OS/23 by 600 feet to
7,600 feet will cost $400,000.00, and points out that another $100,000.00 would extend the runway to 7,750 feet
(WhiCh could handle a Dc-8 55F with T.O. Wt. 280,000), but because this extension cannot be justified by past
performance, this freight service becomes impossible - the report further points out that the additional 150 feet
would have a great effect on the statistics. The letter concludes by stating that the Airport Development
Committee accepts the said report and is grateful to the said Administration for its preparation and present-
ation, and by further stating that the Committee feels, of course, that it could have gone a little farther and
the work scheduled for completion faster.
Councillor Davis explained that the Airport Development Committee, which is a City committee, was
established three years ago to try to get some direct answers from the Ministry of Transport and to try to
arrange with the various departments in the City to arrive at a concensus on what the new road to the airport
should be; the Committee consists of one Councillor as Chairman (Councillor Davis), one member from the Saint
John Board of Trade (l~. Gregor Hope), one member from the Saint John Trades & Labour Council (Mr. Eldon Richardson
and from staff there are the Commissioners (Zides, MacKinnon, Baird and Park) and City Manager N. Barfoot. He
stated that this Committee has finished its work and the work it has been doing should be turned over to Mr.
Baird as Commissioner, and the Council Committee on Commerce under Councillor Kipping. He advised that the above
report from the Committee is really the final report - there is nothing more that the Committee can do. He
stated he feels that the results of the plan are going to be favourable and that most of the expenditures are
going to be made, and he is. quite certain that the maintenance garage (costing in the vicinity of one million or
one million and one-half milllion dollars) is going to be started either this winter Or in the early spring. He
felt that the work of this Committee is done. Councillor A. Vincent stated he understood that Transport Depart-
ment officials came to Saint John and met with other people rather than with Councillor Davis, thereby ignoring
Councillor Davis. He stated that he was upset about this fact and made his feelings known to the Number One
Minister of Canada. In reply, Councillor Davis pointed out that the Ministry of Transport works with this
Committee - the airlines do not, normally - they work with the Board of Trade; in order to avoid confusion, he
thinks it is best that the Council Committee on Commerce should be involved in all these affairs. He stated that
he has already turned over the information - there is an application from Eastern Provincial Airways to get it to
become involved in a regional airline, and they have a, proposal that has now been presented to the Commerce
Committee, and the Committee on Commerce will be dealing with it.
On motion of Councillor M; Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above report from the Airport Development Committee be
received and filed and Councillor Davis and the other members of the said Committee be thanked for their services
to the City:
A11D FURTHER that the matter be turned over to Mr. Gordon Baird, Commissioner of Economic Development,
for further exploration.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Peter S. Glennie, Barrister, of
Palmer, O'Connell, Leger, Turnbull & Turnbull, on behalf of Robbins, Limited, which company, along with Eastern
Bakeries Limited, made a joint formal application for re-zoning at the December 1st last Council meeting, to have
406 Douglas Avenue re-zoned, advising that the notice of change of zoning is pr~sently being advertised by the
Common Clerk and his clients would ask that the said proposed change be given a first reading and, if possible, a
second reading at the Council's meeting of December 15th, 1975, be received and filed:
AlID FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the former Eastern Bakeries Limited property located on
Douglas Avenue from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be
read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Heinz Fleckenstein, Architect, on
behalf of the developers of the Ellerdale Place project which received re-zoning approval at a Council meeting on
September 2nd, 1975, advising that this project has now moved into the construction phase and that eight 12-unit
apartment buildings are now under construction and sub-surface exploration has been completed for the first
eight-storey apartment building, and that the rock foundation makes it necessary to move building A-2 to a new
location as shown on the attached site plan and that this change in location of the said building A-2 will almost
certainly change the location of some of the other buildings which form Phase II of this project, and requesting
variance for building A-2 as shown on site plan P-2 submitted with the letter, and further advising that easements
for telephone and power have not been finalized and will be revised to suit the revised building layout -- be
referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation.
Councillor A. Vincent raised the question that a development of this size,
in the project, is supposed to take soil tests in regard to placement of buildings.
presumes this would be part of the recommendation to come from the Planning Advisory
before getting to this
Mr. Barfoot stated he
Committee.
stage
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Simonds Lions Club, pointing out that the
area of Loch Lomond Road fronting the Loch Lomond Villa and the Loch Lomond Shopping Centre is considered to be
212
~
5/m()hAs ,{/IJH.
C/ub
/oc4 ,1om~/'1d
014
C'r0.55 -a-a/Ir
(/ r oyel'; t7r
(,(,ntt'er-~ss
,(0<:.4 Ao/nOhd
'7?d.
T f?d~C-
/I~hf$
p~/;f!e2)e"d,
-t-rq<</~ aul:l
rra-Pf/&
:J;;,f'd- If am/>>-
(/1?,~mfJ ,)o!/~
195'1-tx!,
(
7h?///l?ees cf--
{l/fy ~ "'?t?dh
aJ1l7/per.5bYr/eS
Pe6rt?/l'h.3l
('an. ~ I-d,
(/l1t7!-/pn
/tls-l)
'PefrtJ-/iht5J
can, .i-l-d.
Sepl//~e "sIn,
(Car wash)
'Plann. !l-Ply/s,
Ct?/?7n?,
Prl? Fe PI,!!
()u/)1l?rs) /F
dangerous to the safety of pedestrian traffic and there is no other crossing area in the immediate
vicinity and this point is heavily used by pedestrian traffic from the said Villa, Simonds Junior High
School, Bayside Junior High School and East Saint John Elementary School and that vehicular traffic moves
quite fast at this point, in a less than totally satisfactory lane pattern and danger to children and to
senior citizens is definitely evident, and suggesting that the only completely satisfactory solution
would be the erection of an over-pass or possibly the establishment of an under-pass, and asking that
consideration be given to this matter, be referred to the appropriate City staff for a report.
.
During discussion prior to the above motion, Mr. Barfoot advised that this area has been looked
at before and possibly a signal is required at this location.
Councillor M. Vincent felt that with the school and the shopping area and the Loch Lomond Villa
located there, it truly is a bad situation for pedestrians crossing the street, and he does not know
whether a set of lights is going to be the answer, or not, and he cannot speak in favour of an over-pass
or of a tunnel type of crossing - he personally does not know what the City staff might recommend there
to try to minimize the danger but he knows there is definitely a danger there, and it is a miracle that
something more serious has .not happened there than has already happened. He suggested that, rather than
just coming back with a recommendation on traffic lights, the staff could go into whatever other possibilities
there might be, over and above traffic lights. He suggested that maybe the placement of a police officer
there, or somebody there on a full-time basis, to escort people back and forth would be the answer
because that is a heavily-used road and there are four or five lanes of traffic. He felt that if the
City does not take some action immediately regarding this problem it will become similar to the problem
on Chesley Street. The Mayor noted that, as requested by Councillor M. Vincent, the City staff will come
up with a reply to his suggestion, as well as reporting on the cost of traffic lights. Councillor Pye
advised that he approached the Traffic and Safety Committee on this very item, nine months ago, and the
Committee studied the location and the situation but the Committee has not come up with any recommendations,
for or against; a pedestrian light is what he proposed to the said Committee at that time.
I
I
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the New Brunswick Branch of The
United Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada, noting that two bi-centennial anniversaries will be
taking place of signifigance to the City of Saint John and to the Province of New Brunswick (the years
1983 and 1984) as outlined in the letter, and stating that the Branch asks the Council to: adopt a
resolution that a fitting recognition of the 200th bi-centennial of the termination of the American
Revolution and the arrival of refugees who remained loyal to their Sovereign, commonly known as Loyal_
ists, in the areas which now constitute part of Canada, be observed; and to adopt a resolution urging the
Provincial Government to take steps to ensure that suitable recognition is given, and a fitting observance
is conducted to mark the 200th anniversary of the establishment of the Province of New Brunswick _ and
advising that the said Branch will be pleased to co-operate with the City in any efforts for these two
ends -- be received and filed and the said Branch be asked to submit to Council a suitable letter, and
the Council endorse such letter and send it to the proper officials.
.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the application from Petrofina Canada Ltd., for a
permit to build a full-line car wash service station, as shown on the submitted plans, on the property on
City Road that is located west of new "Mr. Muffler" building, be laid on the table until the said company
proves ownership of the said property.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he understands that this company does not own the land at the
above noted City Road site.
Question being taken, the above motion to table was lost with Councillors A. Vincent, Green and
Pye voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt and M. Vincent voting "nay".
.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the application from Petrofina Canada Ltd., for a
permit to build a full-line car wash service station, as shown on the submitted plans, on the property on
City Road that is located west of new "Mr. Muffler" building, be referred to the Planning Advisory
Committee for a report.
Councillor M. Vincent suggested that the above motion include prOV1Slon that the ownership of.
the land be determined and reported back from the Planning Advisory Committee. Councillor Cave agreed
that this be included in the motion, but Councillor MacGowan, the seconder to the motion, would not agree
to this being added to the motion, noting that this is not customary and other people, if they have an
opportunity to purchase, it comes in that way. The Mayor felt that the Planning Advisory Committee will
include in the report to come to Council the information regarding ownership of this property, for the
information to Council.
I
Question being taken, the above motion was carried.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that because of a traffic tie-up he was delayed in reaching the I
Council meeting, and thus the Council had dealt with the matter of tenders for the Lancaster Lagoon lift
station. He asked that, before the contract on this project is awarded to Simpson Construction Ltd., we
(?tJb{I7, ~,~'~ ave a meeting with the consultant and Simpson Construction Ltd. He stated that he made a long-distance
~ ~r '~6'a( telephone call to Councillor Davis to obtain some information for him, which he did, and the Common Clerk
eJ1 OY~I/" handed it to Councillor A. Vincent. He repeated his request, that we meet with the consultant and this
;(al7ensle"'/,;;Jb. contractor before this contract is signed, based on his "track record" that Simpsons submitted a contract
I, ./ _ -7. price on the Saint John Power Commission building for $918,000.00 and he built "extras" for $280,000.00,
//~ ~~~/o)? and they just settled the arbitration case for $142,000.00. He stated he goes on record as publicly
$., /?_ _~. saying that this contractor is a great company, but it is Number One extras on extras, and while this
1h7J7SUJ7 Lb~ company may be low on the said sewage lagoon lift station job he wants assurance there will not be .
/-t-d. "extras".
PoU/er am./??,
At the request of Councillor A. Vincent, the Common Clerk, who is Secretary of the said Power
Commission, provided the following information: the tendered price for construction of the said Charlotte
Street building of the Commission was approximately $918,000.00; the claims of Simpson Construction Ltd.
....1
"..
21:.3
.
/"" vtoa;.d 0
U/e/$
I Sf 1i1aJ?/~
$(!~oP/ o-P
Jee,&}1 01o:J.
(/n/v, PI?
/i'Jap/l7e
I $<!/E?I7(!(J'S
, In $,T
.Ed',
.:7); rtff:i-p r,
.
I /lJa!ft?r
(1pmm,
tfl?tJ/e
LEG A L
e/t-!j -
7rCil YJ-$ ;,-t-
~ -6-PI.
:Bus
. ~'y..ste/??
-/'rOlJ7(!A/se
I
I
.
lil...
for "extras" were $280,000.00; the said company was awarded $142,000.00 just the other day, in its arbitration
case in this matter. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he could name many other jobs regarding this company
(where "extras" were involved), and that he thinks that the Mayor should have a talk with this contractor before
,
the City signs the contract.
At this time, Councillor Kipping, who is a member of the first Board of Directors of the new University
of Marine Sciences in Saint John (Which presently is located in the 115 Prince William Street premises of the
Saint John School of Marine Technology), advised that he has been involved with this School of Marine Technology
since its beginning and that it was a singular honour and a privilege for him at this time to more formally
introduce Mr. Edoardo Weis, Director of the Saint John School of Marine Technology, and Chairman of the Board of
Directors of the proposed University of Marine Sciences.
Mr. Weis stated that he had the honour to present to the Mayor and Councillors at this time the first
Bulletin and first Board of Directors of the new University of Marine Sciences in Saint John, most of whom were
present at this Council meeting: Mrs. Freda Lee April; Mr. Lawrence M. Bell; Dr. Michael P. Keating, M. D.; Mr.
Eric J. Kipping, Councillor; Mr. William A. London; Mr. Ora P. MacCollum; Miss A. Marilyn MacKnight; Mr. James
Maskell; Mr. Gordon C. Mouland; Mr. Sydney T. Mathews, of Ottawa, Ontario; Mr. Andrew A. McArthur; Mr. Malcolm M.
Somerville; Mr. Murray Zides; Mr. Edoardo Weis. He stated that with the co-operation, assistance and solidarity
of these Members of the Board we start in this eastern port city of Canada an institution that will be at the
service of this City initially but indeed for all of this great country, for the improvement of facilities and
our people in all the Marine fields - mainly however, Shipbuilding; Ship Operation; Port and Docks; and Marine
Education and Training; therefore within the University a Marine Research Centre will be the fulcrum of pre-
paration of our own specialists, teachers, researchers. He stated that plan and design study of the new Univer-
sity are in preparation and will be submitted to the Board of Directors in January 1976 for approval; the plans,
layout cost and the model of the new University will be prepared by Mr. Heinz Bleckenstein, Architect of the City
of Saint John; all of the legal aspect and required formalities are prepared by Mr. A. J. Debly, Lawyer of this
City and after approval by the Board of Directors will be properly exercised early in 1976. He stated that to
reach the accomplishment of today, he planned development in three different steps: (1) the initial starting of
the institution under name of "Saint John School of Marine Technology" with courses in Nautical Sciences (Navi-
gation); Marine Engineering Technology and Naval Architecture offered; (2) the recognition of the courses by The
University of Michigan and extension of the courses to an improved programme in Naval Architecture, Marine
Engineering, and Navigation; the incorporation of the Institution under the name of "Saint John School of Marine
Technology Ltd.", and the founding of "The Maritimes Shipping Herald and Marine Engineering Journal" and "Le
Journal De La Marine Marchande Des Maritimes" - a bilingual magazine serving The Port of Saint John, the world
14aritime field and the School; (3) the founding of "The University of Marine Sciences" with the co-operation of a
group of personalities of the highest reputation, knowledge and competence in the marine field, business and
industry. He advised that development to this point took nearly four years of the hardest patience, perser-
verence, tenacity and the highest faith in God. He advised further that it is thanks to you all, the support of
the Mayor. and Common Councillors of this historically First Incorporated City in Canada that we reach together
one common aim: an independent University in Saint John - the only one of its type in Canada. Hhe stated he
wishes to assure the Mayor and Councillors that this Institution is completely non-political and that the Members
of the Board of Directors of this Institution are ladies and gentlemen of Good Will.
The Mayor stated that the Council congratulates Mr. Weis and all the Members of the said Board of
Directors. The Council at this time gave an ovation to Mr. Weis and the Board of Directors. Councillor Parfitt
added her felicitations to Mr. Weis. The Mayor advised Mr. Weis and the Board of Directors that the Council will
continue to help, to the best of the Council's ability. Mr. Weis expressed his thanks, in reply.
Following a Committee of the Whole session, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed the Chair in
legal session of Common Council.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Common Council notify City Transit Limited that the
Council received the company's request for take-over of the bus system and that the correspondence in this regard
has been received and filed to the termination of the company's.franchise agreement.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~'" no"k
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-second day
of December, A. D. 1975, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye and A. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development,
D. Buck, Acting Deputy Commissioner of Property Management, R. Thompson,
214
/Yl<9::Jpr
f(/t?r.sltad
7rd/ler ';PapA-
(Iat'/( e-f'
power) I
S-i--Il1,rKS
CIJI..tf1(}j,
/YJa~oY'
C?oUI7,~v/s
Pro/:ostNi
reaucf-i on;11
[7;7fys s/.ze
hst?n?enC
dj1r~Med- re
$ewe'r, 1?oLI1t?!I
7er.mi)1~ /
IVdi '/, /I;lrbClMI'.
:Ed:
Ct7l!fSob 'c/-ftlr
kMt?Y'j'e/7C!j
eodrP/ et9d
ve~/c/e
Flre''''I-
t(/pr/rs .2)e,ds
kJ17{Jr1'6')?c !I
1J1651~u,neS
O~J? /~.;J-I/ 017
C't7h?h?
(j;l(h, /l, t/; nee-
(}/-!-!/ IJ1 If r.
a>>;J?1, kh~ry:4-
U/1l/1,fS
U/aier "p/7eSStZ
ft/; l' /; 'e iiI/e.
pe-f-/-f /t)J?
5'-tand j?/f?e
/alrewtJod
~rea
{lo/l/allwy
Chief of Rehabilitation Services, D. French, Director of Personnel and
Training, and D. McCaig, Park Planning Assistant of the Recreation and
Parks Department
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
The Mayor advised that on the night of December 20th last, due to a problem of no heat or
lights in the Kierstead Trailer Park area, Saint John West, a number of people who reside at the Trailer
Park came to his home seeking shelter, and following discussion with them, he, as a private citizen, make
contacts for them. He stated he wanted to compliment the St. Mark's United Church and Reverend K. M.
Findley, who offered to open the Church hall, which he did, and invited these families to spend the night
there, where it was warm - later in the evening, some of the families left because of certain things they
could do on their own; the Church was made available to these families if they needed it again on Sunday,
December 21st.
At this time, the Mayor read a prepared statement expressing his disagreement fundamentally
with the concept of reducing the size of the City of Saint John that was introduced at the Council '
meeting of December 15th last in comments made by a Council member with respect to the administration of
the City. The Mayor stated he feels that these comments reflect improperly upon this Council and the
preceding Councils, and that reducing the area of the City would be a backward, retrogressive step and a
decline in the growth which this city has been experiencing. The Mayor's statement advises that he
entirely rejects the concept to reduce the size of the City, and he trusts that other Councillors,
knowing their duty to our City and citizens, feel as he does. He stated that he has felt it necessary to
make the remarks in this statement so that the public will not take the proposal of anyone Councillor as
policy of the other members of Council. Councillor Cave expressed the view that he does not think the
Mayor's remarks are correct. Councillor Kipping stated that he presumes the Council will debate the
subject at some future time. The Mayor made affirmative reply.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
National Harbours. Board has requested the City of Saint John to enter into an easement agreement with
respect to an easement right to maintain, operate, reconstruct or repair a sewer pipeline, 85 inches in
diameter, on an area of approximately 65,850 square feet situate at Rodney Terminal, Saint. John harbour,
and that the documents have been examined and found to be in order, and recommending that the Mayor and
Common Clerk be authorized to sign this agreement, be laid on the table and be referred to the proper
land committee for the proper easements and proper legal documents to be negotiated.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager, Fire Chief,
Police Chief and Commissioner of Engineering and Works, who form the Emergency Measures Organization
Committee, advising that during 1975 it was considered necessary that in the course of controlling and
directing emergencies, an emergency control centre be established and that this control centre should be
of a mobile nature, but that the considerable amount of money necessary to initiate this concept was not
available which has resulted in a tanker which the Fire Department was taking out of service and which
was being made surplus to that Department's fleet, having been modified by the Maintenance and Supply
Department to make it into an emergency mobile centre which is now available for operation; and advising
that this vehicle has seen operationduring the Marsh Creek flooding; and further advising that it would
appear that the City of Saint John is ahead of many national organizations in providing such a fine
mobile centre and that the staffs of the Fire Department and the Maintenance and Supply Department should
be complimented on the work that has gone into this vehicle, and expressing the view that the citizens of
the City should be equally proud of it when it is seen in action; and further advising that this vehicle
can be on display for the Council meeting of December 22nd and should be examined to fully appreciate its
capabilities -- be received and filed and all those who are responsible for the construction of the said
vehicle be congratulated for the good common sense they have used in this regard, and that they be given
a vote of thanks.
~
.
I
I
.
I
The Mayor displayed a book showing the above named emergency measures vehicle, and advised that .
the vehicle was parked outside the City Hall building at this time. Noting that it is a very attractive
vehicle, he congratulated the Chief and his men for this functional vehicle.
Councillor A. Vincent expressed concern
electric stove in the above named vehicle, in the
willing to pay for this expenditure, personally.
personally inspected the said vehicle.
that some
interest s
He stated
ceramic
of fire
that he
tile be put over the top of the
safety. He stated he would be
was making these comments having
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Engineering and Works with reference to the petition received by Council from the residents on Willie
Avenue concerning water pressure in the Lakewood area, advising that this is a problem that the City was
cognizant of and has been making engineering plans which would correct the problem, and advising that the
solution to the water pressure problem is the construction of a stand pipe which would facilitate pressure
problems, not only in Lakewood, but eventually in Forest Hills, and which would cost approximately
$226,000.00 - in this total there are two items for the supply of a new pump and the replacement of a
motor and impeller on the diesel set, and should these. two items be installed immediately, it would
correct some of their problems - and recommending that the cost of construction of a new stand pipe for
the Lakewood area be considered for the Capital Programme for 1976, and, further, that a new pump be
installed immediately at a cost of $2,500.00, and, in addition, that a further cost of $2,000.00 for the
installation of the pump and the replacement of the motor and impeller for the diesel set be approved __
be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if some of the expenditure in the above recommendation is supposed
to be in the current budget and it is now being transferred to the capital account. Mr. Barfoot explained
that the recommendation is to consider the $226,000.00 expenditure for a stand pipe in the 1976 capital
budget; it was always intended to capitalize this construction - the timing, however, up until now, has
not been definite. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the all the pipe and all the connections up to the
stand pipe was supposed to be in 1976's ordinary budget, and he asked how is Willie Avenue going to be
connected to the stand pipe. 11r. Barfoot replied that it.needs a pipe from Willie Avenue up the hill
about 200 or 300 feet.
I
I
.
~
,..
.
*'
I
I
.
I
..7)emolti/on
37<1'J/klll
%
/fSoI ij1
,(ell7ster
.
')1:J
i;J .
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter from the City Manager and the
Building Inspector, the lowest tenders received, namely, those of Paul's Trucking & Demolition Co. Ltd., to
demolish 37 and 31 Leinster Street for the sum of $4,600.00, and to demolish 45 and 47 Leinster Street for the
sum of $2,800.00, be accepted, which includes a waiver of informality of tender procedure on the part of the said
contractor who was one of three tenderers who submitted their separate bids and separate deposit cheques in one
envelope rather than having submitted each separate bid and separate deposit cheque in a separate envelope.
Councillor Parfitt asked if any residents who now live in the above noted properties have had time to
seek other accommodations, and how soon the properties are to be demolished. Mr. Buck advised that one of the
properties has been vacant for some time; the other property, still has some residential tenants and the City is
making arrangements for their relocation; none of these buildings will be demolished until the tenants are
relocated.
Councillor A. Vincent asked why the tendering procedure was not followed in this matter as advertised
in a paid advertisement in the local newspaper. Mr. Barfoot ~tated that there was a slight discrepancy in the
instructions given to tenderers - in one part of the instructions they were told to put them in two separate
envelopes and in another place it was implied that they were in one envelope, and so some tenderers followed one
procedure, and some, the other; however, the intent of the tendering was performed and this is why the recom-
mendation to waive any informality that may have been there in the tendering procedure. Councillor A. Vincent
made the suggestion that when contractors tender and are instructed that they have to go by separate tender they
may feel that the third out of four tenants may not move out until next year and they may have to pay more
money - and if the City is going to waive it, then the City should not call the tenders that way. He felt that
if you are going to get honourable and fair contractors bidding, which did bid in this case, the game should be
called by the rules we call the tender - he is afraid that this tender was not called that way - it upsets
the Construction Association, and other citizens who know a little bit about bidding. He stated that the City
should not advertise in the newspaper one thing, and award a contract, another; it does not make for good bidding,
next time. He asked that Mr. Rodgers explain what his conversation was with the Building Inspector in this
matter. He added that it is his own opinion that the tenders should be called over again, because the tender
call was for certain things and the bidders did not do it; the City called the tenders in this particular matter
and did not accept the tenders on the basis it called - he does not think that is fair. Mr. Rodgers stated that
following discussion with the Building Inspector, and assuming that this is an informality in the tendering
procedure, the Council if it so wishes can waive that informality, and he assumes this is what the City Manager
is recommending to Council that it do now - the Council does not have to accept the City Manager's recommendation
if it does not wish to, but the provision is there for that in the tendering procedure. Councillor A. Vincent
made the point that the City is a member of the Saint John Construction Association and tenders under the Assoc-
iation's regulations - theTefore, why does the City bother with all that if it waives it when it suits the City
to do so. Councillor Davis reminded the Council members that some years ago the Council formulated rules for
tendering within the City - the City's own tendering procedures are modelled after the procedures of the Pro-
vincial Government and other agencies - the City does have in those procedures enough leaway so that when there
is a small deviation from the actual formality that the Council can waive the formality - and in this particular
case, it is a matter, as he understands it, of having one envelope over two envelopes. He stated he does not
think that there is that great a seriousness about the matter. Councillor A. Vincent contended that in this
case, it was a little different because it involves the tender call wording, and two buildings and two buildings.
He asked that the tender call be produced. Mr. Barfoot replied in the affirmative to this request.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid On the table until a copy of the
tender call is provided for the information of Council. -/$c ~eO. (J-f' 1l1'f:~{,J'f7( N'$:!iJ?lKS ..p~(Jve h7.:#f(JJ7 (l~ 'T.:<.~
'Chis :B<>~k)
Councillor Kipping asked that the tender bids also be brought to the Council meeting. Councillor A.
Vincent concurred in this request. Mr. Barfoot replied in the affirmative.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
;7I~rp~ ~ RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager submitting a letter from
I?7c~~ar~ ~rr. Harold C. McNamara, dated December 18th, 1975, on behalf of Silver Falls Park Development Company Limited,
~ indicating his company's commitment to the completion of the sewage lagoon at Silver Falls Park, Saint John East,
eW~ e and advising that a satisfactory arrangement in order to protect the City I S interest in this matter would be for
;'~;9~PJ.1~ an agreement to be entered into between the City of Saint John and the said company, covering the completion of
I ~/;;'ver~/;; the lagoon, with the performance to be guaranteed as cited by Mr. McNamara, and that this agreement be executed
~~)( ~~J~ rior to the sub-division agreement with Lloma Construction, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to
~ 7t../ "execute the aforegoing documents subject to the documents being approved by the City Solici tor ~ be received and
~...- ...vevelt7f/' filed:
C' ClJ,-i-d'..
Sfeb-d/"" ...t-
d/(:jredn, (l17 l-
IS/Iver Nils
'P<iJl"k
lit; J?1 i!>
Ct1JJs-t-rJ1d.
,It-d.
.
'?erlbrm.-;;,
bt'Jhd
.....
AND FURTHER that the fOllowing expenditures be approved for water and sewerage materials for Silver
Falls Park, Phase VIII, to be charged to the 1975 Capital Budgets:- (1) water materials (watermain, gate valves,
et cetera) $16,400.00, (2) sanitary sewer materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $6,600.00, and (3) storm sewer
materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $19,150.00 - making a total of $42,150.00; and that the Mayor and Common
Clerk be authorized to execute on behalf of the City an agreement with Silver Falls Park Development Company
Limited, covering the completion of the existing sewage lagoon in the Silver Falls PaTk, with the performance to
be guaranteed as cited by /1r. Harold C. McNamara in his letter of December 18th, 1975 addressed to the City
Manager, and that this agreement be executed prior to the sub-division agreement with Lloma Construction re-
garding Silver Falls Park, Phase VIII, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the afore-
going documents subject to the documents being approved by the City Solicitor.
Councillor Gould asked if we are to understand that there is a performance bond presently in the
possession of the City, and that the said bond is for another undertaking which is not quite finished, and that,
now, that performance bond will take place for this job. Mr. Barfoot replied that that is true - the other job
.s almost complete and it is intended to transfer such portion as is required to cover this performance on the
lagoon. Councillor Gould asked if it would not be better business to have the other job totally complete before
you had the performance bond shared by two different projects. Mr. Barfoot replied that there is provision for
the City to hold only sufficient guarantee regarding whatever work remains to be complete, and he thinks between
the two agreements this can be worked without detriment to the City's position. What he is saying is, that he is
satisfied the performance bond that is now in the City's possession will be sufficient to complete both jobs.
\
216
~
:PepC, aN17/?f~h.
J>/anJ?,+7Jevel
;re/fJ,btlur,h~ tI.
II'17j?r'o//emenc
'Prt/~~h1/?fe
p~n
AaJ?d C~.mI?1.
r?JffPlt/J1d :r
(}~epe-H-e
:JOJn 1? I4tlMe.
Sl1tdh ,Khd
JJ~//el. Cbr?
L!.It7. II C.
tV::JJ lis!, eqr
1
Consideration was given to.a letter from the City Manager, dated December 19th, 1975, submitting
a letter from ~IT. D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal. Services together with a draft plan
prepared by the Department in co-operation with the citizens of the South End, whicWoutlines the policies
and programmes to be implemented regarding the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme, and recommending
that the Council accept the plan for the said Programme in the South End in principle, and further
recommending that the Land Committee be authorized to commence the acquisition of the lands necessary to
carry out the programme, and further recommending that the City of Saint John support the programme of
housing set out in the plan in order that the housing project may start in early spring of 1976. The
City Manager's letter adds that further recommendations concerning the implementation of the plan will
be brought to Council for action from time to time. .
Present at this time were Mr. Raymond J. Guerette, President, and Mr. John Mooney, a member of
the executive, of the South End Development Corporation.. Also present were Messrs. Jan Davis and Robert
Dryden, the two planners who are involved in the preparation of the above named plan. Mr. Buck advised
that there is a correction required in the presentation from the South End Development Corporation: the
schedule that appears in the draft plan given to the Council is correct - the one in the draft letter
given to Council, which accompanies the letter from the City Manager, is incorrect - the only difference
is that the schedule shows a sum of Queen Square landscaping which is shown in 1976, whereas, actually,
that work will be done in 1978; they were trying to keep the 1976 costs as low as they possibly could
and defer any work that could be deferred until later years, and they feel that Queen Square landscaping
work can be deferred until 1978.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that when he received his Council correspondence on December
21st, when he returned to the province, he did not realize that the Council was going to have a dele-
gation before it at this meeting - therefore, he proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that this
matter be tabled until the next meeting, so that he would have time to study the whole report, before he
would be prepared to meet; he would like to be able to ask some questions which he is not in a position
to be able to do, now. He included in the proposed motion that the South End Development Corporation be
asked to return to Council in one week in this matter.
!~. Guerette advised that since the South End Development Corporation was before the Council
in August of 1974 asking that the Council allocate the funds for the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme
for the South End, they have been working on a plan because, under this Programme, before the 1.2
million dollars can be spent they must have some sort of a plan; before they can spend the said sum they
have to give to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the New Brunswick Housing Corporation and the
City of Saint John plans, which were on display at this meeting of Council - these plans have been
detailed in the report that was now before the Council. He pointed out that the objectives of the
Programme were to rehabilitate the neighbourhood, to provide for additional housing - particularly in
those areas where the housing was very substandard; they had hoped that the housing would be a catalyst
for further private investments to continue building in the South End, and they wanted to generally
improve the physical environment and the social and recreational amenities in the South End; for the
past year, they have been working very hard with the citizens of that area and they have had several
public meetings; the plans on display at this meeting, and what is contained in the book now before
Council have gone to the citizens in the South End and they have met on November 12th last to consider
this - they were given two weeks in which to think about the plan and to ask questions, and on November
26th the Development Corporation went back to the citizens and the citizens voted a set of resolutions,
adopting the plan - these resolutions are in the said book. He stated that the Council is Deing asked at
this meeting to approve this basic plan because the Development Corporation now wants the Council to
unlock the doors to the treasury so that they can get at the 1.2 million dollars; they have set out for
the Council how they have to spend this money - it is a four-year plan and one year of that is already
gone and they spent some money on planning and architects, and so on, but the bulk of the money now, has
to be spent and Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will not spend the money or give the Develop-
ment Corporation any money until the Common Council approves the basic plan. He stated that for 1976,
they are proposing to spend about $485,000.00 - out of that you are paying 37% which means that the City
has to budget about $181,000.00 out of its own monies - the rest will come from the Federal and Pro-
vincial governments - and then, for 1977 and for 1978, for a total of 1.2 million dollars; once the
Council has approved the basic plan, it will permit the Development Corporation to take some initial
steps immediately to plan for the Block 10 housing - it will also permit the said Corporation to buy
some land which it knows is available at the moment, which land will go away unless they are able to get
at it right away. He stated he is aware that the City does not have any money, but the City signed an
agreement with the Province a year ago and the City is bound by that agreement, and the City has three
years to spend this money - if it does not spend it this year, it will have to spend it next year, or in
1977, but there is a limit of four years on the Programme, so the City has to start spending, now, and
the City's total for 1976 is $181,000.00, and this is spread out as shown in the said book, for 1976;
they are asking for a total commitment of $485,000.00 and the City's is $181,000.00; this will not only
permit the Development Corporation to do the things that are shown on this budget - it will permit the
Corporation, then, to go to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation with the plan, showing that the
City is. spending this money on this, and get at the money for housing, for recreational facilities,
which is available - the said Federal Corporation will not really entertain the Development Corporation
until such time as the Council approves in principle the plan and what the said Development Corporation
has submitted to Council at this meeting; this is the final step; after this, the Development Corpor-
ation is mobilizing which means that they hope the actual construction will be in the spring, and
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has assured them that there is money available for about 40-60
units on Block 10, and they think they can get this started in the spring. He stated that in addition
to the budget for the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme, they are also asking if the Council would
undertake to spend in the vicinity of 3 to 4 million dollars over the next ten years, from 1976 to 1986,
which is the City's own money, and is not Neighbourhood Improvement Progr~e money - this is the kind
of money that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation wants the City to spend, and it is divided into
land acquisition, landscaping, site development, housing and generally to rehabilitate the neighbourhood -
the City would have to spend some money on that. He added that they have the rink in there, because he
thinks the City's commitment to the people in the South End to build a rink is a fairly strong one; they
realize that the City does not have any money, now - they do not expect the City to build a rink next
year, or even the year after that - but he thinks that sooner or later the City will want to build it,
and that is why thee put it in their projections for ten years. He stated they have an awful lot of
land to acquire if they are going to fill in those areas shown on this paper, for housing - much of this
land is almost available, right now, owned by absentee landlords, consists of very dilapidated buildings
- you can buy the land - and he thinks that the time to do it is now - there is money being provided in
the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme, and as well, when that Programme runs out, they are asking the
City to spend some of its own money to complete the assimilation of these various lots on which they are
planning some new housing. He stated that they are not saying they are going to build all of this, but
they do hope to attract private investments and initiate things themselves, and to organize co-operatives,
to get things moving. He stated that, in particular, the recreational facilities must not be forgotten -
there is hardly any in the South End - and this is one of their first priorities after housing; he
pointed out that below Broad Street is pretty well where they are concentrating their efforts, because
that is about the only place where there is some cleared land; if you are going to put a rink anyplace,
you have nowhere to put it except the other side of Broad Street unless you are prepared to level a city
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....1
,..-
217
.
S'()ui-h Kh
7Jevel. ~I'
tfel'!hf,ottr-
A tli/( I "7 fl~~
l1J~d ~p-
I.!r.;;mmt? j?4.
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
ll......
block; the negotiations they have had. with. the various people who own property in that area are very favourable -
if you are going to buy anything, buy it now, before it is too late. He advis~dthat the Development..Corporation
has worked closely with the City staff on this plan, and the said CorporatiQh';IDa: .}hecitY'stiiff.are here before
the Council at this time, speaking as one, and this plan is what they want, and.this' is what they have studied,
and they think this is what the Council should study very seriously.
With regard to the use of Block 10, Mr. Guerette advised that the Development Corporation and the City
staff have given close study to this land, and Block 10 is just not big enough for a rink, according to the
Recreation and Parks Department's own criteria - they cannot build a rink on this block and provide the facilities
that they have to provide, according to the City's own regulations - it is just too small - if the City.does have
to build a rink there and there is pressure to build housing in the future it is going to be very expensive
housing because then we are going to be in the position that we will have to level city blocks to actually put
housing. He noted that it has taken the City many years to assemble Block 10, but that block now exists as
cleared land - and it is going to take years to acquire the lands on each side of Block 10 as per the plan - that
is why they are saying ten. years - but those properties are now starting to fall into our hands and we need the
money to buy them, and they are very cheap. He stated they are hoping to work out a deal with the City regarding
Block 10: the City bought the land for the other rinks' across the city and put the rinks on the land and some-
times that land was acquired over many years - they are going to ask that the City give them Block 10 for one
dollar and they will be back during the coming winter on this matter to see the Council - however, under this new
programme, they are going to let the City have the $250,000.00 out of the funds which they could spend in other
ways with their Programme and the City can take this money out of this joint budget of the City and the South End
Development Corporation but in return, as stated, they want Block 10 for one dollar - so the City has that money
ready and available for the price of that particular piece of property the identity of which he is not at liberty
to mention at this time and which he thinks the City can buy next month if it wants to because the money is right
there - the only thing the City has to spend is 37% .of that amount on that first item, and that is about $95,000.00
Councillor Hodges asked if there is anything planned to make a small shopping centre on the block where
the Save Easy store and the laundromat are. Mr. Guerette explained that they planned sort of a neighbourhood
centre for the Save-Easy block and recreational facilities in that area - a place where people can meet, as well
as playgrounds - it could develop into a small shopping centre, he noted; however, they had to start somewhere
with these plans, although some of these properties on these plans are going to be geared for future use which is
probably in a way the people down there never thought of. Councillor Hodges asked where the Development Corpor-
ation thinks the City is going to get enough enforcement officers to do a fast patrol from one end of the South
End to the other (he had just commented on the conditions the back alleyways and dooryards are in, in the South
End), particularly with the absentee landlords. .In reply, Mr. Guerette noted that the Corporation came to the
public meetings with a set of resolutions and the last item on the agenda of the public meeting was the question
put to the South End people as to what they want - did the Corporation miss or lose anything, and did the South
End people wish to add anything to this, and that was the resolution they added: more foot patrolmen in the city.
Councillor Hodges replied that what he is talking about is enforcement officers for the unsightly premises, and
at the present time there are no inspections that he knows of by the City in that area. Mr. Guerette advised
that they wrote a letter about a month ago to the Building Inspector and to Mr. Salassy with a list of about 50
properties in the South End saying these are the properties they think are fire hazards or are going to fall
down, and the properties that have been destroyed by fire recently are on the list - and they asked these City
officials to take a look. 'at ..the'.said '.list of properties and see if they could condemn them or urge the landlords
to rehabilitate the properties; the letters came back, saying they are doing the best they can but people have to
move somewhere and there is no place for them to go at the moment - Mr. Salassy has inspected about 10 of these
properties already - apparently about 3 of them should not have been on the list - they just looked bad from the
outside - they would like to have the said properties inspected and to find a way to get the landlords to rehab-
ilitate their properties without having to take the tenants out of there.
During further discussion of the plans, Mr. Guerette explained that with regard to all the green areas
shown on the plan, in between blocks, there were houses demolished and there is sort of a path in between the
block - they are going to fix those up and there will be some tot lots in those, as well - these kind of areas
are peppered allover the South End, and some of them they will have to acquire, as passages and as the tot
lots - this will be the mini-recreational facilities they will have on the north side of Broad Street. Noting
that in the past the South End has been lacking trees in certain areas, and curbing, as compared to other sections
of the city, Councillor Hodges felt that the South End has as much right as any other section of the city to be a
first-class section, and stated he supports the plans of the Development Corporation,.fully.
Expressing his support of the undertaking in the South End by the South End Development Corporation,
Councillor Green stated that the only part that bothers him is that in their land acquisition, Phase I, they are
still taking that block in as we had mentioned before between Vulcan, Charlotte and Sydney Streets and Broadview
Avenue - whereas that area, as mentioned before, is certainly a good commercial site, and he is just wondering if
we are doing the right thing by taking that block and then have to get another block to help them out, because he
personally feels that in that block we would be making a mistake by going in there. Mr. Guerette replied that we
have to decide where we are going to put some recreational facilities and assuming that we need so many acres per
so many people, and so on, the ones in the area that they have set aside for recreation are even barely enough,
as it is, and it had to include that particular lot; he personally feels that if you are going to bring in
development, and so on, you are probably going to want a site larger than that and it probably belongs in the
industrial park, not down in the South End - not that area - it is fairly restricted - just a city block - he
does not know what kind of industry you could fit in there - it probably would need more room - he does not know.
He stated that the Development Corporation feels that this land should be zoned for recreational purposes and
they have talked this area around about commercial development, industrial development. Councillor Green stated
that the only thing he is saying is that any piece of land on the waterfront that is valuable now is going to be
much more valuable in the future. Mr. Guerette agreed, and stated that you have to look at the alternatives - if
you want to build the rink sometime it is going to be three times as expensive to demolish the entire city
block - this is what the City is faced with; with regard to the Barrack Green, he stated that they tried before
to get it and he thinks that the Council knows the experience, and we are just not going to get that piece of
land.
Councillor Cave noted that all the South End Development Corporation is asking is that at the present
time the Common Council agree in principle to this plan - which means that we do not accept this to be one
hundred per cent - it can be changed. Mr. Guerette confirmed this observation. Councillor Cave continued, that
the purchase of land would be done by the City through the Land Committee. Mr. Guerette confirmed that it would
be done through the City. Councillor Cave stated he feels that the Council should agree to this plan, in principle,
subject to various changes. Mr. Guerette .explained that there is more to this, than meets the eye - he suggested
that Mr. Davis and Mr. Dryden explain more fully just what the Development Corporation would like to do.
Councillor MacGowan commended the South End Development Corporation and the citizens who have been
involved, noting that they have had citizens from allover the South End and the City has been wanting to do
something for the South End for years, and now we have a group who have spent hours of work planning this. She
stated she does not think the Council, even by closest study of the matter, could find anything else that needs
to be done - she thinks this is an excellent presentation - she was thrilled when she read it, and is anxious to
see the necessary action taken to get it in motion.
'91M'
"'" .
~
StlulJ; 'hd
2Jevej Cpr,?,
lYelgJ;btlu.rho
.1./17 j?roverneht-
P~~r~l17,me ria.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that it was his intent to try to have a private meeting with one
of the members of the South. End Neighbourhood Improvement Programme, namely, Mr. John Mooney, for the
purpose of trying to unveil to this Council the agreement that the Town of Oromocto Recreation Department 4It
has with the Provincial Government - and we can build our rink down there - but he sees that the Council
is not interested, and that is why he asked that the matter be tabled - he spoke to his fellow Councillors
in Committee of the Whole and made it clear that he had a telegram in his possession from the previous
Minister of Education, Mr. Lorne McGuigan, that there was a certain document between the said Town and its
Recreation Department and the Provincial Government, and that Councillor A. Vincent wants the same treatment _
that is all he is asking for - that the matter be tabled. He felt that if the Council hears the rest of
the South End Development Corporation's presentation, the Council is going to lose the whole "ball park".
I~. Guerette replied that they are interested in what Councillor A. Vincent has spoken of, but this is the
plan - it took a year for them to get it ready - they are through chasing after all these alternatives I
that you sent us chasing after - this is the plan - this is what we want. Councillor A. Vincent advised
that the chairman appeared before the Land Committee and said that he had certain land they discussed - he _
himself went to a telephone and called the owners of the former Penders company and he never heard tell of
it - therefore, by making that telephone call, Councillor A. Vincent knows that certain connections have
not been made. He added that he is completely in support of the South End, but he wants to do it legally,
and fair, and all he is saying is, that he has in his possession the said telegram saying that there is a
lease available, that there was a lease, and there is a lease, in Oromocto for recreation purposes, and we
could do the same thing in the South End.
l~. Guerette at this time introduced Mr. Davis, advising that Mr. Davis is a planning consultant
and was hired by the South End Development Corporation to work in conjunction with the City staff to plan
the development of this plan here, and to formulate it - most of this plan has been written by Mr. Davis
and by Mr. Dryden, who works for the City. At this time, Mr. Davis explained the details of the four
plans that were on display in the Council Chamber with relation to various aspects of the rehabilitation
of the South End area under discussion as outlined in the Development Corporation's presentation. Noting
that most of the buildings in poor condition in this area are owned by absentee landlords, Mr. Davis
stated that the Development Corporation would like to reduce this problem by purchasing land by South End
Development Corporation and by co-operative groups from the South End, and give the people who live there
a greater control over the area itself. He advised that the plan responds to the greatest needs in the
area - the greatest priorities - and by far the greatest priority in the South End, and probably anywhere
in the City, is for improved housing; they have indicated a number of housing projects which are defined
in area in terms of the areas which have the greatest concentration of poor buildings;. regarding the City-
owned Block 10, since housing was determined to be the highest priority and Block 10 was the most available
piece of land, it was determined that that should be used for housing - it is surrounded on all sides by
areas which are also in substandard condition, generally, and they have the block and development to
include portions of all the surrounding blocks and we will end up with a net construction of probably 250
housing units on those sites, over the next few years; the second site is in the area around St. Andrews
Street, across from the Save Easy, where there are a number of buildings which are in poor condition and
if the inspections indicate that a sufficient number of them are in poor condition, that portion of the
block should be. removed and replaced; they are indicating a housing project on North Queen Square which,
would preferably be for senior citizens because it faces on to the Square and is a level lot, two blocks
from the central business district; at the foot of Pitt Street, there is a large site which is partly
owned by the City and which has a couple of houses on it - one is in poor condition, one is in fair
condition and one is reasonably good - this site could be used to advantage for additional housing; there
are a lot of small sites throughout the area they would like to either fill in - they are vacant lots
now - with new housing - the same character, the same size as we have existing on the streets - two- or
three-storey buildings - and to replace some of the poor buildings that are shown on the map on display
with other types of in-fill housing; if all these things are completed, we will end up at the end of the
project with construction of approximately 675 new units, but what the Development Corporation has identi-
fied on the appropriate map in this regard is that we have a problem with approximately 400 and something
units, so we are not really increasing the occupancy of the residential density of the South End, at all -
we are putting a number of units in and are just replacing what we are taking away. He stated that in
terms of recreation, they have defined a recreation zone which kind of grew together from a series of
items which they had, which included the Barrack Green area and the area around it, and this would be
developed over a long period of time preferably, but what they would like to see is that a policy be
established that this be made recreation; he referred to the map showing the existing land use of the
South End and the existing recreation area there, at the present time, and stated that the Comprehensive
Community Plan required over 20 acres of land, and this almost prQvides that; at the present time, the
recreation is very "tight" - there are not any real places where people can go all of the time with the
exception of th~se existing ones; they have defined a number of small recreation sites throughout the
South End and, in some cases, they happen to join up, where we have a mini-park adjacent to a playground,
and it may provide pedestrian linkage through the block; they would like to rehabilitate some of the
streets themselves, as well as buildings on the streets - to define some of the streets as residential
by limiting the traffic on them and putting in new landscaping - limiting the speed of traffic, and that
sort of thing, and this would reduce the amount of sort of short-cutting of traffic through the South. End
and it would not increase traffic on any of the streets.
I
.
I
.
Councillor Parfitt noted that with regard to in-fill housing, most of the lots in this part of
the city measure 40 feet on the street by maybe 130 feet deep, and that with new building today each unit
has to have one and one-quarter parking spaces provided for it, and she asked how this regulation would be
gotten around. lillo. Davis replied that there are a number of problems - one other problem is that existing
zoning in the South End requires 60-foot frontage, and so a variance of that type of situation would have
to be available for almost all the cases of in-fill housing that we are talking about; if we are talking
about a 40-foot frontage, and we are putting in three units we can put in three parking spaces across
that - parking can be provided either by narrowing the frontage of the house or by putting in a few car
spaces in the front, like some people have now - there are a lot of great problems in the South End but
parking is a very great problem right now in that there should be more off-street parking but it is
practically impossible to do so without taking something of greater value away. Councillor Parfitt
advised that she supports the building up of the South End as a residential area, and noted that it is the
best part of the city - there is no pollution, no railway crossings, and it has a bus service. She asked
what is the density regarding Block 10. Mr. Davis stated that for that block and for all the projects,'
they have calculated based on the existing density for the South End as it exists - the density of that
block would be the same as the density for other blocks - it would be 27 to 30 units to the acre which is
about 50 units to a block, which is what exists now. Councillor Hodges advocated that the South End,
which previously had a higher population density than it has now, be brought back to its original higher
density, because it is cheaper for the City, and all the services, and everything else, are there. Mr.
Davis noted that the population density of the South End has been declining for the last 25 years at
least, a little at a time, and the density could go back up; the Development Corporation in this plan
would be putting in 675 units and taking out 400 and some odd units. Councillor Hodges noted that the
problem in the South End now is the transient population, and he asked if this group is going to try to
reverse that. Mr. Davis replied that the rehabilitated buildings and the new buldings that they put in
would not be for short-term living except that they would like to establish a small housing bank so that
in the event of an emergency, like a fire, they would be able to house people for a short period of time.
Councillor Hodges asked how this group is going to get the people to go for landscaping, and stated he
I
I
.
~
,..
219
,.
.
I
I
Sotdh hd
;Pev~1 Ct?r?,
IJfeI'!h jtlJe/'-
ho(;d .Ltj?~
. men! '/?rtJ-
~/blmJ?1e?1a
{;erclld'R
WhO/len
'Pd-/f//J17 f7
s-l-J1eet-
I tJlos/n1
,{owe/I f-t:
1/:;:1 .5/;ore
~d.
.
I
I
4nt:L aht/?/,
/?"el7D1,
-IoU/ell $I-:
.
II...
noticed a new building there and what is on the lawn, but cars parking on it. Mr. Davis stated that a lot of
these projects would hopefully be carried out either by the South End Development Corporation or groups that are
organized in the South End using Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation financing, ana: as. part of the project
landscaping would be included - the Development Corporation hopes to include it in Block 10 as a small recreation
area similar to what they would be removing but it would be at least a year before they could put it in so they
would like to replace it, first.
Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that the plans to which Mr. Davis had been referring (that were on
display in the Council Chamber) were not included in the book in which the development plan has been presented to
Council by the South End Development Corporation. Mr. Davis explained that this book is a draft which was very
quickly put together from what they had - the important portions .of it are at the beginning which is the summary
of all these things they ~e doing, and the maps which are indicated in this plan - there is one map in the book
and when the final report is completed it is going to have something like 24 maps which will have all of these
maps that are displayed at this meeting, plus about three times as much more information. At this time, at the
request of Councillor A. Vincent he explained the four maps that are on display at this meeting of Council.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week until the
next meeting of Council so that the Council can study the project and determine where the City can find the money
to go ahead.
Question being taken, the motion was lost, with Councillors A. Vincent and Green voting "yea" and all
other" Council members present voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the Common Council adopt, in principle, the report of the
South End Development Corporation for the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme in the South End.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay" stating that he so
voted because the City does not have the money to do what the said plan calls for.
Mr. Gerald R~ Whalen of 386 Lowell Street, was present on behalf of residents of Lowell Street and City
Line whose petition was before Common Council on December 15th last, protesting the closing of portions of Lowell
Street and Bay Shore Road thus making Lowell Street a de~d-end street, and pointed out that the proposed street
closure would isolate these residents further from Fire Department services and from the public bus service and
they would be placed in the position of having to go another way to work, and it would change their environment.
Noting that the arena at Lowell Street was built with no access road, and that the proposal in closing the
portions of Lowell Street and City Line is to give that land to the Canadian Pacific Railway in exchange for a
pie-shaped piece of land from the Railway, he stated the petitioners would like to know why this happened; he
added that an item appeared in newspaper one time that it was to create a buffer zone for a railroad company -
the next time, they said they want it for the people for a parking lot around the arena and for the children to
play in around the arena - the petitioners would like to know why this was done; he asked why the plans did not
call for access roads to the arena when it was built; he noted that traffic is to be diverted down Lowell Street
towards City Line and the other end from Bay Shore Road and Woodville Road has been closed, and all the traffic
has to come up the way he described; he added that, in addition, an apartment building is being built down on
City Line which will create more traffic, with no talk about access roads in view of. the proposed street closures.
He pointed out that neither Lowell Street nor City Line were built as roads, but were just paved over the sod.
Noting that the said petition bears over 100 names, Mr Whalen stated that he could have obtained more signatures
had it not been the Christmas season. He stated that the petitioners want to know why the City wants to give
land away to a railroad company. Making another point, Mr. Whalen stated that these residents would like this
road to travel on, in both summer and winter - they always used it. Mr. Whalen advised that an official of the
City told him that the official's map did not coincide with that of Mr. Whalen. He stated that he called an
official of the City and was told that the said portions of Lowell Street and Bay Shore Road would be closed but
~hat these residents could use the parking lot, but these residents do not go along with that. He stated that
this road was laid out by the Province of New Brunswick, not by the City of Lancaster, nor by the City of Saint
John, and that he does not think it should be closed to give land to a railroad company or anybody else. He
noted that there was an acre and one-quarter to be given away - from Bay Shore Road was to be given away and part
of Lowell Street was to be given away, and the City was being reimbursed with one-quarter of an acre of land from
the railroad.
In reply to Mr. Whalen's queries, Mr. Barfoot advised that the Council has advertised the closing of
portions of Lowell Street some of which are now underneath the tracks of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Mr.
Whalen observed that he has traced out the base lines of the railway right-of-way, and if that is the case, there
must be land owned by many citizens of Lowell Street that is underneath the tracks. Mr. Barfoot explained that
it is the old right-of-way that the City is closing, in order to creat a new right-of-way for Lowell Street. Mr.
Whalen interjected that this is not what he has been told by an official of the City, and that what he was
talking about was what was advertised in the newspaper, regarding what would be taken away from these residents.
j~. Barfoot advised that the City is advertising the closure of portions of Lowell Street in order to transact a
land exchange with the Canadian Pacific Railway, but when the streets are closed the City will then provide a 50-
foot street right-of-way which will link Bay Shore Road with Lowell Street adjacent to the proposed parking lot
along the approximate road alignment that presently exists - though the City is closing an existing right-of-way,
it is providing one, in exchange - it is proposed in the 1976 Capital programme to reconstruct the parking lot
with the main entrance on Bay Shore Road, to reconstruct approximately 150 feet of Lowell Street to landscape and
fence the area in the proximity of the arena - in other words, what will be restored is more than these residents
have now.
At this time, a map of the proposed new right-of-way was shown to Mr. Whalen, who noted that they did
not say they would make any access road for the residents.- he also noted.that Lowell Street runs from City Line
to Sea Street.
In explanation of the Land Committee's deliberations on this street closing matter, Councillor Davis,
Chairman of that Committee, advised that the Lowell Street arena was built on that site because the people there
wanted that arena very badly, even though the area that is to accommodate the arena is smaller than we would have
liked - but there was tremendous pressure from all the people in West Saint John for that arena on that site; now
the situation is, that if we leave that road the way it is you are going to have cars all along Lowell Street,
parking in front of the homes of the residents there; the City has had a lot of protests from people there about
closing off these streets and making the exchange with the railway company, and so on; there are rights-of-way
that go across those railway tracks that have never been used and the street has been using land that belongs to
the railway company, and we have to make this land exchange, to tidy things up - the reason the City has been
doing this street closing is to try to get a space for all the cars that are going to be piled up in that area -
the City knows about the grade - Councillor Green is very familiar with that area - and the City has been doing
.)') (I
1ttW/IW '1
~
Stf,f?d- t'/e,$/n
/tlwe II $--6-.
~~ S'hoJ?e
a,hJmi -c:tee
ft/h &/e
~/.;1r/e.s
/Vtm- a/on
IJ/7J j?/t?!lt?e s
,Kat?J?0n7 / l!
~-tJrd /ne:l-ltJr
'P/.;;JI7JJ, t9~ I//S ,
Cr?mffl.
7?e-7.ol?/J7f
Pe-frP /'in.2
cAh4>P ,/+,f
~,$.JJe champ
'l(e-MI'! i J7f
(e,tuner~~i.? ~
?Y't??er6-!fJ
the best it can with a situation that is not ideal, and it is trying to develop a system of streets so
that the residents can get down the grade and down Bay Shore Road; the City is aware of the problem _
Councillors Green, A. Vincent and Pye are on the Land Committee together with the Mayor, and the Land
Committee has given much study to the matter, and this is the best solution the City.has, to keep the
cars away from the street and blocking this 30-foot right-of-way. Mr. Whalen maintained that all the
traffic, both ways, from the arena will have to come down City Line and then turn around, and then it
will become one-way traffic, instead of both ways.
.
Councillor MacGowan asked Mr. D. McCaig, who drew the plans for the Lowell Street right-of-way,
if he discussed with the residents of Lowell.Street these plans and explained to them exactly what is
planned for that street. Mr. McCaig replied that he discussed the matter with Mr. Whalen, but he was not
speaking with any of the other residents. Councillor MacGowan that as a public relations matter, it
would be a good move to explain the plan to the other residents because she does not believe they under-
stand exactly what the City is planning for Lowell Street. She noted that Mr. McCaig had explained to
her that this is a legal closure more than a physical closure, so it is not going to affect the traffic,
at all, for the winter, until construction takes place. In reply, Mr. McCaig stated that is true, and
that there is a small portion of the street which has to be reconstructed - but, on paper, it is actually
just a "paper" closing of the street, not a physical closing of the street, so it will not affect the
residents during the winter.
I
Councillor Gould proposed that third reading of the closing of these two portions of the
streets in question be now proceeded with.
I
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the matter of the proposed closing of a portion of
Lowell Street and of a portion of Bay Shore Road be laid on the table for a further week until the
residents of that area have an opportunity to know exactly what the City is planning regarding the
streets in question.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent, Davis, Gould
and Kipping voting "nay".
.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the City staff will try to release some publicity, for the
information of the said residents in the above discussed matter, in the meantime. The Mayor advised that
this will be done. Councillor Green, in this connection, suggested that the City Manager release a copy
of the map of this street new proposed right-of-way, for the information of the public.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
I
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, December 15th, 1975, when there were
present Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Cave, Davis, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation,
namely:-
1-
list of
1975.
That as recommended by the City Manager the position of Economic Co-Ordinator be added to the
those non-Union civic employees who received the 17% salary adjustment effective January 1st,
Saint John, rl. B.,
22nd December, 1975.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the
recommendation contained therein adopted.
Councillor MacGowan voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, with
regard to the application from Petrofina Canada Ltd. for re-zoning from "RS-2" Suburban Residential
district to "B-2" General Business district classification for the property situate at the northwest
corner of Loch Lomond Road and McAllister Drive, advising that the Committee recommends that the said
area, as shown on the submitted plan, be so re-zoned as in the application, so as to permit the estab-
lishment of a car wash and gasoline sale facilities pursuant to a resolution under Section 39 of the
Community Planning Act tying the proposed development to a plan filed with the Common Clerk, and further
advising that with respect to widening requirements for McAllister Drive, the said company has now been
made aware of these requirements and has been able to negotiate the acquisition of additional land on the
south side of the property, and the company has received authorization from Shamrock Realty Ltd. (the
owners of this land) to apply for the change of zoning, and the said company (Petrofina) has also redesigned
the proposed development so that it would be able to operate even after the widening is acquired -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted:
I
I
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the northwest corner of Loch Lomond Road
and McAllister Drive with a frontage of 148 feet on Loch Lomond Road and 215 feet on McAllister Drive
from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential district to "B-2" General Business district, be read
a first time.
.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the City has knowledge of who owns the above named land. Coun-
cillor Cave advised that it is owned by Mrs. De Champ. Councillor A. Vincent stated he realizes that,
but i~s. De Champ is not making the application and it is his understanding that the City Solicitor ruled
at a recent meeting of Council on a certain application and Councillor A. Vincent asked a question when
the application of Alpha Investments & Agencies Ltd. was up and another application regarding land in
....1
,..-
i)') .1
Je.;~,.".:
.
I
I
'?t//J / 17~
:.8Y-AOlW
'Re-;zo/?/h.
. (olVlJlt'r5A/?
ot:
Fro f1(!,nt.!1 )
I
7?e-hbl'?/J?j'
Pefr//-hna
alJa~
,.(-6-d.
.
Millidgeville was up and Councillor A. Vincent got it under Number Twelve - his point is that the Council cannot
and should not go along any longer with the Act saying one thing and the regulations saying something different _
he thinks it should be clarified; the Act says you must own the land, to advertise it - the regulation says
differently - all he is trying to do is to have one way or the other - while it is clearly understood that the
Act says you must own the land, the regulation does not say that; he wants it one way or the other, at all times.
He stated he is going to be forced to vote against every person who applies for re-zoning unless that person
produces a deed, unless the Council gets the regulation changed, or the Act changed, one or the other, and he
thinks it should be changed. Councillor Cave explained that the land owned by Mrs. De Champ, who is a widow, is
approximately one acre - she donated a 66-foot right-of-way down through the centre of her land at a great deal
of personal expense in doing so - she lost a lot of money - and she is held up on this matter - the company in
question has an option to purchase this land from her - the company representative told the Council so, he added.
He stated that Mrs. De Champ is the only one, with the exception of the Bishop of Saint John, and one other
family, who has donated land for McAllister Drive at no cost to the Parish of Simonds, and he felt that the City
could help her out in this matter as she needs it in the worst way. He stated that he has no persona~ interest
in this matter. In reply to the question raised by Councillor A. Vincent, Mr. Rodgers stated he has no infor-
mation regarding Mrs. De Champ or. what connection she has with this matter; with regard to the Zoning By-Law
requirements, he advised that applications for re-zonings must come to Council from the owner of the land or an
agent or someone with an interest in the land; with respect to the prison site, that question was clear - they
did not have any interest in the land at all, the City owned it; he stated he does not know what connection.Mrs.
De Champ has with the Petrofina re-zoning matter - the application is clear - it is from Petrofina - maybe
someone has an option with Petrofina and has exercised that option - if so, that would satisfy the requirements
of the Zoning By-Law. Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that there is a differential between the Act and the
regulations, and if the regulations say that you must have an indication that you own or are going to purchase,
then that should be filed with the application - that is his legal advice, and he is going to stick to it. He
added that there is going to be a law suit someday in the city, if the City does not follow it. Councillor
HOdges asked if there is a conflict between the regulations and the Act. Mr. Rodgers asked for a clarification
on what is meant by "Act" and "regulations" because he is not clear on that. Councillor A. Vincent contended
that j~. Rodgers already'knows the difference. Mr. Rodgers replied that there is a section in the Zoning By-Law
that has the requirements. Councillor A. Vincent asked whether the Act says you have to own the land; he then
maintained that the Act says you have to own it - the regulation says you do not have to own it. Mr. Zides
advised that there is a statement from Petrofina to the effect that the company has an option on the land - the
company has been trying to buy it; we know that we have had lawyers for the De Champ property appear before us to
verify this because of the question of widening of McAllister Drive, so we although have not really asked for a
piece of paper we have had the De Champ lawyers sitting at the table at the same time as we have had Petrofina
sitting with us. He stated that the intent of the regulation in the Zoning By-Law is very simple: it is that
someone does not wait for you to go to the City and get your property re-zoned - primarily, the question of
ownership on property only appears in the Planning Act with relation to sub-divisions - the zoning provisions in
the Planning Act simply say that the Council may set certain standards and procedures in relation to th~ zoning _
and this is one of the ones that we have put in. He stated that, in this particular case, we have had the
solicitors for the property owners sitting around the table with us discussing this re-zoning, so we know there
is no subterfuge there; there is another piece of land that would be bought by Petrofina from adjoining property
owners and we do have a letter from them authorizing Petrofina to proceed with the application for their land.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if we have one from the original property owners - if so, he would like .to see it.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and Green voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the northwest corner of Loch
Lomond Road and McAllister Drive with a frontage of 148 feet on Loch Lomond Road and 215 feet on McAllister Drive
from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential district to "B-2" General Business district, be read a
second time.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the sum of
land for public purposes with respect to the Nora Kathleen Russell Sub-division:
~ymen-t-
/h //ell rJ-,C
?~,pl/e J?Ur-
~ d AliD FURTHER that the letter from the said Committee in this matter, advising that a large lot on the
I pose.:> C1n southerly side of Fraser Avenue, at its junction with Walden Avenue, is being divided into two lots thus making
~r.;/ ~~~- applicable the provisions of the Subdivision By-Law relating to land for public purposes or money in lieu thereof,
~ ~ ~/ and that the figure of $360.00 is based upon the appraisal of the property carried out by the Property Management
eel'? usse, Branch be received and filed.
SUb-a/v:
~360.00 be accepted in lieu of
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
(g7I'~~ RESOLVED that the report of the Water Appeals Committee for the year 1975,
I ~).1~ which advises that the Committee feels there is a definite need for the continuation of the said Committee as
l?ej?t?)1~ this is the only way in which consideration can be given to those citizens who are in indigent circumstances and
~f~~ that the Committee therefore recommends that the Common Council take the necessary steps for its continuance, be
1/1 ./ received and filed and the matter of membership of the said Committee be referred to the Nominating Committee.
r/Rj?ea/s
("Q"?ml'~~~e Councillor A. Vincent made the suggestion that the City's water bill of approximately 1.5 million
dollars to the Fire Departlnent for 1975, in view of the cut-back of Provincial finances, the City make an appeal
to the Water Appeals Committee to obtain a reduction in the City's bill, and in view of the fact that the City's
water bill is being increased by $30,000.00 or more. Mr. Barfoot noted that Councillor A. Vincent was referring
to the hydrant rental charge, which is 35% of certain water budgets which is chargeable back from the utility to
the General Fund to pay for the use of water by the Fire Department; the figure for 1976 has not been adopted
yet; the figure we have been discussing is 35% of the water distribution and production costs. Councillor A.
Vincent explained that his thought in discussing this subject is to try to build up an argument that the Province
has to give the City more money. Mr. Barfoot noted that the Council's maximum allowable figure in 1975 under the
regulations was ~1,035,000.00 and it is possible for the Council adopt any other figure up to the maximum allow-
able; in 1975 the Council adopted the said maximum. allowable figure; it does not have to go to the Water Appeals
7>,.e>f/, CtlVt.
Ft're ~ed:
. wdtfr b?//
Ce?U/J, /1,
Vi~ce >>1-
f/:;L l"<i1nr-
ren-c~/
e);.;;jr'l!!-
If/cJ-t-er:JJ e.
bu.d4g%-
....
92 ,)
J.J "'"
~
ISo1bR/ // ~t.
41o/J/I€ ,7ome
741717:/1/1//$,
Com/?!_
Pet-er E Child
1)fU'11/C1(E1/ ~
reMltJH$ C!OJ?-
su/i-in5 ePtZr6'~
PNt/ine/'.;;/-
iJ1&Vn/c!/~ /
C/!?~ne/I
..l)e~ ;1/<<I7/C:/-
fA5//l9-17a/rs
aUJ1c:/I's;;4/'A
~.1f-/';;'111'
t't?~l7e// Si;,kne.
.Ef/-,( .;;rW
tPu J/, /l. {/;'me,
C'6?U/;l1'/1 SCilla;.;;
:l3'y-~qW
Committee to adopt a figure for 1976 which is less than the maximum allowable.
plained that by charging the figure .against the Water Department, it helps the
Councillor Green ex-
City in its budget.
.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Isabel H. Gibson of 2390 Loch
Lomond Road, making application for permission to renew her permit for the year 1976 to occupy her mobile
home which is located on the property of her son-in-law, Mr. Colin Kennedy, on the southern side of Loch
Lomond Road, immediately east of the Lakewood Grocery Store, be received and filed and permission be
granted for one year.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
I
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above named application from Mrs. Isabel H.
Gibson be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation and that the matter be laid on
the table in the meantime.
"nay" .
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors Cave and Pye voting
On motion of Councillor Kipping
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Peter E. Grady, Mouth of Keswick,
N. B., advising that the cities of Bathurst, Campbellton, Edmundston, Fredericton, Moncton and Saint John
over the past several months may have been exposed to a brief presented by him outlinlng the formation of
a Municipal Labour Relations consulting bureau, and submitting a copy of the basic proposal which was
presented at a meeting of the Provincial-Municipal Council, a Six Cities administrators meeting, the
executive meeting of the annual Six Cities Association meeting and to the annual meeting of the Towns
Association, and advising that he has recently held extensive discussions with the Department of Munici~
pal Affairs and it has been agreed that his proposal will be presented to the Economic Development
Committee of Cabinet for approval in principle and for approval of financing; and further advising that
in addition to the support of many municipalities in New Brunswick, he has also obtained support in
principle and for approval of financing from Treasury Board to the suggestion of providing assistance to
municipalities through financing via the Department of Municipal Affairs with respect to Labour Relations
problems; and advising that the energetic support of the Common Council would greatly enhance the chance
of his proposal becoming a reality and hence also provide some professional directions for labour relations
in the municipal field; and stating that at the Council's earliest convenience he would request
a letter of support from the Council in order that we may proceed with processing this project through
the government structures, be referred to the City staff for a report regarding the said proposal.
.
The Mayor advised that there are two items to be introduced by the City Solicitor at this time.
Mr. ROdgers advised that one item deals with the amendment of the Council Salaries By-Law.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the item regarding amendment of the Council Salaries
By-Law be added to the agenda of this meeting and be dealt with.
Mr. Rodgers advised that the said amendments deals with a matter that was referred to the
Commissioner of Finance and himself some several weeks ago, to look into the possibility of whether the
Municipalities Act permitted the City to amend this by-law to allow a Councillor, or Councillors, the
discretion and the right to refuse any part of the salary and expenses. He stated that they have exam-
ined the legislation and what is before Council at this time is an amendment, if the Council wishes to
enact it; upon third reading, the section will become effective which provides that a Councillor who
wishes to utilize this amendment must then notify the Council in writing to that effect.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
.
Provide
time.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to
for Salaries to the Members of the Common Council of The City of Saint John" be read a first
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide for Salaries to I
the i4embers of the Common Council of The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Provide
time.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to
for Salaries to the Members of the Common Council of The City of Saint John",
Amend a By-Law to
be read a second
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
I
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide i'or Salaries to
the Members of the Common Council of The City of Saint John".
Councillor A. Vincent requested that third reading to this by-law amendment be given at this
eeting of Council. When asked if this was an emergency in his particular case, he recalled that the
Council members discussed this matter last week, and stated that he does not want to be embarrassed.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that an emergency be declared to exist and the by-law
entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide for Salaries to the Members of the Common Council of The
City of Saint John" be given three readings.
.
Question being taken, Councillor Gould voted "nay" ;and the motion was defeated.
~
,..-
,)')')
~N,,,l)
S~ut-A Md
.J)t?vt&,!, t:b"j?-
/Vd~.hJ(,,~/'-
hop;! J!!!p/1%t'
mt!'J7-t- '1-f1o-
g/'~mt?1e
ria)?
'<ClI1,{ Com.
kJfJ;!
I ~5sel'>!b&
lIou$,nf
I
.
7enLer
. 4~eol!X-e~
.:l)emo//~/1Jh
37";'$/
.t.e/nskr Szf.
~~#7
A ~/I7~,I? $1-.
p.;ud s
7i>uOK/~+
I :l>emph l/on
a ~-I-d.
Cr/elb/hce
s.:T Ciy/t!
K /?7 /?I () !Je'es'
{/I?IP/1, :Jalill
I~
Ct1U/1, II.
0'17eenr
.
I
I
.
It....
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation contained in the letter
dated December 19th, 1975 from the City Manager, the Council accept the plan for the Neighbourhood Improvement
Programme in the South End in principle, and that the Land Committee be authorized to commence the acquisition
of the lands necessary to carry out the programme, and that the City of Saint John support the programme of
housing set out in the plan in order that the housing project may start in early spring of 1976.
Councillor MacGowan advised that the above motion is complementary to her motion which Council adopted
earlier in this meeting regarding the above matter.
Mr. Barfoot advised that he has now obtained a copy of the tender advertisement regarding demolition
of 31 and 37, and 45 and 47, Leinster Street, and it says, as follows:- tenders for demolition of buildings,
City of Saint John, N. B..; separate sealed tenders, in duplicate, addressed to Mr. D. H. Garey, Common Clerk,
City Hall, for the demolition of City owned buildings located at number 31 and 37 Leinster Street, and number 45
(former M.R.A. garate) and 47 Leinster Street, Saint John, N. B., will be received up until 2.00 p.m., December
3rd, 1975, and marked on the outside of the envelope - "Tender for demolition of City owned buildings located at
number 31 and 37 Leinster Street, and number 45 (former M.R.A. garage) and 47 Leinster Street, Saint John,
N. B.", et cetera. He pointed out that this tender call says envelope, singular, but at the beginning it said
"separate sealed tenders", so there was a discrepancy which was interpreted by one contractor as meaning two
separate envelopes having separate, sealed tenders, and by the other contractors as meaning one envelope with
separate tenders and separate tender deposit cheques inside that one envelope; so that all the tenders were
opened together whether they were in two envelopes, or in one. Councillor Kipping expressed the view that that
is a very small technicality to hold up a matter like this, particularly when there is about a one hundred per
cent difference between the high and low bid. Councillor A. Vincent stated he is not interested in the price,
but in the principle of this matter. Councillor Kipping pointed out that he thinks the principle is quite well
established: the tenders were opened properly, they were received as requested, and he thinks on a small technic-
ality like this where we could fall either way, he believes that most of the Council members are saying it go
one way, and the City Manager is recommending that it go one way, and one Councillor is attempting to block that
and recommend that it go another way. Councillor A. Vincent stated that is not true; he asked for the infor-
mation, and he should be given the right to speak on a point of question.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter from the City Manager and the
Building Inspector, the lowest tenders received, namely, those of Paul's Trucking & Demolition Co. Ltd., to
demolish 37 and 31 Leinster Street for the sum of $4,600.00, and to demolish 45 and 47 Leinster Street for the
sum of $2,800.00, be accepted, which includes a waiver of informality of tender procedure on the part of the
said contractor who was one of three tenderers who submitted their separate bids and separate deposit cheques in
one envelope rather than having submitted each separate bid and separate deposit cheque in a separate envelope.
Councillor A. Vincent stated his point is that if we are going to get fair tendering, if we advertise
for two envelopes we do not open any envelope if there is any deviation from that call, but we call tenders
again.
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the item regarding a grievance
from Saint John Civic Employees: Local Union No. 18, C.U.P.E., be dealt with publicly.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~~" 0;.0"
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-ninth day
of December, A. D. 1975, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, Parfitt, Pye,
A. ~incent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, and M. Zides, Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on December
~)24
..., ..
/l!lI"I!'6'/1/ed ,.,e
al"dA/lec-tuN/
s t?rv/ces
$hC/I7Jl"oalr 7kr.
elMbhous-e
(?t(/>d~ +S/~
;R. 7). PuNLy
I} 55C/C'.1 /l~jl
:]),1?~~
$7. en tJ,eelr $/9
7;ewIl77l?d7f~n
~d-f"/'I8!:1 /}ssoe,
'/-6-a.
J pAn F/oo" '7.$ns.
70s, 4-~/A-~~ A
:B()tt""<<~s /f'e#t;'I1.
Ct1,~-f-. ,
~ ~/e/~ ,.6
(/,N,J3.
u, ;Y,:J3. in .s.x
'Pfllke 2)ep-_
eclac,;;J t-/ol1,;;J I
C()tl,.~es
~
15th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Cave ...
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
City of Saint John has signed a client-architect agreement on March 11th, 1975 for architectural services
for new clubhouse facilities at Shamrock Park, with Purdy and Simson, Architects, and that the City has
been advised in writing by the architects that the said firm has been dissolved by mutual agreement, and
the new firm is called "R. D. Purdy Associates, Architect", and further advising that, as a result, the
architects request that a new client-architect agreement be signed using the new name of the firm, and
further advising that, except for the new firm's name and date, the conditions of the new agreement are I
exactly the same as the previous agreement, regarding athletic facilities at Shamrock Park, and that the .
City Manager recommends that the new documents be executed on behalf of the City, be received and filed .
and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if there will be some provlslon in the above named agreement that
if there are "extras" and we go to arbitration, the same architect will not bill the City for consultant
fees after taking the stand and telling the arbitration committee that the contractor was entitled to the
"extras" (as happened in the case of the Power Commission of the City of Saint John). He noted that the
architect billed the said Power Commission for a consultant fee of a percentage of that one hundred and I
some thousand dollars after charging the said Commission four thousand dollars. He asked the Common
Clerk to verify these remarks that pertain to the Power Commission's experience in the case cited (the _
Common Clerk is the secretary of the said Commission). Tbe Common Clerk stated that these remarks are
very close - he did not know the exact amount, but it is very close. Councillor A. Vincent stated that
what he was trying to point out to the Council was that it is about time, when the City engages con-
sultants or architects, that it tie them down. His question is: does the above named agreement contain
the provision that in the event there is an arbitrary figure of dispute at the end of the contract that
the City lets, that the. architects will not charge a fee on it. Mr. Barfoot stated that he did not have
the proposed agreement with him and he could not answer the question in detail. Councillor A. Vincent
stated he feels that the said clause should be inserted in the agreement. Councillor A. Vincent com-
mented that it is a strange thing that this same architect on the said Power Commission - after we hired .
a clerk of the works there was not one dollar permitted after we hired a man, so there is a lesson to be
learned there, and he was trying to point this out to the Council.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if any money has been agreed to, or been given to, the original
architect. 14r. Barfoot replied that he did not have the answer to that question. He recalled that the
original architect was engaged approximately a year ago and a lot of work has been done but he is not
sure that any billing has been made. He added that he would be pleased to provide the answers to those
questions. Councillor A. Vincent stated that according to his records, he understands that the Rec-
reation Department engaged this architect based because we did not accept the tender of his over-designed
building at Shamrock Park, and he understands there have been many thousands of dollars paid and that the
City has a credit well in the thousands of dollars. He asked that he have the information for the next
meeting. The Mayor replied that same will be provided.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engin_
eering services regarding the following named project that was undertaken under the Department of Regional
~conomic Expansion programme:-
1.
.
Hazen Creek Sewage Treatment Plant
Godfrey Associates Limited
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 34,
dated November 28, 1975
$ 34,845.45
$ 991. 40
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that
granted for payment of the following invoices, namely:-
as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
I
John Flood & Sons Ltd., dated November 18, 1975
Jos. A. Likely Ltd., dated October 15-17,1975
Bourque's Welding Co., Ltd., dated December 8, 1975
D. Hatfield, Ltd., dated December 3, 1975
D. Hatfield, Ltd., dated December 3, 1975
$ 4,004.12
$ 2,787.92
$ 2,885.18
$ 11,731. 30
$ 16,673.85
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
_-,' J RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
given for payment of the invoices received from the University of New Brunswick in the total amount of
$8,587.00, covering the cost of educational courses conducted at the University of New Brunswick in Saint
John for members of the Police. Department during the period January to June, 1975.
Councillor Gould asked if the City covers the cost of
candidates are successful, or even if they are not successful.
the entire cost of these courses.
the above named courses only if the
Mr. Barfoot replied that the City pays
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report from the City Manager on
~
r'"
225
7e. er~./
O/cceJ?!e"
.~u/?;l~
.J)./4>-6-P/~/~
A-t-~.
ClJ/~/(j/r:s
CI'''l'J.:Z) ,1M.
16U/1c!! /
S.;;1/ar/os
:B!:I-AaJ1/
I
. {}o/SrJi:{'-
~ u/-6- Cla/",
:I>eul
.J:K: IA///s/;n
<I- '?P/1-/lhtJ
ep, lId.
(SlJtlrl-Ferl;fj
1?d, IDlI74s)
I
Mhd {'p/n/11
{/.;j"fa
:l3a-Herie ~
L -t-d.
J?f%;Jd
st"e6 <I-
,,(/#/e
. ~I.,"erf.y -
C/Cilrff o-f
Can,l.id,
Surv-e(f
I R 11. f;;lt'/Q /;.;J
"F.;;semed
tffUI'vte wlre)
I :;;;Y c:
C.G/l7a~ L-id
tihlt'tJ1!:.
~(lCh ,(ObJt>;u(
'Rd.
. P~~r/d1J1
:Z~%.1,~~
.:Bus slelkr
~/knrt~/e .5'-6-.
A" f?CJ, ,{ohl
t/I'//~ l1~si~
...... CouncJl/
tenders for equipment rental, tenders be awarded as recommended in the submitted summary of bids, and also, that
the re-negotiation clauses of D. Hatfield Ltd. and Chitticks (1962) Ltd. (for re~negotiation of the contract for
a proportionate increase in prices if the wholesale price of gasoline increases beyond 801 for Hatfield and 771
for Chittick's) be accepted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the above named tenders for equipment rental were called in accordance
with the rules and regulations of the tender procedure. !1r. Barfoot made affirmative reply. Councillor A.
Vincent asked for a copy of that.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide
for Salaries to the Members of the Common Council of The City of Saint John" be read a third time and enacted,
and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if an amendment can be made on the third reading of this by-law, the
amendment he has in mind being that it would be dated back to June 21st, 1975, and that it would be a permissive
by-law and not a compulsory by-law. Mr. Rodgers advised that the by-law will be permissive in that the above
amendment says "may", but the by-law cannot be retroactive - the retroactivity does not exist, regardless of
whether the by-law is permissive or mandatory.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Gould voting "nay".
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide for Salaries to the Members of the Common
Council of The City of Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor advising that the
solicitor for J. E. Wilson and Roofing Co. Ltd. has asked that the Common Council authorize the Mayor and Common
Clerk to execute a quit claim deed in favour of the said company which is in the process of transferring a
parcel of land in the Chesley Street area, the solicitor for the purchaser having uncovered a possible flaw in
the title which can be corrected by the City giving a quit claim deed, and advising that the reason for this
request is that a portion of the property and the right-of-way which the owner enjoys in common with others
appears to have formed a part of an old reserved or developed street called "Road to Short Ferry" which ran from
Chesley Street in a southwesterly direction to the Saint John Harbour - on August 14th, 1957 the Council formally
closed the "Road to Short Ferry" and by quit claim deed in 1969 the City conveyed most of the said "Road to
Short Ferry" to Irving Oil Company, Limited, and the granting of a quit claim deed by the City was requested for
the small portion shown coloured in green on the submitted plan would clear up any outstanding problems that
might exist in relation to this portion of the said former old Short Ferry Road -- and recommending that the
Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute a quit claim deed in respect to this matter -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, whose letter advises
that Streb & Little are purchasing four acres of land off Fairville Boulevard from the City as shown on the
submitted plan and that in order to provide a 50-foot road from Fairville Boulevard to the lot a 20-foot strip
of land is required from Varta Batteries Ltd. to add to the existing 30-foot right-of-way, the City of Saint
John purchase a 20-foot strip of land from Varta Batteries Ltd., being approximately 9,000 square feet, for the
sum of $4,200.00, for the purpose of constructing a road between Fairville Boulevard and the four acres of land
being purchased by Streb & Little.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
the City of Saint John purchase a 50-foot strip of land from Kimberly-Clark of Canada Ltd. comprising approximately
22,500 square feet, for the sum of $10,500.00, to provide access to land between Fairville Boulevard and land
bordering on the throughway in back of Kimberly-Clark of Canada Ltd., and that the City bear the cost of sur-
veying.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the Works
Department has requested that the Committee approve payment to Mr. R. A. Farrahar in the amount of $100.00 for
compensation resulting in the necessity to install a guide wire as an anchor to hold the second pole as shown on
the submitted plan, and that when the easement between the City and Mr. Farraher was drawn up no mention of this
guide line was made, and that if it is necessary to move the pole and anchor, it would result in an expense to
the City of $500.00 - however, Mr. Farrahar will accept $100.00 compensation to allow the pole guide wire to
remain on the easement -- and recommending, therefore, that Mr. Farrahar be paid the said sum of $100.00 to
cover compensation for the guide wire on his easement and that this item is to be indicated on the easement
drawn up between 11r. Farrahar and the City -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
The Mayor advised that the letter from the Land Committee for payment to Gulf Oil Canada Ltd. for land
acquired at the corner of Lansdowne and Wellesley Avenues, has been withdrawn from the agenda of this meeting.
Read the following letters: (1) from Loch Lomond Villa Inc. Administrator, Mr. T. G. Jarrett, in
support of and on behalf of the residents, staff and Board of Directors of the said Loch Lomond Villa, noting
that the improvement made to Loch Lomond Road has apparently increased the amount and the speed at which vehicles
use this Road, and requesting on behalf of the said Villa that "stop" lights with push button controls be placed
somewhere in the vicinity of Loch Lomond Villa on Loch Lomond Road as many residents use this roadway to go to
and from the Villa and Loch Lomond Mall and it is becoming exceedingly dangerous - and advising that the residents
of the Villa feel that a shelter at the bus stop on Ellerdale Street would be very adequate because the senior
citizens find they must leave the building and wait at this stop for the bus; (2) from the Residents Council of
Loch Lomond Villa advising that great concern is being felt by the residents of the Villa regarding the need for
a traffic light to be placed in the vicinity of the Villa and the Junior High School, and submitting a petition
signed by the residents of the Villa, requesting that a traffic light be placed in this area as soon as possible
as the need is urgent.
'Y)~
...,"'U
~
5'/InNvtS //tJhS
C!ltvb
Petf'e:slr/d ~
ero$$/h~
{()j/t'r/al1~l"~
,.(tlo.17 ,;(CJ~hd
Vi'l/.;J Le.
:Bu s s~e/-ler
fileNta/e $-t-,
Tr>ano/Jl't..;; t-/P/7
Ctlm/?1,
l!1e.J)t?na/;i $-t.
t-/"od#/~ /l1teY58d.
Crt&} /l"lffr.
~~UI1./J1, fltl7f:el1r
ProJ/e;.-, I"e
<<41eJ"f'u I1-t?-rr
tl/e$t-ml#'f and
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye .
RESOLVED that the necessary pedestrian traffic lights be installed
immediately at the above named location, and that the Council ask for a report from the engineering staff
on the cost of an under-pass for pedestrians under the Loch Lomond Road in the vicinity of Loch Lomond
Villa.
Mr. Barfoot advised that the City staff, as a result of the request received at the Common
,
Council meeting of December 15th last from the Simonds Lions Club for either an over-pass or an under~pass
for pedestrians across the Loch Lomond Road in the vicinity of the Loch Lomond Villa, which request was
referred to the staff for a report, is still examining this proposal, and he trusts that the staff will be
permitted to report back before the Council decides on whether it wishes lights, an over-pass, under-pass,
or nothing at all. Councillor Hodges pointed out that the Loch Lomond Road is a dangerous road, and
whatever measures the Council takes regarding pedestrian lights or the over-pass or under-pass would be
for any citizen who wants to get across the road, and not just for people who live at Loch Lomond Villa.
He added that what concerns him is that in essence once the Council approves any sub-division the City is
responsible for the safety of the pedestrians from both sides of the street, and he feels this is what the
Council.should consider: the people, including young people, who have to cross to the other side of the
street. He stated he does not believe that traffic lights are going to be the solution to the problem
because traffic that proceeds at the speed of 40 m.p.h. around that corner will be on the lights before it
has a chance to stop. Councillor Cave replied that it is his opinion that if the lights were installed
down over the hill at the bottom of the hill coming directly up from the Villa, there would be sufficient
notice in that way to motorists after they come around the bend, unless they were driving 70 m.p.h.
Councillor Gould felt that the schools in this area also should be considered because with the extension
of Ellerdale Street a lot of apartments and buildings will be going up there and no doubt both Bayview
School and Simonds Junior High School will have a lot of students coming from that side of the street, so
the lights could serve both purposes at the same time. Noting that there is going to be a cost factor
involved with lights as well as with an over-pass or an under-pass, and that he has had pros and cons on
both sides, Councillor Higgins stated he feels it would be wise if the Council could obtain the desired
report for the January 12th Council meeting from the City Manager, .giving the cost of lights, an over_
pass, or an under-pass, and the Council might very well make a decision at that time.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by
Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED
factors to be
that the matter of the above noted traffic lights be
submitted by the City Manager and City staff to the
hOC/' .,(()/1J0I1/~ ,
?>.../ ..L . laid ow the table
r't?~eS7;;'I"/aJ7"_ ~ Common Council on
dh>sS/h.'! t-r-rrl
I'ljr),{~S Councillor Cave stated he will have to vote against the tabling motion because of the urgent
need to provide lights to assist the senior citizens in crossing the Loch Lomond Road at the above dis-
cussed location. He added that this is a major job and he does not feel that the Council will have a
report on costs by January 12th.
for a report on all
January 12th next.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillor Cave voting "nay".
Councillor Cave proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that a bus shelter be installed at the
bus stop on Ellerdale, as requested by the Loch Lomond Villa Inc.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that a report from the Transportation Committee and from
the City staff be filed with the Common Council at its meeting on January 12th next on the cost factor of
constructing a bus shelter at the bus stop on Ellerdale Street referred to in the letter from Loch Lomond
Villa Inc. and on who would be responsible for the cost of such bus shelter.
Councillor Davis pointed out that a busy intersection is developing at that corner because
McDonald Street is going to be an extension of the causeway, and there will be a vast change in traffic
pattern there within the next month or so. He therefore felt that the Council should really ask the City
Manager to do a complete study of that corner because it is going to be considerably worse than it is now,
next spring. Councillor Higgins stated that, in the light of Councillor Davis' remarks, he hopes that all
the long-range factors would also be included in the above requested report.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Cave voting "nay". He stated that
he is only concerned about those senior citizens - he is not concerned about reports - he wants something
done immediately so that we will not have any accidents there.
Councillor M. Vincent asked for permission to introduce two small items at this meeting. It was
noted that the Common Clerk had three items, as well, to be added to the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above mentioned five items be added to the
agenda of this meeting.
Councillor Gould'voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he understands some residents are having some water run-off
problems on Westmorland Road and they have been in touch with City staff but apparently have been unable
to get satisfaction. He asked if the Council would authorize staff to look into the situation that occurs
from 92 Westmorland Road down to the entrance to Westmorland Heights and see if they can come up with some
kind of an. answer to the problem. He explained that he has already taken the problem directly to the City
staff but so far has not had any success with it, and for that reason, he was bringing it up at Council.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the water run-off problems that are being exper-
ienced on Westmorland Road from 92 Westmorland Road down to the entrance to Westmorland Heights be re-
ferred to the City. staff for investigation of this situation to see if a solution to the problem can be
arrived at.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,..-
227
. C"'AC/7, />1.
l//h~O?t-
FtJ. e s-/;;;di.
(ruMOCtr-eL
c/O$/hff (rf!
Ohe)
:E3ud 'Yet-
I. rest-raint-
FIJ.e 2)~,
e/t-;! /71.1 r..
(!PIt/7. &ve
$}Jt7W I
I (!I7MhP
( scli'd/h'lf
$d/h'h1 )
CflH/1, '.J);;Jv;s
-, ,
f-Ire 1115<<1'-
OihCe r>d#?S
. F/J'le Uhdel'-
wr/t-ei"$
h"e 2Je,d--
s-t-d-t-/tlf?$
SiIMltjat;'
f7-f'l;/ d-.s
/970
djJj7//eGl-t/OI7
I
.
Welks /eq
I1l1e, sbrl11
sewer
:l>e,d-- ;rJu-n,
19-f71a/rs
I
I
U///I/e &ve,
G-6-al7dplpe
.
/(thj'JfE
-/'/re
s-t-af/lJn
....
Councillor M. Vincent stated that, prior to recelvlng the correspondence for this meeting of Council,
he received a number of telephone calls, and after reading a letter that is in that correspondence he can
perhaps see where some of the calls may have occurred from. He stated that there appears to be a rumour spreading
throughout the city that the Council is going to close one of the fire stations in this city due to a restriction
that is being placed on a budget. He stated that he personally knows nothing about this and he does not recall
it having been discussed at a Council meeting at any time, and that he thinks that if there is any truth to this
he would certainly like to hear about it from the City Manager. He stated he has read a letter in the said
correspondence where this has been a suggestion as to one step in a way that the budget might be kept in line,
and that he certainly wants to express his discontent with the suggestion that a fire station be closed - he
thinks that is one of the services that the City has to keep at the same standard at which it is, presently.
The Mayor replied that, so far, all budget matters have been held up until the Council makes them pUblic and,
therefore, he is afraid that discussion on them cannot take place here, at this time. Councillor M. Vincent
asked if he can find out if it has been discussed that a fire station is going to be closed - and if so, by
whom. The Mayor replied that Councillor M. Vincent can check it out with the City Manager and when the Council
announces soon what it is going to do, the Council is prepared to discuss the subject, openly, when the time is
right - which he hoped would be announced before the close of the present Council meeting.
Councillor Cave stated that he received many calls from residents of the Westmorland Road and Lakewood
areas over the last storm that the city experienced. He stated he is concerned over the fact that he knows the
City is going to have to restrict services to a percentage but he is wondering at the present time if the
problem should not be taken into consideration - and he thinks it should be - of sanding and salting the streets
in the city that are hilly. He added that an elected representative, when he receives these calls, all he can do
is tell the citizens that he will try and get somebody there, which he tries to do. He noted that the question
of restriction of services because of budgetary restrictions is placing everybody in an embarrassing position.
With reference to Councillor M. Vincent's statement on the Fire Department, Councillor Davis recalled
that the Council discussed all departments but in the discussion of the Fire Department he raised the question
concerning the fact that we have one of the best fire departments, probably, in this part of the world and that
our fire insurance rates have doubled and tripled, and he felt that the Council should convene a meeting with
the fire underwriters. The Mayor stated that he can well see that Councillor M. Vincent is interested in the
question that he asked because of his connection, and, certainly, as a liaison for the Fire Department - how-
ever, although the answer could not be given at this time, it could be obtained, he added, for Councillor M.
Vincent. Councillor Davis felt that that may be the basis for the rumours - that the Council was discussing the
fire rates.
Read a letter from the City Manager advising that the Municipal Assistance Act permits the Lieutenant-
Governor-in-Council to provide Stimulation Grants to assist in developing or improving standards of services
and/or a facility within the municipality, and advising that in light of the City's experience in 1975 with its
application for Stimulation Grants in excess of nine million dollars and was allotted the sum of $100,000.00 in
instalments of $10,000.00 over ten years, a list of projects that might prove acceptable has been assembled by
staff and is recommended to Common Council for submission to the Department of Municipal Affairs on the pre-
scribed form over the signature of the Mayor and Common Clerk by December 31st, 1975, the said list being, as
follows: -
Project
1. Wellesley Avenue storm sewer
2. Willie Avenue standpipe
3. King Street East fire station
4. Shamrock Park field house
Estimated Capital Cost
$ 180,000.00
$ 275,000.00
$ 550,000.00
$ 200,000.00
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Wellesley Avenue storm sewer project which is estimated
to be a capital cost of $180,000.00 be submitted to the Department of Municipal Affairs on the prescribed
application form over the signature of the !~ayor and Common Clerk by December 31st, 1975 for a Stimulation Grant
for 1976.
In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's request for an explanation as to why the City is going to spend
this sum on Wellesley Avenue, Mr. Barfoot advised that this is the total cost of a project which will provide
for the increased storm run-off along Wellesley Avenue when the land behind the Princess Elizabeth School is
fully built up with housing as has been approved recently by Council; a portion of this work was done two years
ago, and this $180,000.00 is for an additional job on the work; the job we have done now looks after the existing
run-off but the run-off will be increased when all that land is built up with housing. Councillor A. Vincent
recalled that that land in behind the School was serviced around 1945 or 1948 and there are hydrants, manholes
and catchbasins in there, services, and everything in there, and we have never built on that land - he is
talking about that whole area that is behind the football field - he is wondering if this storm sewer work is
really going to cost $180,000.00 because we have other places to put our money. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that
this is a request by Council for Stimulation Grant support, and the Council has not as yet approved the capital
budget Which will finally approve these projects as far as the Council is concerned; the previous project
referred to above on Wellesley cost approximately $200,000.00, but that was the lower portion of Wellesley
Avenue and is a different area than the one now under discussion. Councillor A. Vincent stated that if someone
can show him that the City is getting value for dollar, the above work is alright with him, but he thought that
the $200,000.00 that the City previously spent on this work also comprised this work and was the entire amount
to be spent. The Mayor noted that the figures that are being submitted regarding the Stimulation Grants ap-
plication may not be the exact figures that will be approved when the Council does the capital budgeting. He
asked if the City, if it gets approval on the Stimulation Grants application, has to spend that money or can the
City uSe it on another project if it does not need it all for the projects applied for under the said Grants.
In reply, Mr. Barfoot stated that last year, the Provincial approval was for a sum of money rather than for
money against a specific project - and this is the manner in which the Government has been doling out Stimulation
Grants - the Government approves a sum rather than a project - and so, at this time, he would anticipate the
Council would be able to apply whatever money is given, to one or more.of these projects.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the Willie Avenue standpipe project which is estimated to be
a capital cost of $275,000.00 be submitted to the Department of Municipal Affairs on the prescribed application
form over the signature of the Mayor and Common Clerk by December 31st, 1975 for a Stimulation Grant for 1976.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the King Street East fire station project which is
estimated to be a capital cost of $550,000.00 be submitted to the Department of Municipal Affairs on the pre-
228
~
Si/mulo;-t-Ilm
r;ran-e- ItJ7t
dJ,o?I/<:a-l-lo~
:Depl, Nun,
19~/l'1s
$hah1J"~t! Ir ~,.Ir
tJlubhotl$e
'P1<>JnJ7, IJdy/s,
Com.m,
Jltt/nz.,cIeC'ieh -
.skin
Skm'ale '?/ade
$u.b-d'/I/.
11 e-;Zt;h ;' nlf
pY'Of/b~1 pkn
Vdlf//dlnC'e
RoCCCL C-",pu,j/
1l9"e~meJ7ts
scribed application form over the signature of the Mayor and Common Clerk by December 31st, 1975 for a
Stimulation Grant for 1976.
.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the estimated cost for the above named fire station is rlslng,
continually, as time passes. Mr. Barfoot advised that he will have a report to Council in the next couple
of weeks on the progress of this job. Councillor A. Vincent felt that the figure of half a million
dollars is high for a building when the City owns the land, and that the Council is going to have to take
a second look at this project. He felt we have to go to public tender, or something, and stated he just
does not understand this kind of price. Councillor Gould noted that the Fire Chief has been working
diligently to try to cut some things out because the price was much more than this, as he understands, and
they are working down to the $550,000.00 figure. In reply to Councillor Parfitt's query as to when the
new piece of fire fighting equipment is to arrive in the city that the King Street East proposed new fire
station was supposed to be ready to house when discussion commenced approximately two years ago - she
added that the said equipment delivery period was approximately twenty-six months from the date of ordering
and that the said delivery period must be coming up soon - the Mayor stated it is his understanding that
this equipment will be here in a few months' time. Mr. Barfoot advised that it is expected to arrive next
month and it will be housed at East Saint John, temporarily.
I
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the Shamrock Park field house project which is
estimated to be a capital cost of $200,000.00 be submitted to the Department of Municipal Affairs on the
prescribed application form over the signature of the Mayor and Common Clerk by December 31st, 1975 for a
Stimulation Grant for 1976.
At the request of Councillor A. Vincent, Mr. Barfoot explained that the above figure of $200,000.00
provides a building measuring 124 feet by 45 feet, one storey in height, containing four dressing rooms
with showers and washrooms, the square footage of the building being 5,580. Councillor A. Vincent asked
if that is not high per square foot, and should the City not look at a leasing. Councillor Higgins at
this time gave a brief summary of the Council's experience in this matter when public tenders were called
and high tender figures received, following which tenders were turned back and private bids were asked for
and negotiation took place regarding a figure, and $200,000.00 is the resultant figure; the site for this
field house was changed from one part of Shamrock Park to another part, on the flat, where the present
club house now stands.
.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
to whom had been referred the application from Mr. Heinz Fleckenstein, Architect, on behalf of the devel-
opers of the Ellerdale Place project which received re-zoning approval at a Council meeting on September
2nd, 1975, for variance of building A-2 as shown on the submitted plan P-2 - advising that the Committee
recommends the proposed re-location of building A-2, the first eight-storey apartment building, as shown
on the said site plan, subject to the following:- (A) the elimination of Phase II details from the pl~n
filed at the time of the re-zoning of the project (the developers would be required to submit a new
detailed plan before proceeding with building in Phase II); (E) the screening of the full length of the
immense parking area being created along Ellerdale Street by the change of building location (the parking
area is some 570 feet long; the front yard portion should be effectively screened by planting at least 5-
foot native grown evergreens from a nursery at five-foot intervals along a staggered line); (C) nO changes
being made in the layout of the apartment housing types B, their parking areas, et cetera, from that
originally approved by Council's resolution for the original re-zoning; (D) Council varying the afore-
mentioned resolution to authorize the new location of building A-2 subject to these conditions; and (E)
irnplementation of the agreements referred to in the re-zoning -- and further advising that the Committee
believes that the Rocca Group should do its replanning well in advance of building in Phase II and submit
a new proposal, and, moreover, with the Council permitting the presently requested relocation of building
A-2, all of the Phase II layout should be considered no longer applicable; and further advising that the
relocation of the building also affects the location of a service easement required for storm sewer
drainage and utility lines, and this is being allowed by the surveyor; .and further advising that Point (C)
of the conditions is included because the site plan being used for the development of the eight twelve-
unit apartment buildings shows some changes in the parking layout from that originally approved, and these
conditions affect the location of play areas and usable open spaces on the lots which the Advisory Com-
mittee finds unacceptable - the Rocca Group (through Mr. Fleckenstein) has agreed to proceed on the basis
of the earlier plan presently on file with the Common Clerk; and further advising that none of the agreements
referred to in the said re-zoning has yet been entered into, and, obviously, it was the Council's intent
that they should be, and the Committee requests that this be done -- be received and filed and the recom-
mendation adopted, and the necessary agreements be prepared and executed by both parties.
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
;(, /'/?t7 ~-~ requesting that the Committee be granted an extension of time to give its views on the proposed change of
on ~ .~ the Zoning By-Law to permit the proposed penal institution on a site located between Green and Ferguson
Q~en~I'?.e~~ Lakes, west of the Martinon By-Pass, and advising that the Committee had already decided that the issues
, involved warranted its holding a public meeting which meeting was originally scheduled for December 18th
/J!ett, secttl'1/l-f but was postponed because of severe snow and driving conditions, and that the Committee did consider the
/z(. ~~ feasibility of re-scheduling the public meeting in time for it to report to Council for January 5th -
;gen .eJ7 ~)?~, however, numerous citizens and some of the memflers had expressed concern about holding the meeting during
the festive season, and the Committee then/decided to request the extension of time in which to report;
and noting that the public meeting or heaf.ing proposed by the Committee is distinct and separate from the
hearing of objections, et cetera, whlCh the Council is required to hold under the provisions of the
Con@unity Planning Act; and advising that if the Council grants the extension of time, the Committee plans
to have the public meeting at 1.30 p.m., on January lOth at the Saint John High School -- be received and
filed and the necessary extension be granted.
I
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
.
The Common Clerk stressed that the above granted extension in no way interferes with the Council's
public hearing on January 5th with regard to the said proposed re-zoning.
~
".
.
I
{'(NIIl, ;P!f-e
$/7 ()Jt/
tJ-tlJ71rtJ/
,$.;;)/-6- (ojJ-
ie17-6- w/-t-h
$;;;17,(,
(/7Y'Oj?p,h.f/on
I
{!PUI?, ;t1-
1//J1~e nr
.
I
Ct'UI1, /1,
I//ncent-
/u $1"/11$1
$-1-,
. Wafer
-e'111/f/ll1tj 0
. C;'-I'1 sill
I ~i.
~/~/It7Y'
W,aier f'm/liiJ
f11J {J/'tfj ~
Fro!?? flN Ii'
flNpert-!f
I
')')9
~~
Councillor Pye requested permission to place a matter before the Council at this time.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the item that Councillor Pye wishes to introduce be added to
the agenda of this meeting.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor Pye advised that over the week-end he received many telephone calls concerning the roadways
and the sidewalks in the eastern area of the city, and upon investigation, he learned that the salt content in
the material spread during icy periods has been reduced by seventy-five per cent. He commented that this is
extremely dangerous because when the sand is spread over the highways has no impact and even the slightest
breeze carries it off the surface, so you still have the icy condition. He stated he feels that this is a very
false type of economy - we cannot economize to the extent of jeopardizing the well-being of the pedestrians and
the lives of the motorists by cutting down the salt content. He noted that the previous mixture was one pail of
sand to one pail of salt, and that the present mixture of one pail of salt to four pails of sand is extremely
hazardous. In reply, Mr. MacKinnon noted that the problems dealing with salt and sand vary with the temperatures
and we vary the ratio of mixture of these two materials accordingly, depending on the mixture that is required
in various types of weather and in various locations of the city, to achieve the desired results in combating
winter driving and walking conditions. Noting that salt is extremely expensive, he stated that we have to
control in some way the volume of this material that is used, and he recalled that during the budget discussions
one of the methods considered for reducing costs was to control the stockpile of salt that the City now has.
Councillor M. Vincent suggested to Mr. MacKinnon that he might entertain the possibility of looking at the snow
ploughing and snow removal job load for a given day or two and then publishing it through the news media what
area he is going to try to cover - because a number of people telephoning and complaining that they are not
getting their streets or roads sanded or salted, or what have you - he felt it might be very satisfactory to the
citizens if they could be told at least the intentions of the department, by means of a schedule as to when this
was going to be done, or even to be given the opportunity to look at the snow and ice control report that the
Council received from the Engineering and Works Commission recently. Mr. MacKinnon noted that reference was made
in the snow and ice control report to public relations and the issuance of reports so that people would know
exactly which roads we were doing, but that was mainly for snow removal rather than ploughing. Noting that the
citizens expect that all of the roads are going to be ploughed, he stated that it is fair to say again that the
roads in the residential areas are not getting the same treatment nor are they going to get the same treatment
as the streets on the main highways (for example, Rothesay Avenue, Main Street, Chesley Drive, Fairville Boule-
vard, and the throughway) - those highways are going to get the prime treatment because they have most of the
traffic load and the traffic, in turn, has to get to the residential areas; some of the citizens have said to
him their areas have to be done in a reasonable time - the difficulty there, he noted, is we cannot say when a
"reasonable time" is - it depends on the weather conditions and on the particular storm, and also on whether or
not there are equipment problems; however, the Department is trying to notify the citizens, but in the case of
the recent storm, we had some bad conditions with the weather and great changes in temperatures, and it was
difficult to cope with, and, at the same time, this occurred during the holidays and we had some difficulty
getting adequate numbers of men - it is just difficult to control everything, at that time.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to discuss a certain problem at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the item that Councillor A. Vincent wishes to introduce be
placed on the agenda at this time.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that a condition has existed since October 9th or 10th last in that
water has been running from a private property at 10 Brinley Street, which he thinks is caused by a water leak
on that property, and out on the street, and with the present winter weather this water has now built up to
about 27 inches of ice on this one-way street. He stated that when he takes this problem up with the City staff
they say it is not on City property and there is nothing they can do about it. He stated he feels that the City
should have a by-law whereby the Water Department or some civic official can send a notice to the property owner
instructing that the water leak has to be fixed or the City will do so and then charge the cost on his water
bill. He also felt that this condition on Brinley Street is not the fault of the Works Department because the
water is coming from private property and the City has no law that permits the City to tell the owner of that
property to take action to correct the situation - he felt that if it was a drain-off situation, the owner
should be made to install a catch basin on his property and attach it to the City's storm sewer, as he feels it
is the responsibility of the owner of the land to attend to the drainage problem.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be requested to submit a recommendation
regarding the possibility of adoption of a by-law calling upon owners of private property to provide proper
drainage of their property so as not to permit water to be emitted on City streets, and to provide repairs .to
ater lines on their property so as not to permit leaking water from such lines to be emitted on City streets.
The Mayor advised that another item has been received for inclusion on the agenda of this meeting,
regarding the Haymarket Square service station of Irving Oil Limited.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
meeting.
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above noted item be added to the agenda of this
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
)?lanjJ,l9~v/5 Seconded by Councillor Higgins
~Or.?/n. RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising
~vJ.'l7~ t?/'/ that Irving Oil Limited has applied for a permit to (1) add One new pump island for a total of three at the
. ,l-t--If{, Haymarket Square service station, (2) enlarge the further-in island so as to accommodate an extra pump, (3) add
~erv/~e'~' a canopy over the three islands, and (4) add a third driveway further west at this service station; and further
~j1~)nJ(~ advising that the proposal as submitted is based on the new traffic layout at this point including a median or
~~. divider in the middle of the street, curbing and curb cuts as shown on the Irving site plan Drawing Number 7601
~)nl? 15f~ which is being filed with the Common Clerk, and a minor revision to the central traffic island which the said
ee1~e:j?;1qP company would have to arrange for; and further advising that the said Committee recommends that the proposed
tlr/V6'tPdJ'y
....
230
~
(J/f~ IJ/~r,
/r7t. ~t(~
:f]ttqd
't</fesC'il/d2/0;l C etJ
Fe6. 9: /f1t,
(1.2f.,2,-fAi5 ~()olr)
changes at the said service station, off Haymarket Square, be approved by Council -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
The Mayor stated that it is the recommendation of the Common Clerk that this meeting be ad-
journed until 2.00 o'clock p.m., Wednesday, December 31st next, to deal with the 1976 budget.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Wednesday, the
thirty-first day of December, A. D. 1975, at 2.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
and F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by Mayor Flewwelling.
.
I
I
.
Read a letter from the City Manager, dated December 30th, 1975, submitting the 1976 operating
budget of the City which reveals that' costs of all City services have increased, largely because of wage I
and salary increases; that to maintain the level of City services provided in 1975 would need a gross
budget greatly in excess of the Provincial 14% limitation; that accordingly the City is forced to cut
back drastically on the level of service provided by all City departments in order to meet the 14%
limitation; that the amount of Unconditional Grant support by the Province to the City has not increased
over 1975; that accordingly the City is required to place on the taxpayers the total increase in the
budget, resulting in a probable 32% increase in the municipal tax rate; that for homeowners, the increase
in municipal taxes will be more than offset by the decrease in Provincial taxes - but all other taxpayers
will be hard hit; that in order to live within the proposed budget for 1976, the citizens and/or the City
staff will have to exercise the greatest of restraint in demanding and/or providing the various City
services but we have to live within our means, and recommending that the 1976 current operating budget be
adopted.
The Mayor stated that the preparation of the said budget required considerable work by both
staff and Council in view of the fact that the Provincial Government limited the City by law to a 14%
budget .increase and that as a result of this limitation it will be necessary for the City to curtail some .
of its activities.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above letter from the City Manager be received
and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the amount of $25,667,725.00 be adopted as the
~ estimate required for the operation of the City of Saint John for the year 1976 as follows:-
General Government Services
Protective Services
Transportation Services
Environmental Health Services
Environmental Development Services
Recreation and Cultural Services
Fiscal Services
$ 1,501,021
9,911,363
6,239,000
887,100
1,563,999
2,414,400
3,150,842
$ 25,667,725
I0>h -Ia y -* for non
./ part of
Y't!V'l!?nae 191ft>
._~;----
/--~-,:::
J-o./
- a more detailed breakdown of the above estimate is attached and forms a part of these minutes.
In reply to a query from Councillor Gould, the Mayor stated that as can be seen from the above
report of the City Manager, nothing is mentioned about the closing of any fire station in the City.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the amount of $1,377,400.00 be adopted as
tax revenue for the year 1976, a more detailed breakdown of this estimate is attached
these minutes.
the
and
n
estimate (
forms -a
I
I
.
~
JI"'"
23:1
;Btoifer-
.
/976~
$u.j///~ '
expe.J7u-/
/"76
SeU/t'n::lge
I (!o/Ied-/~+
.2J/s LPS::i/ I
~x~.NI/f"M
I
.
I
I
. lYlaf/t?/'S
:/!Iood .POho
CI/n/c
.
lYJ.ayoY'
/0/76
t:; )( r;(OJ-I:-e
q. 70J7eS
I
I
ill4!;10 yo
J:iI)( ~ate
~!ye-l-a
re:7f-ra/nt:
KC'ol'H?m /C!
s~#
emdi6'heij
.
....
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the estimate of expenditures for Water Supply for the year
1976 in the amount of $3,697,300.00 be adopted - a more detailed breakdown of the said estimate is attached and
forms a part of these minutes.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the estimate of expenditure for Sewerage Collection and
Disposal for the year 1976 in the amount of $1,959,200.00 be adopted - a more detailed breakdown of the said
estimate is attached and forms a part of these minutes.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
$J':;i~"."k
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the fifth day of
January, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye and A. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and
Development, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, E. Ferguson,
Chief of Police, and P. Clark, Fire Chief
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by Reverend Peter Bagley, of the Parish of the
Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception.
The Mayor advised that the annual Mayor's Blood Donor Clinic is being held on Thursday, January 8th,
from 9.00 a.m. to 8.00 p.m. at the Red Cross Centre on Bayard Drive, and that he is making a special appeal to
all Saint John citizens to support this Clinic.
The Mayor stated that over the week-end he received many telephone calls from citizens, mainly senior
citizens, who were worried about the tax rate and how it would affect those who live in apartments and who asked
that he clarify this question to the best of his ability, which he will try to do, as follows:- as worked out on
the basis of the 1976 budget that the City forwarded to the Provincial Government, the tax rate for owner-occupied
residences of the Inner Tax Zone in 1976 would be $1.455 municipal and $.75 provincial, totalling $2.205, as
compared to the total 1975 tax rate of $2.228 which means there is a .1% reduction on $10,000.00 - this is $2.30;
for owner-occupied residences of the Outer Tax Zone in 1976 the municipal tax rate would be $.775 and $.75
provincial, totalling $1.525, as compared to the total 1975 tax rate of $1.676 which means a reduction' of l5~ -
that is, $15.10 on $10,000.00; for apartment buildings of the Inner Tax Zone in 1976 the municipal tax rate would
be $1.455 and $1.50 provincial, totalling $2.955, as compared to $2.603 which was the total tax rate for 1975
which means an increase of 35~ - that is, a 13.5% increase which would be a $35.20 increase on a $10,000.00
apartment; for an apartment in the Outer Tax Zone, there would be a decrease of $40.00, the same situation
applies to businesses as to apartments in the Inner Tax Zone.
The Mayor at this time read the following prepared statement:
"I submit for your consideration the following directions for the forthcoming year as a guide to enable
us to give responsible leadership to this city during the present economic situation.
1. Due to the state of the economy, we must give priority to essentials and
services are kept to a mlnlmum. High taxes can only hurt our general development.
non-essential services will not harm our people and may help stabilize our taxes.
ensure desirable but unessential
A reduction in expansion of
2. A new concept of more efficient operation of our city must be enforced. City staff are now recelvlng
good wages, in some cases leading compensation in comparative private enterprise. We must expect greater ef-
ficiency from our staff. We must look forward to recommendation of savings and economy and reduction of waste or
loss, which unfortunately too often appears to have affected many City operations.
3. To meet increases in costs of necessary services, we must expand our tax base. This can only be done
by more building and more business within our geographic boundaries. We must direct our attention to those
policies which will encourage building and business developments most beneficial to our city.
4. In order for Council to appreciate our financial situation both present and future, we must be fur-
nished with more information respecting expenses and proposed expenditures. Council cannot be expected to rubber
')3~ .:-)
..., ....
~
/J1.;J:/t?r
:gult'.fe~ary
r,si!-n;;l/J7t.:>
JJhnn. /l,{f/ls,
Coh/)'n,
~/tll7e/ G:,t!?,I
1f/m,/(/'effOlrsJi
f(er;lJej;,~ea$/s
Ihredmed-s,
.L. h~,
"
-I,'
.,
..,<
1?e::':z.o ;'/I7.f
P~IJIl, h'R' PIs, ~
1(e- fi PI? /nfJ
~1'J11t?j;eea$/s
InJ/R $-I-me n-es
.Au.
stamp recommendations for expenditures merely because they come from our staff.
be called upon to make capital expenditures without being adequatelYlnformed as
expenditures will mean, and how much are to be paid in future years.
Similarly, we shall not
to the actual cost such
I ask that these directions be tabled until the next meeting of Council in order for Councillors
to study them and thereafter be received and filed."
On motion of Councillor Cave
.
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the above noted directions that have been submitted
by the Mayor be laid on the table until the next meeting of Council for study in the interim by the I
Council members, and for receiving and filing.
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising took place regarding the proposed re-
zoning for Kennebecasis Investments Ltd. of the undeveloped or unsubdivided portion of the Bon Accord
Subdivision, which lies on the northerly side of Loch Lomond Road opposite the Hickey Road, and that no
written objections had been received in this regard. It was noted that no person was present to offer
comment on the said proposed re-zoning.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee which recommends
that the area so indicated on the submitted print be re-zoned in the above noted matter from "R-2" One-
and '1'wo-Family Residential to a "PD" Planned Development zone in accordance with Section 39 of the
Community Planning Act tying the development to a plan filed with the Common Clerk. The letter states
that the developers of the said subdivision, Kennebecasis Investments Ltd. (Messrs. Lionel Cook and
William Kiekarski) have applied to Council for this class of zone; that the development covers an area of
twenty-three and one-quarter acres and will consist of 107 lots, and that there will be 190 mixed housing
units on the said 107 lots, made up as follows: 7 one- and two-family, 96 duplex, 16 quadruplexed, 24
apartments, and 47 row housing; that the reason that the Planned Development zoning is being used is to
allow for an integrated but modified type of design, occasionally blending different densities; that the
main street through the development, Bon Accord Drive, will continue at its present width of 66 feet and
small loop or crescent streets will run off it _ these will be 50 feet wide with 26 feet of pavement;
that some of the front yards on these purely local streets have been reduced to 20 feet instead of 25
feet; that the variance was granted by the Planning Advisory Committee because the overall layout is
generally an improvement over the standard proposed subdivision pattern.which Kennebecasis Investments
originally had designed for the area.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the undeveloped or
unsubdivided portion of the Bon Accord Subdivision, which lies on the northerly side of Loch Lomond Road
opposite the Hickey Road and more or less in line with the apartment project known as Century 21, from
"R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to "PD". Planned Development district, be read a first
time.
In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's question as to who are the signing officers of Kennebecasis
Investments Limited, the Common Clerk advised that a Mr. Cook signed the re-zoning application as Presi-
dent of the company.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the undeveloped or
unsubdivided portion of the Bon Accord Subdi~ision, which lies on the northerly side of Loch Lomond Road
opposite the Hickey Road and more or less in line with the apartment project known as Century 21,. from
"R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to "PD" Planned Development district, be read a second
time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee, which recommends that the area so indicated on the submitted print be re-zoned for Kenne-
becasis Investments Limited from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to a "PD" Planned Devel-
opment district in accordance with Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, tying the development to a
plan filed with the Common Clerk be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
The Common Clerk stated that with regard to the proposed re-zoning of land on the northerly
side of Thornbrough Street, land to the north of the lots on the odd-numbered houses on Parks Street
Extension, and of a parcel of land adjoining on the east the property known as 39 Parks Street Extension,
which relate to the proposed apartment project on Thornbrough Street of Lloma Construction Ltd., ad-
vertising of the proposed re-zoning was completed and no written objections were received. No person was
present to submit comment with regard to the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
1?e-:zpY)ino of 'l'he City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning (a) a parcel of land
~ on the northerly side of Thornbrough Street approximately 400 feet from Sandy Point Road, having a
7h ()rl7bY'''~h ':>-T-_ frontage of approximately 400 feet and a depth varying between approximately 175 feet and approximately
/ cnfs 225 feet, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district; (b) the
/ / "" land to the north of the lots on the odd-numbered houses on Parks Street Extension, from "R-IB" One-
A.l ()J?1Cl ,-;"n/ Family Residential district to "Rill-I" Multiple Residential district; (c) a parcel of land adjoining on
s-C-Y'ud/t1>} .At". the east the property known as 39 Parks Street Extension, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential
district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district -- be read a first time.
I
.
I
c'
.
I
I
.
....1
".
>)3'.3
~ . t
.
1?e-;?:..0 17/1J,
~/r;I1?R
I CbJ7.5-t-rwd!
,{/- c/.
I
'/el7~ ;:::
Waf'1t/
.
1'P/aYJI1' Ilolvl
(}Ol11P'1,
/.7' /lfri/
ke:1.%el'l7
:lJ.;llrel'l~.s
/-I-a.
/?l7bill?s
~-cL
.
7?~;Zol?/n
1-P.;;rA- /J11f
$?nee5
?4!f q re'd7S
I
,cen c><?
.
.....
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning (a) a parcel of land on the northerly
side of Thornbrough Street approximately 400 f~et from Sandy Point Road, having a frontage of approximately 400
feet and a depth varying between approximately 175 feet and approximately 225 feet, from "R-1B" One-Family
Residential district to "RM_l" Multiple Residential district; (b) the land to the north of the lots on the odd-
umbered houses on Parks Street Extension, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Resi-
dential district; (c) a parcel of land adjoining on the east the property known as 39 Parks Street Extension,
from "R_2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district -- be read a second
time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
With regard to the proposal to re-zone the former Eastern Bakeries Limited building at 406 Douglas
Avenue to permit the conversion of the property to a 31-unit apartment building, the Common Clerk advised that
the necessary advertising took place, and that one letter of objection was received. The said letter, which is
from Miss Leola F. Ward of 410 Douglas Avenue, advises as follows:- for many years the occupants of 410 Douglas
Avenue have had to endure untold hardships as the result of the establishment of the said bakery in this area and
it is her hope that a decision to permit the conversion of this building into the said apartment building will
not be made lightly and without a great deal of consideration; this apartment building brings approximately 60
adults from all walks of life into the area plus an undetermined number of children from whom there would appar-
ently be no yard space for play and recreational activities - except for a small green area belonging to her at
the rear of her property, and she is unwilling to have this utilized and trespassed upon by tenants of this
proposed apartment building - this problem has existed in the past with regard to bakery employees and customers
using her property as a short-cut to gain access to the bakery; should this proposal go through, it will also no
doubt mean an additional 30 motor vehicles in the area using the roadway known as Prospect Drive on the far side
of her property - the fact that provision for parking is to be made at the rear of the building is no guarantee
that the tenants and visitors to the apartments will not park their vehicles along Douglas Avenue and Prospect
Drive as was the case when the bakery was in operation; in addition to the above, there will no doubt be the
nuisance of taxis coming and going all hours of the night, with drivers honking their horns while awaiting
passengers; Miss Ward is concerned as to how alterations and repairs can be made to the exterior of that section
of the building that abuts her land without the contractor trespassing on her property - as the building now
stands, it would appear impossible to do so; it is Miss Ward's opinion that this proposal will do nothing to
enhance the .neighbourhood or increase the value of her property, and she foresees nothing but difficulties for
her should it go through.
No person was present to speak to the said proposed re-zoning.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated December 24th, 1975,
which advises that the Committee recommends that the said former bakery site building as shown on the submitted
print be re-zoned from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" up to Three-Storey Multiple Residential
classification; that Mr. L. J. April proposes to convert the building to apartments - the present building is to
be decreased in size by elimination of the additions at its rear - renovations will not basically change the
appearance of the present structure other than provide two entrance ways and to generally refurbish the building _
the building size is 223 feet by 70 feet or 15,610 square feet per floor, which would produce good size apartments
averaging close to 1,000 square feet per unit on the two existing floors; that parking for the building will be
provided at the rear - access to this parking is afforded by a 30-foot wide driveway leading off Douglas Avenue _
this driveway is also used by Murray & Gregory Limited to their premises which are near the Eastern Bakeries
property - the present landscaping will be well maintained - in the event that sufficient children live in the
building, they have ample space for play facilities; that the Committee, on reviewing this proposal, thought what
was proposed was a reasonable re-use of the building which has a useful economic life; that the application for
re-zoning was accompanied by letters from most of the nearby property owners supporting or not objecting to the
proposed conversion of the building - Council has also received a letter from the owner of the property next door
(Miss Ward) objecting to the proposed conversion - this letter was reviewed by the Committee and it was decided
that the recommendation for the re-zoning still be submitted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
Ci ty of Saint. John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the former Eastern Bakeries Limited
property located on Douglas Avenue from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to "RM_l" Multiple Resi-
dential district, be read a second time.
Mr. Zides was asked to advise how many car parking spaces are to be provided for the above noted
apartment house, and the location of the ample space for play facilities. He stated that there are at least one
and one-quarter parking spaces for each of the apartments and those are located at the rear; to understand the
situation better, he explained that there are some accessory buildings and lean-to's that would have to come
down, thus making way for the parking and also for the small play areas on the site - not for organized sport,
but just small tot areas. In regard to Miss Ward's apprehension that the contractor for the apartment building
could not work on the sections of the site that abut her land without trespassing on her property, Mr. Peter
Glennie, Barrister, stated he was appearing on behalf of Robbins, Limited, and advised that they have obtained a
surveyor's certificate which shows that the building does not encroach on Mrs. Ward's property and, in fact, the
search of title indicates that she released the relevant part of the right-of-way to the bakery in 1939, so there
is no problem in this regard; there is at least four feet for the bakery to work with the right-of-way - the
bakery owns the fee simple and Mrs. Ward merely has a right-of-way over it, so it is at least four feet for the
workers to work. Councillor Kipping stated he ventures the opinion that this apartment building would actually
enhance the neighbourhood and increase the value of Miss Ward's property because it would become residential
versus light industrial, which it now is, in fact.
Councillor MacGowan, on the point raised by Miss Ward regarding encroaching on her property and the
possibility that children would use her property as a play area, or would trespass otherwise on her property,
asked if, as a gesture of good will, the developer of the proposed apartment building would possibly be interested
in erecting a fence to protect Miss Ward from this encorachment. Mr. Glennie replied that Mr. April has pointed
out there is no prOblem in that regard. In reply to Councillor Parifitt's query, Mr. Glennie stated that the
plan at the present time is that these apartments would be mostly for adults, but the property owner cannot
control the future, and there will be children, no doubt in the future, in this apartment building.
2~14
~
Jle-;U?I7/1?f
..6Ys tern
:L3ii//re"I'/~S ,(-t-d:
Ifobb/J?S .<'-6-d',
~et?/~;:::~
('Re-~tJ#/l1f)
Z(?I7/J1~ ~-,4
&177 enlt h7ii'/77!-
;Iff?,/. .s~4'r/&
f?en /-iel7-CIOlr.Y
1?/af7~/l1oJ1
dfte.iil
$r.s,;P /f
~h"~,H,I
Councillor Cave stated he would like to be assured, regardless of any 4-foot right-of-way, that
Miss Ward would be protecte~.. In reply, /4r. Glennie stated that the bakery has been there in the position
in which it is, since 1929, and there have been no problems in the past, to the bakers' knowledge, and, in
fact, it was pretty rugged use of the property with heavy machinery and trucks - if anything, he would say
the noise and the industrial use of the property will subside and it will increase the value of Miss
Ward's property, and she will be protected. The Mayor felt that Miss Ward's worry was that children living
in the apartments would be running on her property, and Mr. April has assured that he will put up a fence
there.
.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning by-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
.On motion of Councillor Higgins
I
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning of the former
Eastern Bakeries Limited property located on Douglas Avnue from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential
district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate
Common Seal.affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above named letters from the Planning Advisory
Committee and from Miss Leola F. Ward, be received and filed.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed with respect to amending the Zoning By-
Law to permit a medium security penal institution at a site containing approximately 175 acres, lying
between Green Lake and Ferguson Lake off the westerly side of the Martinon By-Pass, by either the estab-
lishment of a new class of zone which would permit such an institution and re-zoning the area to that
class of zone, or to add to the uses which may be permitted in a Rural zone, which is the current zoning
for the area. He advised that in this regard, the following correspondence has been received:- a letter
of objection from l4rs. M. A. Crawford, requesting permission to make representations; a letter from Mr.
Frank P. Doiron, requesting permission to make representations; a copy of a letter from Miss Anne Chisholm;
a letter from the Prison Committee of the Unitarian Fellowship regarding location of the prison; infor-
mation supplied by the Canadian Penitentiary Service; a letter from The John Howard Society -- copies of
which correspondence have been given to the Council members. He stated that, in addition, the following
correspondence was received this date: a letter from the Saint John District Labour Council; a letter from
Mr. Travis W. Cushing; /4r. Frank P. Doiron's brief; a letter from the New Brunswick Association for the
Advancement of Coloured People; a letter from the executive of the Saint John Ministerial Association; and
there is a request from Mr. A. Green of Martinon, and a request from Mrs. Marion Perkins, to also speak on
the subject.
.
I
Mrs. M. A. Crawford read a lengthy, prepared brief at this time, in objection.to the proposed
medium security prison in Saint John West, and 'setting forth the conditions under which she would support
a site in the eastern sector of the city for this facility. On the question raised as to whether there
was conflict of interest through being a member of The John Howard Society and a member of the Planning
Advisory Committee, Councillor Parfitt advised that she sought legal opinion, and it is not so that there
is such conflict of interest. 14rs. Crawford advised that what the residents of the Martinon area are
implying is, that because of the position taken by the John Howard Society, of which Councillor Parfitt is
a member, Councillor Parfitt would naturally be bound, irrespective of her thinking, to follow through and
support that, so this is merely the point these residents are making. She added that, personally, if the
said. facility goes in her back yard, she is not going to worry about it, but she is only thinking of the
very nature of the land that the Federal Government is presently considering and that the Common Council
is considering - this is her prime concern. In reply to the four points made by Mrs. Crawford, the Mayor
made the following comments:- (1) regarding the zoning: this has been passed on to Council to re-zone -
actually, legally the Government does not have to have it zoned - it can just move into this area and the
City knows this and this worries the City that the Government can move into that area; (2) regarding the
water: he is assured that the watershed does not absorb the water from those lakes nor will it ever do
so - he has been told this and they sent environmental people down here to study this; (3) regarding the
Comprehensive Community Plan: he is not as well versed on it as is Mrs. Crawford so he does not know the
changes there; (4) with regard to the Mayor's prediction: he did predict, and he will predict even now,
that this institution will be built - but the location, he will not predict. Mrs. Crawford pointed out
that the residents took offence because the Mayor referred to the location in the particular remark. The
Mayor stated that he does not think he said the location - he said it would be built. Mrs. Crawford
replied that she will check the item.
.
I
Councillor Kipping noted that Mrs. Crawford has been critical of how the matter was handled. He
felt that she must know that there was a planned release which was j"borted by a premature announcement
from a Member of Parliament in Ottawa, and he felt that had the planned release taken place perhaps a
better handling would have been seen of the matter - the public meetings and the information that was
given to the public, and all the rest - Mrs. Crawford may have a point that the matter was not handled in
the best way, but he thinks that she must agree that the whole thing was thrown off kilter by that pre-
mature announcement. !4rs. Crawford stated it was undoubtedly thrown off, but, nonetheless, it was the way
it landed in the residents' laps, so it did not sit too well. Councillor Kipping noted that an attempt
was made to get the matter back on track with the public meeting that was held at Keddy's Motor Inn and
with the other public meeting that was planned and will now be held on January lOth, he understands - and
this meeting this evening is, indeed, just a public meeting at which it is not necessary that a decisi?n
be made. He stated that with regard to Mrs. Crawford's theory of isolation being perhaps the best means
of rehabilitating offenders, the Council has been provided with a quantity of material of research that
has been done on the theory that this kind of institution should be established in an urban area, and he
commented that it is very persuasive. He stated that Mrs. Crawford must also admit that we have been
doing things for some hundreds of years with prisoners and it has not worked very well, and we all know
that, and our professionals know that. He stated that if you have been doing something for a long time
and nothing is changing, you have got to do something different, and he believes that the Penitentiary _
Service now wants to do something different - it is an experiment, granted, but the experience is designed
to rehabilitate those young offenders, and they are from 16 to 25 years of age which is probably where you
have the only hope, if there is. a hope, of rehabilitating offenders; and for that reason, he is slightly
"miffed" by her allegation that most people in authority "mollycoddle" prisoners these days - he knows it
happens to be true - he does not want to count himself among them - and he thinks that there is a
I
.
~
,...
235
.
:7 tl n/)? /n~
2f~-,1 :;/J1/
l"I7l6'I1~I1Je.
"rt!f/ b'6'cU',r,
~IJ //-t!fI1fJ.'
/I/arf/J?t?/J
area
r~A- ~
:lJ1? I Nil
le/I/~e/7$
~i~)rc$'
e~I1!/7J/Hee
!11r. /J b?f1~
.
;?Jr, En/e
!l/;J..Jr3J'7
Illln /Jrf-
t?rall't-
.
I
/II? I?e
Cj l'jjP/117
I
.
~
difference between "mollycoddling" and trying new experiments which are designed to get some results. He pointed
out that the Penitentiary Services people at the Keddy's Motor Inn meeting spoke about the possibilities of
rehabilitation of these young people who are in for mistakes, often - sixteen-year-olds, who make mistakes - and
that kind of thing, so he thinks that her theory of isolation is not well founded and that it is very well
refuted in this information. In reply, Mrs. Crawford pointed out it is not her theory - it comes from the ex-
inmate referred to in her brief. Councillor Kipping noted that the brief has mentioned some alternatives to the
western sector site, and he feels that is a good point, as well; and that the brief has mentioned rigid parole
services, and the matter of jobs going to Saint John residents, and he felt these are all good points. He stated
he thinks that what has to happen, now, is that the matter has to be looked at more on a global basis - that is,
on a wide, community, generalized basis - and he believes that is where we will end up observing it from, and not
from a localized point of view - he thinks we must do that and that we have the responsibility to do that, and he
trusts that Mrs. Crawford understands that. In reply, Mrs. Crawford stated that was her first thinking: look at
the Province in total, and, secondly, if we because of our financial situation, require such an institution in
Saint John proper, then she thinks you have to evaluate the very land structure and the land uses, and reconsider
your thinking.
Mr. Frank P. Doiron at this time read a brief on behalf of the Citizens Rights Committee, representing
the residents of Martinon and surrounding areas, expressing their concern and objections to the construction of a
medium security penitentiary in their region.
Mr. A. Green of 86 Woodside Drive, R. R. 7, Martinon, presented a prepared brief, outlining his ob-
jection to the establishment of a medium security penitentiary in Saint John, and expressing his concerns regarding
various points that are related to this proposal, and requesting that the wishes of the number of citizens who
have made representations to the Council be respected and that the construction of the Federal penal institution
in the Saint John area be refused - or failing this action, the minimum, that an opportunity be given
for all citizens to express themselves in a plebiscite. Mr. Green made a point that he has yet to hear clarified
the statistics that were given (at the meeting at the Keddy's Motor Inn) as proof that the major people come from
the Saint John area - how they were arrived at; he asked if this was an average of over a number of years - if
this was when there was a minimum number of Saint John people in the institution - was it when there was a
maximum number of people from Saint John in the institution; he stated that his honest feeling is, that our law
enforcement in Saint John is much superior to the statistics that were presented at that meeting.
Mr. Ernie Maber emphasized his objection to the proposed re-zoning in question, and made note of the
fact that there were a large number of residents of the area in question in attendance at this meeting of Council
to indicate their opposition to the proposed establishment of a penal institution in their area, and he stated
that they are greatly concerned over the gravity of this situation. He stated that the Council members, who are
the elected representatives of the people, are supposedly in a position that they can make a decision on the
matter before something is actually given to the people in a way of encouragement or any other form that is
needed; that to his mind, the people who are elected to Council are there to represent the people, and the
citizens elected people whom they felt are going to do the most for them; that the area in question is the area
of the citizens in question and there is not any other area that is affected - the Provincial on the West Side is
not affecting Martinon to a great degree, therefore the prison is not going to affect, say, Black River Road -
there is just no connection whatsoever - this is his objection, and if need be he will sign whatever forms are
necessary and go to any lengths that are necessary to make this objection very well known.
Mr. Art Craft stated that he objects to the proposed re-zoning for the simple reason that he thinks
that Martinon was more or less dragged into the City of Saint John - it did not ask to belong to the City but was
taken into it, and so far, the citizens there do not have anything except the proposed prison. He stated that he
does not want a prison at all. He pointed out that Saint John has given the upper River residents nothing - so
why give them a prison? He stated that the residents of the area have not asked for a prison - he would like to
have the Council's answers. Councillor A. Vincent pointed out to Mr. Craft that the Council did not ask for the
prison, either. The Mayor added that, as stated by Councillor A. Vincent, the Government decided what size city
it would be, and that is why Martinon was chosen.
Councillor Hodges advised that he is the only Councillor who has lived in a penitentiary town (namely,
Dorchester, N. B.) - he lived in that town in 1936 for one year with a family who lived right across the fence
from the penitentiary, when he was eighteen years of age, and he did not find that the presence of the peniten-
tiary was a deterrent to normal living, and to recreational activities on penitentiary property in that com-
munity; perhaps that is one of the reasons he does not have that type of fear towards a penitentiary. He stated
that a few years ago when he returned to the location where he had lived in 1936 he found that a housing sub-
division had been built there, and he felt that as far as values was concerned that area has increased greatly in
value. With regard to the point of conflict of interest, he stated that it has always been his policy, because
of being a minority - and as a minority, he has been subject to rejection of society, the same as some of these
people who are being expressed at this meeting, and he knows what it is like - but, nevertheless, it is his
policy to try to make this world a little better than the state in which he received it, and if that is a con-
flict of interest, or not a moral attitude, he is sorry, but it is the attitude he has to take until somebody has
proved to him that this (the proposed prison) is a very bad thing for the citizens of Saint John. He stated he
wants it clearly understood that he not only belongs to the Saint John District Labour Council, and the New
Brunswick Association for the Advancement of Coloured People, but for many years he has been a Director of The
John Howard Society.
Miss Anne Chisholm at this time made a presentation in support of locating the proposed medium security
prison in or near some urban area which has the resources mentioned in the copy of a petition that is being sent
to the Solicitor General of Canada (in favour of the said proposed medium security prison near Saint John), the
City of Saint John being one such well qualified area. She advised that through her personal efforts, the
signatures of many citizens of Saint John including residents of the Martinon area have been obtained in support
of this petition, many of whom will be recognized as persons who have at heart and who have worked for years in
the best interests of our city. Miss Chisholm after reading aloud some of the above names, left the original of
her presentation and copy of petition with accompanying signatures, with the Common Clerk for copying for the
Council records. She stated that she is personally in favour of having this prison in the Saint John area. With
regard to the point about the green area in the Martinon area, she felt that the location of the proposed prison
there would not affect the green area because, surely, the prison authorities are not going to fence in 175
acres - obviously, the area would still be there - and from what we have heard it would be open to the public
except behind (the fence) and those will get in there if they must get in, somehow.
Speaking to Miss Chisholm, Councillor Davis stated that the Council members know that feelings are
running very high in that area - they always do - we have delegations like this quite frequently - it is nothing
new - and feelings run very high, and he does not think it would be very wise (for her) to read off names because
sooner or later the matter peters out, but he does want to make one point: the names she read at this meeting are
names of people - prominent people - who would like to have the institution in this area. He asked if she is
saying they want the institution in precisely this spot, or do they want it in the Saint John city. Miss Chisholm
replied that all those who signed that were aware that the choice that had been suggested by the Federal Govern-
ment was the one, and they were quite willing it would be there - they are also willing that it would be anyplace
else as long as it was in Saint John. Councillor Cave noted that it would appear from the names that Miss Chisholm
2~j6
~
;<'IJ/n~ ~y-,4
cill1}el12 ~e/?r-
;?fed': seeur
'pelJ/~/J~/a"!/
,(.;/rl7!1 ~17/e
.)',oT.2J /str/c:C-
~c7lb, a~)?C'//
7kw/s It/:
Cu $,4/17.1'
7?ev. ~"fr6'/)
.2}fI()"t-he I' s
~fi/l$5P~. ~
/Jdf/.;l;;ee/7lem!-
dC'%U/1eL
J'et?j7/e
~ep;k .</oyL
,(~e
s'T~#istep/d
;?$SoC'.
7?et/,~~/i?1
.:z;"yer
.:TJJ~~~s
:.ff~ / He
(/n/f#,J'/dJ/J
Fel/o/(lShij
has, that these people all live in the central part of the city, or most of them; in other words, they do
ot have a stake in the Martinon area - they have not spent $35,000.00, $45,000.00, $50,000.00 there. Miss
Chisholm replied that their stake is in Saint John City - those whose names she read live in the City.
Mr. Larry Hanley appeared on behalf of The Saint John District Labour Council, whose letter
advises that the said Council has gone on record in supporting the medium security institution in Saint
John, .and is asking the support of the members of Common Council in making every effort possible to see
that this happens, and whose letter further states that not only will this create jobs in the Saint John
area, but will also allow the inmates of this institution a chance to be closer to their families. He
stated that .the Labour Council had the same type of meetings as the meeting held at the Keddy's Motor Inn
on the question of this penal institution, but for the Labour Council's reasons it did not attend the
Keddy's Motor Inn meeting - it had the same (Government) people attend a meeting of the Labour Council -
the Labour Council discussed the subject amongst its members. He advised that the Labour Council re-
presents unionized workers in all parts of the city. He stated that, in relation to having this insti-
tution in the city, to say "Martinon", or "east" or anywhere else, that is "passing the buck" - he feels
that the question is for the City of Saint John; the Labour Council has considered the matter from all
sides and the emotional points of view were brought out, and the contents of the letter reflect the
unanimous decision by members present at two meetings of the Saint John District Labour Council.
i~. Travis W. Cushing of 30 Fenton Drive, Saint John West, spoke in support of his letter of
January 5th, 1975 which advises that he lives only a few miles from the proposed site of the facility, and
he wants to record his support for this proposal, for the reasons cited in his letter, and that he hopes
that the citizens of Saint John will recognize the need for a medium security correctional facility which
would serve many young people from the local area' and make possible their rehabilitation in their own
community. He stated that as an individual he has no objection to being a neighbour to such an insti_
tution; he thinks it is a very important facility and that it can only work well if it works in an urban
area with the adequate support services that our community can offer.
.
I
I
Reverend Warren Brothers spoke on behalf of the New Brunswick Association for the Advancement of
Co loured People, whose letter to Council records the Association's support for the medium security penitentiary
in the Saint John area and advises that for the last few years, the Association has had a member who makes
periodical visits to the institution, although the number of visible minorities is less than twenty, and
at the present time only one from the Saint John area, and further advises that the Association is of the
opinion that if inmates are to be restored to society, it is necessary that family ties be maintained, and
as the majority of the inmates are to be from this area their families will be able to visit them more
often than presently, and further advises that the Association desires that the Mayor and Councillors look
favourably on this project from a humanitarian viewpoint. Mr. Brothers stated that he is in favour of the
proposed prison in the area, regardless of where it is going to be located; one of the reasons is because
he travels back and forth to the prison, and he is also involved quite heavily with the boys at the gaol.
He stated that one of the things he finds, personally, in travelling back and forth, is that he cannot get
to the prison as often as he would like to, and he is sure that those who have that contact with the
prison or who have families at the prison in Dorhcester, N. B. no doubt find it sort of hazardous, too,
going back and forth. He stated that as he talks with the boys there, he finds that some of the regrets
they have in having people living so far away from home is that their loved ones cannot get there as
often; the fact that he is a clergyman means that he can perhaps get there more often than some of the
families that have ties there, and he finds that when he meets the inmates, just to have somebody from the
home town go to see them means a tremendous lot to them. He stated that, should the proposed prison not
be located here, he hopes that it is located somewhere else in New Brunswick that is really not too far
away, because of the distance that one has to go in making contact with the various inmates in the prison.
Reverend E. Lloyd Lake, President of the Saint John Ministerial Association, was present in
support of the letter from the executive of the Association which advises that the said executive makes a
submission in favour of the construction of a medium security prison at Saint John in the hope that it
will be used primarily for youth between the ages of sixteen and twenty-five who show signs of making good
candidates for rehabilitation, and it is hoped that a staff who speaks the same language of the detainees
and acknowledges the need and desirability of encouraging and assisting the detainees .to return to society
as renewed persons, and to work with the leaders and populace of Saint John in Sharing abilities and
resources of society to the restoration of the offenders, and to help change attitudes in society towards
healthy and wholesome views of the criminal and our responsibility to him. The letter states that the
said executive would pledge to the extent of its resources, training and ability to assist in this re-
storative ministry. ~tr. Lake pointed out that the clergy have a vested interest in anything that has to
do with men and their welfare, whether it is detention, or otherwise, and it is in this particular vein
that he was appearing before Council on behalf of the said executive. He stated he can recall instances
where clergy who went to prisons to take services and to minister there - how pleased they were when they
found very few in attendance at the church service, which he supposes is unique for clergy - but, cer-
tainly, it is the welfare of the inmates as well as the community that we are concerned. He stated he
believes there may be other members of the Ministerial Association present who might like to add to what
he has said.
Reverend Daniel Dryer stated that he is in favour of the maximum security prison being located
in and near the Saint John area. He stated that his understanding of the purpose of the justice and
correctional system is the rehabilition of the offender - we recognize that this has not worked - almost
eight per cent of those sent to prison return, under the present system - one of the basic reasons stated
is that during the rehabilitation period the basic problem in coping with problems in home and community
and work relationships have not been solved; this medium security prison is an attempt to improve on this
rehabilitation. He stated that a large percentage of these people will return to our community even-
tually - the time separation could be months, or years; his understanding is that the largest percentage
of these people - some sixty to seventy per cent - that is, in Kingsclear, Dorchester and the central
reformatory - are from the greater Saint John area - this means these people will come back to us, one way
or another, either through the medium security prison or as prisoners released, and this is an opportunity
for us to work with them so that they will come back in a different condition, rather than immediate
release from their confinement; this is an opportunity for us in this city to help; if any of you folk
have, like some of the clergy, been to the prisons - Dorchester, or our own provincial gaol - you would
know that this system is not satisfactory; the young people that we are thinking of, primarily, are young
people that could be your sons or his own; ninety per cent (this is a national figure) of the inmates are
under age twenty-four, fifty-two per cent are under age eighteen; in the studies by Canadian correctional
institutions, Canada has the highest crime and prison rate in the world - that is, 250 inmates per 100,000
population - the United States of America has 216, Europe has 79. He stated that his concern is with
the rehabilitation of persons, and we are being given an opportunity.
Mr. J. Douglas Devine, Programme Co-Ordinator, Prison Committee, Unitarian Fellowship, 299
Douglas Avenue, Saint John, N. B., was present in support of the letter submitted by the said Fellowship
Prison Committee, which letter states that none of the other four communities which are showing interest
in having the proposed medium security institution have the community resources especially needed to
enable inmates to be gradually reintroduced into the atmosphere in which they will eventually be expected
to live as responsible citizens and work opportunities for day work are especially lacking in quantity and
.
I
.
I
I
.
....i
"'"
237
.
11JIeJ/st!;i-e
I
;(P/J/J?!J
:.B!/-A~rV
. Clh7~'I?dme
/Jfep/, .se~~r
~/J / ~;;7f'k.;v;
IlMro/d
/?k tU/Iou..!A
:;;~)1 ~
$oe/d!f
.
I
/It;,,, /tJl?
-:Pel?i//?$
I
.
lI....
variety in each of thes~ communities, and if the institution is refused by Saint John, it will very likely be
built in one of these unqualified centres, and if the City proscrastinates on the matter, it may be lost to an
unqualified area by default; all four areas interested are very high unemployment regions, making the final
decision very susceptible to politics; and advising that the long term consequences of the institution being
located in a low resource community should be carefully weighed against the preferences that any single neigh-
bourhood might have concerning the location of the prison. The letter states that with regard to the petition,
largely from the Martinon neighbourhood, which shows opposition to the prison, in a democracy, such an expression
of individual opinion must be taken seriously as should the expression from the Grand Bay Village Council, and
that it should be equally important that one neighbourhood not be permitted to be the deciding group on a matter
that will affect the entire urban and suburban community for many years to come; the temptation to make a pol-
itical decision must be avoided in such an important matter; briefs and presentations representative of groups
which have members allover the metropolitan area should be given careful consideration; if a more exact reading
of the opinion of the over-all community is desired, then a plebiscite might be advisable; if one neighbourhood
is successful at having the institution turned down, even when it is proposed for a site.more than three miles
from that neighbourhood, all other possible sites will be subject to neighbourhood pressures; if in listening to
public opinion, Council feels that there are good reasons why the Green Lake site should be rejected, it is hoped
that in the same breath, Council will announce another site which it will approve for the medium security in-
stitution. Attached to the letter is a copy of a petition being given limited circulation by the Unitarian
Committee on the prison, which is directed to the Solicitor General of Canada and which represents an attempt to
show some of the local support that there is for the concept of the placing of progressive medium security
institutions near to communities which have the resources vital to the rehabilitation of the inmates, and the
letter states that it is believed that the Common Council will find the assumptions of the petition in agreement
with statements made by 14r. Humphrey Sheehan, Director of Dorchester Penitentiary, and other Federal Government
officials at the public information meeting held by them in Saint John in December last, and that it is hoped
that the observations in the said letter will be given serious thought before the Council makes its decision on
the location of the proposed institution. Mr. Devine stated that he would like to suggest to the Council the
support behind this letter to the Solicitor General: the said Fellowship has members all the way from Westfield
to the other extremity of metropolitan Saint John in just about every neighbourhood other than the Martinon-River
Road area, but areas close to that, on both ends; they have had their own little petition that they have sent and
used amongst their own friends and their Fellowship - they even have had names signing from Grand Bay where he
teaches, which is getting pretty close to the proposed prison area - he would expect it is as close as some parts
of Martinon area, to the said proposed prison area; their group has about 30 families who have active members _
there are others beyond that and they are spread very widely, and of that total number there are only two people
who have not committed themselves, have not said that they are in favour of this. He stated that the Fellowship
is not especially concerned, one way or the other what neighbourhood that institution is placed in, but for all
the various arguments and statements that have been made already they are very much concerned that it be placed
in an urban area that has the resources that, from what they have heard and what the Council probably has in its
packets of information from the Federal Government.... for those reasons, they are very much in favour that it be
located in an urban area like Saint John, and they fear that if a decision is being put off there is danger of
some area which is very rural and has a very high unemployment problem in such an area - and there are four in
New Brunswick which are showing some interest - if such an area should put pressure on another Federal Government
department in order to obtain something which would give more employment there, that that could very well, while
we were waiting, mean that some other area might step in and receive the institution - some area that does not
have the resources that they feel have to be there for a real success.
Mr. Harold McCullough, a member of the Board of Directors of The John Howard Society, Saint John
Branch, was present on behalf of the Society and spoke in support of the written presentation from the Society
which sets forth the favourable views of the Society on the question of siting a medium security correctional
facility in the Saint John area, and which points out that in addition to the many advantages (as listed in this
submission) of having penal institutions near a large community, there is the economic aspect and it is felt by
the Society that the city cannot but benefit by the addition to the community of the many professional, technical
and administrative officers who will be needed to staff the proposed institution, as well as security, main-
tenance and operational staff, and poining out that it has been estimated that the institution will employ
approximately 200 people on a permanent basis when completed and many more than that during construction, and the
institution will, in fact, be a major employer in the area, and, also, it will require a large quantity of food,
supplies and services which, the Society understands, will be purchased in the Saint John area. The letter
concludes by expressing the view that as a city we must be willing to play our part in fulfilling the needs of
society and that this particular need is one which many other cities have recognized as a fair obligation. The
letter points out that it is an unfortunate fact that penal institutions are a necessary part of our society and
places must be found somewhere; it is the view of members of this Society Branch and in line with recent trends
in corrections that nothing is to be gained by locating institutions in remote and isolated areas. Mr. McCullough
stated that he thinks what the said Branch is saying is that the objections which are raised by people are
considered by the Branch to be human and very understandable, but the Branch feels that as a community we have a
responsibility which we share with everybody in Canada, and that this particular responsibility is not one which
we will shirk.
Mrs. Marion Perkins of 95 Champlain Street, Saint John West, stated that she works with the Alcoholism
Programme of the Department of Health, but was present to speak as a citizen, concerned. She stated that she
sympathizes with the feelings of the people of Martinon who had some very valid points, but she can only state
what she believes to be right, and she is in favour of the establishment of this institution in the Saint John
area - some of the reasons have already been given by others - the proximity to families and friends who can give
encouragement and support to the inmates, and the greater employment opportunities in a large urban area; how-
ever, she would like to speak mainly of the relationship of alcohol to crime and particularly in reference to
younger alcoholics. The Mayor pointed out that her presentation has to be in relation to the prison, and her
points on the prison. Mrs. Perkins continued, stating that as a background for her reasons for supporting the
said institution: the LeDain Commission reported that of all the drugs used medically or non-medically, alcohol
has the strongest and:most consistent relationship to crime; between 1951 and 1965 convictions for offences
associated with alcohol rose 150 per cent; it was found that problem drinkers were involved in 33 per cent of the
murders, 38 per cent of the attempted murders, 54 per cent of manslaughter, 39 per cent rapes, 42 per cent of
other sexual offences, and 61 per cent of assaults. She stated she does not have a figure for the percentage of
the prison population whose offences were in connection with the use of alcohol; she has seen statistics that
range from 60 to 85 per cent, but we can rest assured that it is a large proportion of the people who are in-
carcerated, as the reason for their incarceration; in 1973, it was reported in Los Angeles that arrests of youths
for alcohol-related offences had risen 700 per cent in four years; in the United Kingdom, in 1974 a 32 per cent
rise in drunkenness among boys 14 to 17 matches a 30 per cent jump in the number of boys found guilty of crimes
or cautioned; these are just a few of the things as a background. She stated that she has met quite a number of
people who are, and have been, in penitentiary and she believes that a great many of them are there not because
they are criminals but because they lost control of their behaviour due to drinking; she is not in favour of the
institution because she believes penitentiaries are the answer to crime - she thinks that they are a symbol of
our society's failure to provide people with the things necessary for the growth of mature, well-adjusted human
beings - however, they appear to be necessary at the present time, and she hopes that in this new type of fac-
ility that they envision that more help will be provided for people and if we have the statistics to prove the
proportion of people with alcohol problems who are in prison she feels we would wholeheartedly agree that there
should be more help given to people with alcohol problems - the main reason she believes there is a high rate of
repeaters is because people have not received help because they are alcoholics and they return to drinking and
9') b'
-..t.J ..
,.,
7t?I7/1uf ~y-,/~
dhJel1~m~n-c-
/lJed'- S'Retttr,
,PB'~/'tenC-/<:il~
J( e(/, 'if't.t-L:t
kf,f.e //A-
7(.eP. //PyL
C',ltiillWer
111 r, ~ OU;?/et!;i?1l
ah.1Rh/t-l!'di
$t!?l1n'<!e
~i 1 ~ro/.e
Se"J//~
$r: JU//IL S
St?~m-Cf7
:z;~rtlJbrJ$
"(,eeL)
Rt?aL dcee.:;s
-6- If> ::;/6-e
therefore get into further trouble when they get out, and she thinks it is absolutely essential to have
introduction to a rehabilitative programme for alcohol problems, and that is why she believes we should
encourage a new type of facility to help people - not just people with alcohol problems, but other living
problems, to readjust to function better in society.
.
Mr. Rudy Krulik advised that he is employed full-time in working with teen-agers, and that our
problem is a teen-ager problem; he is Youth Minister at Calvary Temple and works full-time in this
capacity; he thinks that the Common Council, as City fathers, and just as people in the audience at this
meeting, that we must recognize that with the growing statistics today of our youth problem, something
has to be done, and therefore, he has to say that a minimum security prison with rehabilitation at the
head of it is the way back, or partly an answer to the way back; he cannot see any other answer to
solving our problems - he has worked in prisons in this area for the last number of months and he has
also worked with young people who should be in prison but who did not get caught, and so on, and he has
been able to rehabilitate those and help those who should have been caught, that did get caught within
our penal system today, but if they had, he would never have been able to reach them; he also would say
that rehabilitation comes from a real price to be paid by everyone - he does, in fact, see the views of
those people who are against this prison in their area - he is not saying where it should be - he just
says: do not be selfish about it - let us pay the price to see our youths rehabilitated and let us not
lose this project - he thinks a minimum security prison would be a step back to rehabilitation of
perhaps some of our sons and daughters someday in this community - and he says: let us be willing to pay
the price.
'I
I
Reverend Lloyd Carver advised that as a clergyman he is interested. in people, and the people in
this case who are in the prisons, and if there is any way he can possibly help them he is interested in
doing it; he finds that he cannot get to Dorchester as often as he would like, and so on; if the prison
was here, as a cleryman he might be able to have more contact with them; he did have the occasion to
conduct a funeral not long ago for a four-month-old child - the father had gone to Dorchester a month
before and was brought back for the funeral - unfortunately, he was not able to work with that man in his
moment of grief - he wishes he could have; also, he would add to this that one of the areas in which
people are learning to counsel other people is called the institutive pastoral education - there is a
chapter of it here in the city in which many clergymen are members, and others, and if the institution
was here that institutive pastoral education would be hopefully able to do a fair job with those men who
are in the unfortunate position of being in the institution; he knows there are many emotional issues
involved, but putting them aside, he would hope that this Council would try somehow to get this insti-
tution here and then, hopefully after it is here, all the facilities of this community be utilized for
the reclamation of as many people as possible.
.
Mr. Lou McGinn was present, representing the Canadian Penitentiary Service, and advised that
Mr. Humphrey Sheehan was still ill and was unable to be in attendance. He stated that if ~rr. Sheehan
were present, he thinks he would stress briefly, three points: (1) it still remains the present policy of
our Minister to locate institutions wherever possible near to, or adjacent to, main population areas from
where the offenders come; (2) they would again remind Council of the statistics which, in their opinion,
suggest a need for an institution in the greater Saint John area; (3) he would draw attention to the fact
that the economic impact of such a facility - it will cost in the neighbourhood of nine to ten million
dollars to create the facility - through payroll, there will be an annual flow of money well-distributed
in the city. He stated that he would also like to point out to the Common Council that they do have
present at this meeting other resource people from Penitentiary Service and from the National Parole
~ervice, also Mr. Julius Solomon, from the Department of Public Works of Canada.
I
Councillor Davis noted that Mr. A. Green had raised a question, about the number of people
presently in penitentiary from Saint John, and he asked when that count was made. In reply, Mr. McGinn
advised that the statistics were taken on October 30th, 1975 and on that date there were approximately
824 Federal inmates in the Atlantic region - of that number, 337 came from Nova Scotia, 291 from the
Province of New Brunswick and of the 291 there were 127 from the Saint John area who are now in Dor-
chester, Springhill and Westmorland and three other very small minimum security facilities - this figure
would include people who are also in maximum security. He confirmed that 35 per cent of the 9,200 inmates
in Canada are medium security inmates; he did not think it would be fair to say that the same percentage,
approximately, would apply to the figure of 127, to be destined for medium security - he thinks that what
would be fair to say is that 35 per cent of the 824 on a general average would be considered medium
security type inmates. Councillor Davis stated that the point he wants to make is that he feels an
obligation to the people we produce in Saint John who end up in penitentiaries but he does not feel that .
great an obligation to people from elsewhere - he thinks that if the Penitentiary Service could guarantee
to us an institution that would not be so large as to require importing offenders it might not be all
that bad, and he thinks Mr. Green's comment on the statistics is very valid. He noted that the Peniten-
tiary Services says there are 127 from Saint John, 42 from Fredericton, and 12 from Perth, which makes
181 who would be destined for minimum, medium and maximum penitentiaries, so the most it could be would
be 120. Mr. McGinn replied that this would be probably so. He noted that this institution in question
is planned for 180 inmates, approximately. Councillor A. Vincent asked how many, of that 127 figure, are
from the Martinon-Grand Bay area. Mr. McGinn replied that he will ascertain that figure and advise
Councillor A. Vincent. Councillor A. Vincent added that he thought the figure of 10 was quoted to I
somebody else in this regard; he stated that he will wait for Mr. McGinn to supply him with the figure
for which he asked. He felt that if the figure is 10 for that particular area, it is quite a high number .,
compared with greater Saint John and the figure of 127. He stated that his point is that maybe we should
all have to take care of our problems.
Councillor MacGowan noted that one of the presentations of objection suggested that the costs
were more to have the prison in their area that what they would take in. She asked if this has been
suggested in other areas, as well, that financially that the city where the penitentiary is is going to
lose more in enforcement than will be brought in by a penitentiary in their area. Mr. McGinn replied _.1
that, all he can tell the Council is the information he heard Mr. Deguay give the last time they were in
Saint John: he stated at that time that they had been in contact with a number of councillors in various
cities that did have penitentiaries and they had not been given any information up until then which led
them to believe it was costing more to have the facility in that area - they were certainly in touch with
people who could provide that information but they simply were not able to provide them with the facts
that would ,indicate it would cost more.
Mr. Julius Solomon, representing the Federal Department of Public Works, on the technical
phases of this proposed penitentiary, stated that with regard to a matter that they probably will be
discussing when they come before the Planning Advisory Committee - and he thinks it is proper that they
state now - that if the location were found and they were granted the location off the Number 7 Highway,
there is a.matter of access, getting into that site, and as it stands now the so-called Martinon By-Pass
is a limited access highway and they would not be able to enter the site directly off it, and they have
discussed this with the Province's Department of Transportation and they made several suggestions how
access might be made to the site, and the one that is most promising of all concerned if they were
.
....1
,..-
tl/eiider -r
. ,s t! f/J/i!?r.;;;5e
-<0/7//71'
E'y-,.( ,;;}H/
&me/?dp/<
fi1~L .> /?Car.
I ,P",-,/'ffmfL
ll?d~P{
ddefJ'$S -cl?
sH.e
/"(/.;;/kr q:--
$efA/er01ge
;j)epi; ~ub.
. t/(/p rlt $ (feI.
7J/aIJ.>>. .4d't//
{!om.177 '
7017U
13'1 -
'I am6'hd/?lo
11/ea,~~Ut;
pel7/U'nndJ.
7//aIJ.>>,/}lin s.
. Ct7/7/P?
I
I
'R~- ;Z.I?I'J/>>'
J//{P/;<< .IhJ/<
Qldmf$ 0/-
/Jff6ll/i!1e S
..(~
.
~
')'39.
,..,..
granted this site and if they were successful in obtaining the site - the one that looks most successful, most
practical, for all concerned and certainly does most justice for. now and for the future, is the proposal to build
a road from the Number 1 Highway running due northwest but northerly from the Number 1 Highway at a point which
is close to the present connection from the throughway. He stated that he will file his brief and a map if the
Council wishes, and there would be discussions with the Planning Department on it. He continued that this
highway would run northwesterly and enter into the service road which is the City's access into the water pumping
plants, and by so doing there would be no connection whatsoever with Number 7 Highway - that present access would
be closed for all time, and a new road constructed which they would like to provide and install the water and
sewer services running down to the Number 1 Highway so that there would be complete municipal services for the
new institution. He felt that the Council would agree that this makes planning sense - it seems to do something
immediate to provide services for that site for that institution, and may do something for that area of the city
in the future - so, he would like to present his brief, which is essentially the same as the one which they used
at the public meeting held at Keddy's Motor Inn in December last, and he has sketched on it that road, and he
would like later to present a large plan to the City which shows that in more detail - essentially, it has been
proposed by the Department of Transportation and it is that Department's idea.
/4r. Ernie Maber asked if it is not correct that the City is responsible for all roads and maintenance
in that area - would the City be required to build the road that Mr. Solomon is talking about. The Mayor made
negative reply.
Councillor Kipping felt that there was a point that should be clarified because with Mr. Solomon's new
information - at least, it is new to Councillor Kipping - about a different approach by road to the area, the
question of extension of water and sewer services becomes a little muddled, perhaps, because previously the
Penitentiary Service was going to supply its own water and sewer systems, completely self-contained: now, the
proposal is that they would hook into City services on Number 1 Highway, and his question is would it be at their
cost, both for the road and the water and sewer services - will be at the Federal Government's cost. Mr. Barfoot
replied that the previous discussion on the site with the Department of Public Works was that they would be
responsible for the complete cost and as far as he knows, this is still the situation, for extending services to
this proposed penal institution location.
Councillor Higgins stated that he believes, with the large gathering present and their concern, pro and
con, and the fact that the Council ordinarily after a public hearing makes its decision at the end of the evening -
he asked if it would be safe in saying that when a decision is made later in the evening, and he thinks maybe
just a general agreement of Council, that Council will, in all likelihood, table the matter pending the report
following the pUblic hearing at Saint John High School and the report of the Planning Advisory Committee. He
stated that if the Council more or less agrees to that, he would therefore propose the following motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the Common Council wait until the Planning Advisory
Committee report following the public hearing is reported to this Council before any readings are taken on the
proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law.
/4r. Zides advised that it would be January 19th as the earliest, and January 26th at the latest, that
the above named report of the Planning Advisory Committee would be before the Common Council.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Pye voting "nay".
.On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that all items dealing with the above matter of zoning and pro-
posed establishment of a medium security penitentiary in the area under discussion, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising
that the Committee now recommends that the.area indicated on the submitted print be re-zoned for Millidgeville
Estates Limited and Alpha Investments & Agencies Limited, for re-zoning undeveloped land along Royal Parkway
(Which runs northerly off University Avenue) from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential to "RM-l"
Multiple Residential classification; that the Council's December 8th decision to lay this re-zoning request on
the table to enable the owners of the land, Millidgeville Estates Limited, to. disclose their intentions for the
whole of the not yet developed portions of their lands, and Millidgeville Estates have now written the Committee
to the effect that they would basically adhere to the Royal Parkway portion of the original plan - if any request
for re-zonings do take place they would be to a minor modification because, in their words, "the land does not
lend itself to anything but low density housing"; that the land use mix in this area was originally designed for
future Planned Development zone but this is no longer likely because that would have entailed planning controls
which the original owners of Millidgeville Estates were allegedly prepared to become involved in - the present
owners are not - in addition, the development of the area originally re-zoned for the Alpha Place Development,
across Royal Parkway and the area now proposed to be re-zoned will entail some minor redesign of the street and
lotting layout of the balance of the land - the key issue, howeve~, is the retention of the basic low density
originally proposed - the Committee will expect that the originally proposed low over-all density for the Royal
Parkway portions of the lands will be retained for any future development; that Millidgeville Estates still owns
additional undeveloped lands between the so-called Royal Parkway area and the university and/or hospital
lands - this area had been earmarked on the original plan for one-family housing - now, with the hospital complex
next door, one can foresee perhaps some other uses and Millidgeville Estates want some degree of flexibility for
this area; that the Committee believes that most of this land, particularly that away from the university and
hospital lands and nearer the Royal Parkway area, should be retained for low density housing - it agrees that
some controlled flexibility might be permitted near the hospital and university lands; that more precise planning
is obviously to follow but the Committee believes it is now in order to re-zone the parcel indicated on the
submitted print for Alpha Investments' proposed apartment project -- be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land with a width of approximately 215 feet along
University Avenue and a frontage of approximately 910 feet on the easterly side of a new street, Royal Drive,
running northerly from University Avenue, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Residential Suburban district to "RM-l"
Multiple Residential district, be read a first time.
Councillor Kipping, referring to the above mentioned letter's reference to the letter written by
Millidgeville Estates to the Planning Advisory Committee to the effect that they would basically adhere to the
Royal Parkway portion of the original plan, asked the City Solicitor if such a letter has any legal force or
validity if Millidgeville Estates does not "basically adhere to the Royal Parkway portion of the o~iginal plan".
Councillor Hodges stated he would like to know where we would stand, if they did so. Councillor A. Vincent
stated he wants to see the letter in question; he asked if Mr. Zides has a letter outlining what Millidgeville
''''"
94{)
,..,
~
1?e- .A 0 17/l7ff
/I/f;~61 Zhl/dd-
h7t?J?~s.,l~e~/6.
A'7fL
J?e-.zon/i1!f
?drt?.//I7,;J
~ha/a /'~L
g~l'I?d e~$/~
/olPe// S7f;
.23~:sJoJ"e ~
Estates say they will do. Mr. Zides stated that they have a letter from Millidgeville Estates, signed by
the President, Ralph Stephen. In reply to Councillor Kipping's question, Mr. Zides stated it seems to him
that the Council and the Planning Advisory Committee have the final say in every issue, if they want it -
it seems to him there is no responsibility on the Councilor the Planning Advisory Committee to make
decisions that are contrary to that position: to interpret this, he added that what they are going to live
with is density that is very low in the immediate area for the area that we are now talking about, and he
thinks that this is a statement of the position that they have put forth and it is a position that the
Planning Advisory Committee has accepted, and there is nO responsibility on the Planning Advisory Com~
mittee to make any recommendations that are different from that position and there is no responsibility on
the Council to accept any different position, if it wants to. Councillor Kipping stated that all he is
asking is whether their statement contained supposedly in that letter, which the Council has not seen, has
any legal validity - apparently, the Planning Advisory Committee has a decision and made the recommend-
ation based on certain promises from the Millidgeville Estates - certain statements made by them in this
letter - so, therefore, he would hope that the letter has some legal validity, or could it be denied by
11illidgeville Estates at a later time, for example, if they did not happen to live up to it, for whatever
reason. ~tr. Zides stated he would be glad to provide the City Solicitor with a copy of the letter in
question from Millidgeville Estates, which is written on the company's letterhead signed by Mr. Stephen's
signature, which he knows. Councillor Kipping stated that, in that case, he personally would not want to
make any decision on this matter until he had word from the City Solicitor on the validity of such letters
because he would think that it would be good business to do so. Councillor Cave pointed out that before
third reading there would be ample time to obtain all the information that Councillor Kipping wants. The
Mayor commented that we will have that information for Councillor Kipping.
.
I
I
In replY to Councillor Gould's request for an explanation as to what planning controls under
future Planned Development zone that the original owners of Millidgeville Estates were allegedly prepared
to become involved in, and the present owners are not, that this proposed neW re-zoning would nOw allow to
go by the way, Mr. Zides stated that the original proposal was fairly low density housing - that is, there
were no great, massive apartments - but some townhousing and some mixing of housing types so that you have
got one-family houses, two-family houses, street townhouses, townhousing groupings - in order to accompl-
ish that, and they were sort of intermixed - they were not separate areas of the kind that we are usually
getting here - Millidgeville Estates was going to have planning consultants devise a kind of a scheme
showing precisely where the buildings would be located, at what grades, and how they would blend together -
this is the kind of control that he is talking about - it involves hiring somebody to do all this and' to
help to control it, but the present people are not, and there is no question in his mind that you are
going to get a re-zoning back here because the present zoning is Suburban Residential allowing one or two
families on quite large lots - that is what their intention is - sort of a holding zone - all we are
saying is that when they do come back we are going to make sure that the densities are low enough to be
more or less consistent with the densities in the original scheme. The .density planned for the area that
is under re-zoning application are three-storey walk-ups, he added, but he understands they will probably
be three or four 12-unit buildings and two 30-unit buildings, or maybe 24-unit buildings - that is because
the hillsides at the back are so steep that we are discounting some of the usefulness of the land.
.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Cave
I~
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concernS re-zoning an area of land
with a width of approximately 215 feet along University Avenue and a frontage of approximately 910 feet on
the easterly side of a new street, Royal Drive, running northerly from University Avenue, from "RS-2" One-
and 'l'wo-Family Residential Suburban district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district, be read a second
time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By_Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the northwest corner of
Loch Lomond Road and McAllister Drive with a frontage of 148 feet on Loch Lomond Road and 215 feet on
McAllister Drive from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential district to "B-2" General Business
district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of
Section 187 of the Municipalities Act, R.S.H.B., 1973" with respect to the closing of the following
highways:-
Lowell Street - That portion of the existing Lowell Street commencing at its intersection with Bayshore
Road and proceeding eastwardly a distance of approximately 650 feet or to a point on its northerly side
having N. B. co-ordinates of E.l,110,892.40; B. 544,109.31, for its entire width being approximately 25
feet; also, that portion of the right-of-way of Lowell Street having a width of 25 feet more or less and
lying south of the existing road, running to the easterly sideline of Bayshore Road, being unused as a
road and forming part of the Canadian Pacific Railway rail yard;
I
Bayshore Road - That portion of Bayshore Road for its entire width of 65.32 feet commencing approximately
30 feet south of the existing Lowell Street or at a point on its eastern boundary having N. B. co-ordinates
of E. 1,110,327.29; N. 543,970.83 and on its western boundary having co-ordinates of E. 1,110,261.99; N.
543,988.94, proceeding thence southward approximately 893 feet to its termination at the shore of the Bay
of Fundy, being unused as a road and forming part of the Canadian Pacific Railway rail yard -- be read a
third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
.
Councillor Hodges noted that the people in the Lowell Street and Bayshore Road area did not
understand that the road that would be closed is a road that has not been built - there is to be a new
....1
,...
,0)111
~I:U . .
5~/'1~i-
. ('/0:7/)77'-
-<t:?we// Sr-.
;g.;;l!f;~l'/jre
~,
Gkrb?/'/1 7('.
a' ~.;lIe/7
I
17e/7~6'/"r
dcee>j?Ce-d
/t1'7wU'.
~ 5t?U/t?1"d95,
hl.;;;'-Ic)- /;';/s
?end.er5. ./
~ce~t!!?a
.$417Jt'~~
~~ So~
175,1/).;I/-t-
4fj'r~~S
~UJ7,&V~
I #I'e~~
5erv/~S
';;ff~t?Ht-
1(,7), ~1!s
/l.$$t>di S'
(1Unt~~
$/M3,P/I; L )
/lM-?/~1X'$
$)dm/'~cA-
. 'lkrA-
elHbjo<<se
~II/Br
{01>1h?/Ss/o.
I
I
.
.....
road and the old road as at present is to De closed off. He felt that in future, the procedure should be to
build a road and once that is done then ask that the unused portions be closed, and then the people of the area
would not be up in arms, as in the above street closing matter at the present time. He added that he feels the
Lowell Street and Bayshore Road area residents were rightly concerned in this street closing matter which was
confusing to understand. He noted that Mr. Gerald R. Whalen is still adamant in his opposition to this street
closure, and stated he personally feels that the road should not be formally closed until the one that the City
has promised, is built.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in
The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 187 of the Municipalities Act, R.S.N.B., 1973", was
read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
Councillor Green advised that the original intent, after building the arena in the Lowell Street area,
was that Lowell Street would be closed and when it came to. the attention of the Land Committee he pointed out the
bad effects there would be in the closing of that section of the road and, therefore, with his objections and
showing the other Councillors the bad effects of that proposal, the road was re-designed, so what is there now is
a road that is compatible to the area and suitable to the people, and they are quite happy with the way it is,
now.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter from the City Manager, tenders
for the supply of water and sewerage materials for the year 1976 be accepted in accordance with the recommendations
contained on the submitted summary of bids prepared by the City Manager and the Purchasing Agent.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter from the City Manager, tenders for
the supply of sand, gravel, aggregates, loam and sod for the year 1976 be accepted in accordance with the recom-
mendations contained in the summary of bids that was prepared and submitted by the City Manager and the Purchasing
Agent.
Councillor Cave noted that the price of asphalt every year is governed by the price of aggregates, and
that the price of aggregates this year has gone down. He stated he would like to check, to find out whether or
not the aggregate that is priced at $2.50 for three-quarters of an inch, $2.60 for half-inch, and $2.70 for
three-eighths of an inch, meet the specifications - because if it does not, there is something wrong; he would
like to know whether or not the aggregate meets the specifications as laid down by the City. He added that he is
agreeable to pass the above motion, but he would like to have a report. Mr. Barfoot replied that this does, he
believes, meet the specifications. Councillor Cave, recalling that a few years ago Chitticks (1962) Ltd. bid on
all this and never supplied the City with any of it, stated this is what he is concerned about. Mr. Barfoot
advised that the asphalt price is based on the price for crushed gravel, rather than the stone chips (the stone
chips was the material prices to which Councillor Cave had referred).
Consideration was given to the letter, dated January 5th, 1976, from the City Manager in reply to
questions raised at the Council meeting of December 29th last when he had recommended that a new client-architect
agreement be signed with R. D. Purdy Associates for architectural services for the new clubhouse facilities at
Shamrock Park, in place of the previous agreement with Purdy & Simson, Architects, signed on March 11th, 1975, as
this partnership has been dissolved. The letter advises that although it may be possible to amend the agreement
so that the Architect is required to perform architectural services free if any extra work is encountered, he
could not recommend such an amendment as extra works are normally the result of conditions unforeseen by the
parties at the start of the work.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he spoke with the City Manager and asked for tabling because he is
not nappy with it. With regard to the above noted phrase in the City Manager's letter "if any extra work is
encountered", Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is not talking about extra work that we authorized the archi-
tect - he is talking about work that a contractor will do and then take us to arbitration because of his loose
specifications framing or because of his plans not being what they should be; anybody who knows about constru-
ction knows that from time to time you can change your mind or you can add, or change something around - well,
that is an authorized "extra" and he is not talking about that - he is talking about "extras" where we have to
take, the contractor to arbitration and the architect will testify, under oath, that the contractor is not en-
titled to it and the arbitration award finds that he is, and then he gets a fee for it - that is the kind of
information - and he thinks it is only fair that some form of tightening the wording of the contract agreement
should be in there - maybe the fee should be half, or something - he does not know, but he certainly knows that
there was a problem and it will be shown in the annual report of the Power Commission of the City of Saint John
where an architect, he believes, charged $4,000.00 for services to tell us that the contractor was not entitled
to it, and now the architect is billing on a percentage of one hundred and some thousand dollars; to him, that is
just not "cricket", and he is very much opposed to it, and he does not know what we will do. In regard to these
remarks, Councillor Gould added that this new clubhouse facility at Shamrock Park was estimated by the designers
to cost about $180,000.00, and it would have been the City's assumption at that time that that is what the City
would pay the consultant's fee on; however, he finds out now that the consultant's fee is based on what is the
lowest bid, when the bids come in, and it comes in at $360,000.00, so instead of getting whatever percent it is
of $180,000.00 the person now doubles that because the bid came in at $360,000.00; he felt this was an easy way
to make instant money, because of a bid. He added that the City did throw those bids out but it still has to pay
on that lowest bid whether the City accepts it or not, and that is the point he is trying to make. Councillor
Cave noted that the architects firm had folded up or he would get a new partner, and stated that in his personal
opinion, the architect is still responsible, and he should be asked to do it for a certain lump sum - and that is
it. Councillor Davis noted that the architectural fees are not on the quoted price - they are on the actual
price, unfortunately, and the point that Councillor A. Vincent makes is very good. He stated he thinks that
Councillor A. Vincent's point should be referred to the City Solicitor: when the situation arises that we have an
over-run, and it is a legitimate over-run, then there is nothing wrong with that, but when even the architect
says that it is not legitimate and the court says it is and then the architect collects his six per cent, there
is something with that, and that particular point, he thinks, needs a little work. He suggested that that be
referred to the City Solicitor, and to the City staff, to tighten the whole contract agreement up. Mr. Barfoot
stated he misunderstood the point that Councillor A. Vincent was making on the arbitration matter, and that he
believes such a paragraph could be inserted in the contract to cover the point of no payment of fees in case of
arbitration. Councillor A. Vincent asked when the City will be going to tender on this new building. Mr.
Barfoot recalled that the original date was March, 1976. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Council will be ab-
le to have a preview of the plans and specifications before the public tenders are called. Mr. Barfoot made
affirmative reply. Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to have a chance to look at the specifications.
In reply to Councillor Gould's query, Mr. Barfoot explained that the architect's agreement calls for a payment of
a percentage on the total actual cost of the work; however, the point of arbitration is that there is dispute as
to whether the cost is there and the client should not be compelled to pay the architect's fees on that. Coun-
"
I ...
242
.si.;llJ7/'fJC!k %11
a/<<.6 ~ 6us e
191't"'~/It"'d Se7"tl/
.:Jf/"e't'/??d d
1(,2),71<r//ij
/7ssQC/~EeS'
6~y ~/1a.f!6".r
~~y Sp~/i'dpr
6Zfy /J1.;7~f/'
.7JJr. ~~CV~
Sir>ed e/os /h
.{owe// $i-. .
~Y'sAoI'e 1f'd:
t7ef'<;i/ d ffkk.
Jl/GlI7I7,/)tt'",/S.
C f.?.P7/7?,
/lsse/71f- "tfo
.s~/J/, ?/~J?
J::J}, I rvil?f'
$".1-.4'1/.
?~//e ,..pur:.
/.;u'J d'
iPt?&'r.. y: '?.,;:;)/"kS
.2JeF:
I1s5e/?~ -10
S"b-d/'J/, pkh
JP~17 #?ifi;;;h7
.slt?Hl#" Su.l-~'
/!fJeepfdl7Ce .~
~'ymel7ts /11.
116'<< ~ j?u-,J/c
f?ttl"flPse /and
:JJol7a/ d /y!C>e
t?f~"'v/17 Siaw
cillor Gould asked if the City, then, could agree with architects in the future for a lump sum payment
rather than a percentage payment. Mr. Barfoot replied that the architects are members of the Architects
Association of New Brunswick, functioning under the New Brunswick Architects Act and there is a standard
form of agreement which defines the terms involved in architectural work. Councillor Gould asked: why"
then, would architects estimate a cost of a building at $180,000.00 and the actual cost be $360,000.00, if
they are in the field. Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that the reason for the disparity of figures is
because there is a lot of work in the area at the present time and contractors bid high when they do not
want work.
Councillor Higgins stated that in the light of what Councillor A. Vincent has said, he would
move the following motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that this matter be referred to the City Manager, City
staff and the City Solicitor to tighten up what has been suggested in the aforegoing discussion, and to
come back with a recommendation to Council.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report dated December 30th, 1975, from the City
Manager and the Director of the Recreation and Parks Department, with regard to the closing of a portion
of Lowell Street and a portion of the Bayshore Road, submitting a list of residents of the Lowell Street
and City Line area who were contacted on December 29th, 1975 (nine in number) to inform them of what is
being proposed and who have no objections to the said proposal, and advising that, in addition, a news
report appeared in the Evening Times-Globe outlining the proposal and there has been no public response to
this - and further advising that of the said list of names contacted, Mr. Gerald Whalen of 386 Lowell
Street is the only person who still does not agree with the street closing, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
Advisory Committee, the Common Council assent to the proposed J. D. Irving Limited Sub-division plan, a
print from which is submitted; and that the letter from the Committee, advising that this sub-division
lies along the northerly side of Dwyer Road to its intersection with Kingsville Road - the proposal is to
create eleven 75 feet by 100 foot lots with Lots 1 to 10 inclusive fronting on Dwyer Road and Lot 11
fronting on Kingsville Road, and that Lot 4, which lies opposite River Hill Drive, is being set aside. for
vesting in the City as land for public purpose (the setting aside of Lot 4 is based on the following
reasons: (a) if in the future, the balance of the property is sub-divided and public land is provided in a
more suitable location, this lot will be returned to the Irving company; (b) if in the event of further
sub-division a street is.required at this location, portions of the lot not required for the street right-
of-way could be consolidated with the then adjoining corner lots) -- and further advising that the Recre-
ation and Parks Department and J. D. Irving Limited are in agreement with the foregoing, and the Com-
mittee, therefore, recommends that the Council accept the proposed Lot 4 as land for public purposes and
assent to the proposed sub-division plan -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor MacGowan asked, regarding the notation in the above letter that "the Recreation and
Parks Department and J. D. Irving Limited are in agreement with the foregoing", whether Mr. Zides has this
in writing. Mr. Zides replied that the agreement with J. D. Irving Limited takes the form of their
signing the plan; the agreement of the said Department takes many forms and he cannot be specific in this
.case - it is a day to day working relationship and the decision is not made by that Department which is
simply an advisory body in this sense to the Planning Advisory Committee which, in turn, recommends it to
Council for Council's decision. He added that, basically, he cannot really tell whether we have it in
writing - we very seldom do - it is a question of sitting around a board table and discussing things and
agreeing, or otherwise. He confirmed that it is in the plan and that is signed, the same as a contract,
and added that it is automatic, because once the Irvings sign the plan and it is approved and filed the
property automatically goes to the City.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that with regard to the John William Sherriff Sub-division, this property consists of two lots
(73-1 and 73-2) at the westerly corner of the.Lorneville Point Road and the Jack's Road in Lorneville as
shown on the submitted print, and that the proposal is to adjust the common boundary to allow the rear
portion.of Lot 73-1 to be consolidated with Lot 73-2 and the remaining portion of Lot 73-1 would have an
area of 15,000 square feet and it contains the Sherriff residence; and further advising that the long_
range planning for this area requires the widening of Jack's Road (the road right-of-way has been 16 feet
wide and 25 feet is being acquired from the properties on each side as sub-division occurs - Mr. Sherriff
is providing a widening of 25 feet on the Jack's Road frontage of his property) -- and further advising
that the Committee has approved the street widening and recommends that the Common Council assent to the
sub-division plan -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
Advisory Committee, the following sums of money be accepted in lieu of land for public purposes with
respect to the following named sub-divisions (in each case, the figure is 8% of the value of the new or
additional lots as estimated by the City's Property Management Branch):-
1. from Donald Nice - the sum of $1,320.00, C-112 .(this sub-division is situated at the northwesterly
corner of Kennebecasis Drive and Westmount Drive - the proposal is to divide Lots 4 and 5 each into two
lots with four resulting lots; each lot has been estimated to have a market value of $8,250.00; when a
single lot is sub-divided into two lots, the City's policy is to apply the 8% payment to the market value
of only one lot and exempt the other lot from the requirement; in this case, two single lots are each in
turn being divided into two, leaving two lots exempt);
2. from Marvin Shaw - the sum of $256.00, S-28 (this property is located on the City side of Grandview
Avenue just east of its intersection with the Hickey Road; a 210-foot by 210-foot parcel of land is being
divided into two lots, one of which contains Mr. Shaw's residence; the proposed new lot has been appraised
at $3,200.00, so that at 8% of its value the sum of $256.00 is to be paid to the City in lieu of land for
pUblic purposes);
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising
that with regard to the application from Carr Construction Ltd. for approval of five lots along the easterly
~~"'. /?,tP/' side of the Jack's Road and at its junction with the Lorneville Point Road, a 25-foot widening of the Jack's
I ~~~, Road is shown on the plan and a recently approved John Baird Sub-division provided a 25-foot widening on the
opposite side of the road - these two widenings together with the existing 16.5-foot right-of-way will create a
total right-of-way of 66.5 feet - the Engineering and Works Department is requiring that the road along the
_L -L frontage of this proposal be chip seal surfaced and they have agreed to accept title to Lot 75-5 in lieu of a
~J7~t?~~ ~O $2,200.00 cheque or performance bond to cover the surfacing costs with the understanding of course that the lot
S~~-~/'Y' will be deeded back to Mr. Carr upon completion of the work; and further advising that insofar as money in lieu
;9;1~1? of land for public purposes is concerned, according to the appraisal of the city's Property Management Branch
/7 /? the valuation for these purposes is $12,400.00 and, at 8% of the value, $992.00 would have to be paid to the
L-C7rrlAOJ?- City, and that the value of Lot 75-5 which is propqsed to be deeded to the City, as outlined above, will cover
strlZctf/o/J both the surfacing costs and this amount - however, since the $992.00 will be due to the City for deposit in the
I ~~~ City's trust account for the acquisition and development of land for public purposes, the Carr Construction
company would have to pay the City $992.00 and interest at such a time as Lot 75-5 is deeded back; and ~ecom-
mending that the Common Council (1) assent to the sub-division plan which will follow the tentative plan, a copy
of which is submitted, with respect to the street widening, and (2) either accept the sum of $992.00 in lieu of
land for public purposes or the City accept title to Lot 75-5 until such time as the road surfacing has been
completed and Mr. Carr agrees to then pay the City the sum of $992.00 and interest for the return of the lot
be received and filed and the Council assent to the above named sub-division plan which will follow the tenta-
tive plan, a copy of which is submitted, with respect to the street widening, and the Council accept title in
favour of the City to Lot 75-5 until such time as the road surfacing has been completed and Mr. Carr agrees to
then pay the City the sum of $992.00 and interest for the return of the said lot.
,...
.k1h?e".s F
.$h/f//ef/
/lc-#fe7nC'e
err 1:.a!:p~6'.
/~ //BU o-r
,Ptd~r/.
~,b~'d
,PUIjPPse
~17~
. (evt?/nfU.,R;I
f?~P?~h<r
In /; 6'<< on
'Zezfr()61?0l
t::'",l!ah ,,(-tz[,
a,r H',ii1$h-
SG'I'V/6e ;In.
I
attl?, A1}>"PA
(1,<<l7e//
m-qs.
fut?s..//t>I79?
.ilh51<h9r
j/er/ptfs
(/lid-few
~d)
.
I
IYfJWspflt?J"
l~dpdd;sJ.
~!/ ~pUn<!/
re ,Pu pl/o
C'pmPfa/N~
-C-/Oh
II C; 'I!J ;fetuS
S 'p~ce
.
~
0" '3
AIW'::U. t
3. from James E. Shipley - the sum of $280.00, L-114 (this is
School Bus Road at its intersection with the Lorneville Road;
by the Property Management Branch at $3,500.00; at 8% of this
in lieu of land for public purposes).
a proposed lot located on the easterly side of the
the lot requires .some fill and has been appraised
value the sum of $280.00 is to be paid to the City
On motion of Councillor Higgins
The Mayor advised
request of Petrofina Canada
withdrawn from the agenda.
that the item on the agenda from the Planning Advisory Committee, regarding the
Ltd. to erect a car wash and service station on property on City Road, has been
Consideration was given to a letter from Councillor Kipping, advising that at this meeting of Council,
it might be appropriate to consider how communications between the public, its representatives, and our munici-
pal government could be improved, and that two suggestions that have been made before, that is, question and
answer period at Council session, and regular newspaper "City News" space, would seem to warrant further con-
sideration, and that Councillor Kipping will move that the matter be discussed.
Councillor Kipping explained that, in placing this item on the agenda, his idea is simply that the
Council should probably consider some suggestions which have been made before which he believes are suggestions
designed to improve communications between the public and its representatives and our municipal government. He
stated he had a further suggestion which would improve communication, in his opinion, which he would like also
to introduce at the appropriate time - it has to do with the same problem.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that provision be made for a question and answer period at
Council sessions.
In explanation of the proposed question and answer period at Council sessions, Councillor Kipping
pointed out that many times the Council members bring in matters to put them on the agenda and they come up
extemporaneously - the Council members do not know what they are before they come and permission has to be voted
each time in order to get them on the agenda - the Council members do not know what they are voting for - they
do not know what they are going to discuss until it is actually placed on the agenda - and this usually comes at
odd times - usually at the end of the total agenda. He stated he thinks that the Council could have a period
set aside - like the item called "Mayor's remarks", the following item might be "Questions and answers by
Councillors" at which the Council members might bring up typical questions, and he has some examples of typical
questions that often get lost or they are not of sufficient importance in themselves to warrant going through
the formality of putting on the agenda; of the typical questions he is thinking of is, "What is the present
status of plans to improve the serious parking situation in the city which is a day to day problem for almost
everyone?". He noted that we sort of lose that, but it needs to brought back to us every day because this is
the kind of question that we get from citizens almost every day - complaints, suggestions, queries - that kind
of thing - so, that would be One question that is a little more important, he thinks, than the kind he was
thinking of. He added that the question he was thinking of as being not sufficiently important to warrant
putting formally on the agenda, is, "Similar street names in the city cause confusion among visitors and busi-
ness people; are changes being considered, and if not, why not?" - that kind of question, and even though the
Council may not be able to get an answer immediately at the Council meeting from the City staff who are present
at the meeting, at least it could be referred for an informational report which could be made public - not
necessarily discussed - at the next meeting or some future meeting, but made public, so that the public is
better informed on matters which are irksome to them and which they seldom get information on. He stated that
is his proposal.
Commenting on the suggestion that regular newspaper "City News" space be taken, in the above mentioned
communications matter, Councillor Higgins noted that it is a very expensive item. He recalled that in the
revious Council he headed a committee about the use of the media and the cost factor was overwhelming, as well
as the organization and consistency factors. He stated he is willing to go along with the question and answer
period, but it could get very far off-base. Councillor Kipping interjected that it would be very time-limited,
strictly time-limited. Councillor Higgins stated he is worried about the Councillors asking questions of City
staff - sometimes the City staff are not present at Council meetings because there is nothing really that
pertinent to them On the agenda of that meeting and they are not present to answer the question - but that
Councillors will be asking questions publicly of City staff that could be very easily asked and answered with a
telephone call through the day, and then advise the person making the enquiry of the answer by making a return
telephone call. In reply to that particular point, Councillor Kipping stated that he has taken that into
consideration and he has spent a good deal of time making telephone calls to City staff and trying to root out
information during working hours - but it does not always work, and not only that, but you cannot get the
information sometimes back to the public, because you do not have the information; what he is talking about here
is improved communication, and he thinks this is the only way the Council is going to be able to get little bits
and pieces of information - and some, not so little - out to the public, because the Council members get a
myriad of questions asked to them every week - all kinds of questions, some of which they can answer and some of
which they cannot, and some of which they do not make note of to remember them, but the person who asks them
24-4,
~
.
tJ"UI7, ~',P"p/J7~
IYt!((/Sj?~pt?r
_P(YeHI.s/d5~
a/6/Jd / re
,PuP'/;'c< - _ _ L/.
CtJ/1?"h?P b /(Enrl~
lIe/l.!:I /VeU;S
.5 f?~ cq.
aUI?lr1jJ/!n~
7?me p;C
CtJHh<!// m-/5S:
!beth,~, t//I?~
S.iI/Clr'f /11~1'~
"f-If2:Vt9/?se
~ I/b~l7t:!e
p{ ee//l7ed;
e#{!.C{f! (Ie
::J)Re. cf<,'f, /17!?
finds it of great interest and wants to know the answer; it is detail - it is not trivia - but there ,are
some important questions and there are some other kinds of questions; he thinks we could get into that. He
stated that it is all up to the chairman how the thing is handled - it has got to be time-controlled most
strictly and severely and ruled out of order when it is out of order. Councillor Cave stated that,
regarding any businessman or taxpayer in this city who asks a question that any Councillor cannot answer
immediately, he would suggest that Councillor Kipping or any of the other Councillors do what he does,
namely, tell the person making the enquiry to put it in writing and he will get them the answers, and you
avoid a lot of problems. Councillor Hodges noted that there is a Commerce Committee (composed of Coun-
cillors Kipping, Gould, A. Vincent and Cave) and that public relations is part of this department, and
stated he thinks that Committee should come in with its recommendations, rather than one man. Councillor
Davis stated he sees nothing wrong with a Councillor bringing in a question so that the public will know
he is asking that question, but he sees great problems in trying to have the answer at that meeting _ for
instance, Councillor Kipping asks the question about similarity in names, east, west and centre _ Summer
Street, and all these other names - if we ask that question today, on Monday, the Council would have a
copy of a report made by Planning some years ago on the study of those names and why it was not introduced
and why the street numbering was not changed so that all the streets would be parallel; he stated he
thinks it is very valid to bring in a question but he does not think it is right to expect an answer at
that meeting - the answer could come at the next meeting. He stated there is a question on parking, and
the Council could have that answer the next week because it has a good report on parking. He stated he
thinks it is very right for a Councillor to bring in a citizen's question to the meeting _ not to expect
the answer that meeting. He stated that regarding the point on advertising, we already have the logo _ it
is all ready - we have talked to the newspaper to get a price on so many inches of column per week - the
cost is high - we do not have the staff - we start that every year and each year it drops down because we
cannot acquire the staff to handle it, and all that would happen is it would start off well, and then
peter out, so, why start? Councillor MacGowan stated that she can see a Council meeting getting out of
hand entirely if questions were thrown out loosely. She stated she would suggest that, if the Council is
going to have question and answer periods, the Councillor write that question and it just be on the agenda
as a question, and the following week the Council would have its answer - but, certainly, not to get a lot
of talk and politicking, because this is what would happen, she is afraid. She added that she knows there
are a lot of valid questions, but she felt that, as items have to be in writing to be placed on the
agenda, why should questions that are not submitted in writing be permitted. She stated that she is
opposed to it, if the questions are asked extemporaneously. Councillor Green, referring to the proposed
question and answer period, suggested it might be a good thing for the press to meet with the Mayor and
the Council fifteen or twenty minutes before the regular session of Council commences - he thinks that
part would be an excellent idea, especially as it would help the press from getting the wrong interpre-
tation, and help the press to get the facts.
.
I
I
.
Councillor Cave proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that this matter be tabled for future
study.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he supports this, but he would like to have the privilege of
asking the question or, just before asking it, handing it in to the Common Clerk, because in the past,
when he asked questions, he found he gets a cover-up letter. He stated he feels that a question period
once a month 'is a-good thing. He stated he has travelled throughout the country and whenever he has a
spare hour he likes to drop into a Council meeting in other provinces, and he has found they do have a
question period where everyone is allowed to ask one question - and they ask it and hand it to the Common I
Clerk - they read it, and ask it, and hand it, and the answer is forthcoming. Councillor MacGowan asked,
regarding the motion of Councillor Kipping, if it will be questions in writing, or questions asked extem- , ,
poraneously. The Mayor replied that the rules will be drawn up for it but he thinks it will be questions
in writing, probably. Councillor MacGowan replied that she cannot vote on the matter until the matter of
putting questions in writing is decided. Councillor Kipping stated that we could work that out, he
thinks - it has got to be very carefully controlled - there is no question about that - it cannot be used
for politicking and it cannot be used frivolously - it has got to be well-controlled, and he urged that
the Council do that, but he asked that the Council get the principle across of improving communication
between the Councillors and City staff and the general public, whom the Councillors are supposed to
represent.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Kipping, A. Vincent and Parfitt and
the Mayor voting "yea", and Councillors Cave, Green, Pye, MacGowan, Davis, Higgins, Gould and Hodges
voting "nay".
With regard to the matter of,regular newspaper "City News" space, Councillor Kipping stated he
realizes that this may be an expense and at this time of restraints, of course, it is difficult to ad-
vocate any kind of a new expense, but he believes that maybe in the difficult times ahead it might be ,even
more important that the Council spend that little 'bit of money to communicate better with the public ~ the
public is already complaining and asking questions about the conditions of the sidewalks, for example _
what is going to happen - they are seeking information on the City's new restraint programme which,
although we give out information, it is soon forgotten, in some cases - and sometimes, it is not com-
plete - so, there is a need for this, in his view. He suggested that if the City cannot pay for it, maybe
it could even approach the newspaper and ask it to do it as a public service. He stated that all he is
asking for is approval of the principle of improving the communication by this means. He proposed a
motion, that was not seconded, that the City institute a regular newspaper "City News" space. Councillor
A. Vincent asked if such an expenditure is in the budget, and Mr. Barfoot replied that it is not budgeted
for this year. Councillor Davis pointed out that we have all that information: Mr. Jack James has all the
information on space in the newspaper, and cost. He added that he himself has been working on this
matter, for years.
.
I
Councillor Kipping stated that he had a third suggestion in connection with this same topic and
it is this: in keeping with general restraint for improvement of communication with the public and for the
sake of consistency, he would move that the 4.00 o'clock meetings of Council be changed to 7.00 o'clock.
There was no seconder to this proposed motion.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor Albert A. Vincent,
advising that by virtue of a December 29th, 1975 amendment to the by-law respecting salaries to the
members of the Common Council, he declines acceptance of the salary increase and expense allowance in-
crease as provided for in the amendment to the said by-law of June 16th, 1975, and that this notice is to
be effective from December 29th, 1975 until withdrawn by him -- be received and filed.
.
The Mayor, speaking to Councillor A. Vincent, noted that the Council gave him good backing (in
enacting the said December 29th, 1975 amendment to the above named by-law) and stated he hopes that
Councillor A. Vincent's organization is happy now that he did not have to receive the pay above what they
told him was limited. Councillor A. Vincent made affirmative reply. Councillor Kipping stated that he was
disturbed last week to hear continuously on the radio, last Tuesday, reasons given by Councillor A. Vincent
....1
,..
245
.
I
I
MI7I'1' amm
/hf/ad/c
. .s;.f2edq J1-o
~I?-& /-?fd:
. :Fa!ls/~e
.7)r. I"Rt:'a
!e/Jee M'/Ol!a
-c/O)?
.2). "R..E; ~
!Jtac>,I!//4v,
7(b-t-"hesOl!l.
.I-t-d. $-t-I'/lr
tv,;:J~rci~
yt. COJ7S~/??/,-
-?I/o)'J
I
L B GAL
.
I
e;?jf.Je,!t~/~
..2). ~ /I/I:S I q,
0IJ1I?j':71 J;,p.
I /7Jt?ds ~-i-~.
{'/a~Le .,(ah-
.fA/er dd/
,,"s. ClI7l~ 4-
e(j!f
t!P/Ol ~e~
. CJ/a/In d~/h.
Om~d/ ~!f
CjP:,
......
in interviews, for declining the salary increase, which are not in keeping with reasons which were given to the
Council in Committee of the Whole as to why he had to decline a salary increase and expense allowance increase.
He stated that he wishes that would be cleared up. The Mayor pointed out that he had just said to Councillor A.
Vincent that he trusts that the organization is happy that the Council backed Councillor A. Vincent, showing
that the Council members wanted him on Council, in order for him to comply with the regulations as requested by
the organization for which he works - and that his salary remain at the original salary he became a Councillor
with. Councillor Kipping stated that, in other words, his employer had asked him not to accept any further
increases on pain of having to leave Council, if he did; he asked if that is correct, and added that that is his
memory of what Councillor A. Vincent told the Council in the past as to the reasons why he must do this.
Councillor Higgins commented that the reasons why a Councillor does not wish to accept do not have to be given.
Councillor Kipping replied that when you have a by-law changed for a reason, then he thinks the reason must be
stated - he stated that this reason was stated to Council very emphatically, very strongly, and then was mis-
represented he submits on the public media, afterwards, and he does not like that kind of misrepresentation,
publicly or privately.
Councillor Davis asked permission to introduce an item from the Land Committee at this time.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the item from the Land Committee be placed on the agenda of
this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, submitting a bill
from Atlantic Speedy Propane Ltd. in the amount of $1,808.04 which represents the expenses that company incurred
as the result of the City requesting the company to remove and relocate its fencing on Bayside Drive as it did
not allow access to the new right-of-way, and advising that the Engineering and Works Department has advised
that the fence is now properly located to conform with the new right-of-way and meets the Department's requirementE
and recommending that the said bill from Atlantic Speedy Propane Ltd. for relocation and erection of new fencing
be paid, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted, it being noted that this is a Department of
Regional Economic Expansion project and is therefore cost-shared.
The Mayor stated that he would like an answer to the following question: the newspaper article headed
the other day that "Strike causes water use dip" and that article was referring to the water supplied to the
Macl~illan Rothesay limited pulp mill, which is not using as much water because the mill is down. He asked if
this mill is still being charged for the amount of water it would normally use if it were not shut down. Mr.
Barfoot replied that there is, he believes, a minimum under the contract which presumably would be in effect -
he did not have that contract with him. The Mayor stated that his point was: do the other taxpayers have to
pick up that extra charge of water usage, having in mind that even though this mill would not be using that
water the cost would still be there to operate the water supply. Mr. Barfoot replied that some of the costs
would still be incurred, but some of them would not; the minimum charge usually covers the cost of having the
system in operation. The Mayor thanked Mr. Barfoot for this information.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillors Cave, Parfitt and A. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.
Mr. ROdgers recalled that two or three weeks ago, he and Mr. D. Gillis, Q. C. brought the Council up
to date to that point, on the action against the City in the Omega court case with respect to the Omega claim
that it is faced with from Lanthier, and at that time, the Council authorized Mr. Gillis and he to go forward
with an offer of $35,000.00, which they did; he further recalled that they had reduced their figure with every-
thing down to $162,000.00 - they came back with a reduction from $162,000.00 to $100,000.00 and Mr. Gillis and
he simply told them that there was no point in getting involved with, discussing $40,000.00 at that stage - so
they proceeded on with respect to the resumption of trial which is to take place on January 6th next in the
Supreme Court Chambers starting at 10.00 a.m., in the Provincial Building, 'Charlotte Street. He felt that the
Council should be informed that the trial will probably go on all week and that any Councillors who are free and
wish to attend and listen to the evidence he believes should attend and list to the evidence, especially on
January 7th when the former City Manager is in the city. He stated he is looking for authority at this meeting
with respect to two matters: if, in the event we are faced any day in the coming week from Omega with an accept-
ance of the $35,000.00, Mr. Gillis and he would like to be in a position to say it is too late - they made that
offer and Omega rejected it, and that something less than $35,000.00, if any, can be re-offered: what he is
getting at is that they made an offer of $35,000.00, they have rejected it and counter-offered $100,000.00, but
if, during the trial this week as the events unfold and they happen to attempt to say they will accept $35,000.00,
i~. Gillis and he want to be in a position to say that that offer of $35,000.00 is no longer open, and that Mr.
Gillis and he make the decision as to what they do at that time - whether they come back with $25,000.00 or
$20,000.00 or $15,000.00, or proceed on - that is one area of authority they are looking for, to make sure they
are not bound to accept $35,000.00, to come back.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor and Mr. D. Gillis, Q. C., counsel to the
City, be given authority to use their discretion in deciding whether to settle the Omega action for an amount
less than $35,000.00, or to proceed with the court case.
Mr. ROdgers stated that the second point is that Mr. Gillis and he are serving notice on January 6th
that we are counter claiming against Omega for the return of the $75,000.00 that was paid back in 1973; he would
like authority for that Notice of Motion to be made on January 6th next in court. He read the said Notice of
Motion at this time.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor and Mr. D. Gillis, Q. C., counsel to the
~
246
'flel-RI" E &ra;4
#/'H/,M ~ '
tbIJS<</-I/175
$ureaa
%rsol1l1e/ a~
City, be authorized to make the above noted Notice of Motion in court on January 6th next regarding the
Omega action.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
on Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twelfth
day of January, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief
Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administration
and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides, Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development, C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation
and Parks, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, and E. W. Ferguson,
Chief of Police
The Reverend David Yarrow, Assistant Curate of Trinity Church, offered a prayer which opened
the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held
on December 22nd last, be confirmed.
Councillor Kipping noted that at the December 22nd meeting, a letter received from Mr. Peter E.
Grady which proposes the formation of a Municipal Labour Relations Consulting bureau and which advises of
the possibility of financial assistance being provided to municipalities via the Department of Municipal
Affairs with respect to Labour Relations problems, and Which. seeks the support of the Common Council of
his proposal, was referred to the City staff for a report regarding the said proposal. He asked how soon
the Council might expect a report on this matter, in view of the fact that Mr. Grady asked for the
Council's reply at its earliest convenience, and because it seems to Councillor Kipping that it is a bit
pressing, if anything is going to be done about it.
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
The Mayor asked Mr. Barfoot if any communication has been carried out between City staff and
Mr. Grady in the above noted matter, and Mr. Barfoot replied that since the meeting of Council on that
point, the staff has not followed the matter up, as yet. Councillor Kipping asked that this be done at a
very early time now, because it seems to him that Mr. Grady is almost waiting upon the Council, and
others, for some indication of support or non-support in the matter, and the Council should let him know,
one way or the other. Councillor M. Vincent noted that on this matter, this subject is on the agenda of
the Personnel Committee and it is hoped that the Committee would discuss it at that time, also, and
perhaps there might be some response coming from the Personnel Committee.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held
on December 29th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
December 31st last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
January 5th last, be confirmed.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
JI""
2~7
.IY. .E.
/!J u..seIL,m
I
$jJOW <I /ee
C'on-PI'I?/ :
SDlI1d/l?4'
stf'ett"/-s
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
E;,"'Y~
:JJejl:
II...
The Mayor stated that he has a letter, and he thinks that Councillor Davis can later give the Council a
report on the closing of the New Brunswick Museum, because he thinks it is important that the Council should know
about this. He added that the Museum is closing, and he thinks that all Councillors do not know about this.
Councillor Davis advised that the Museum has closed because of the alterations, additions and changes in the
Museum. The Mayor asked if there is any danger of losing anything, at present. In making negative reply,
Councillor Davis explained that this is strictly a closing to the public because it is very difficult to keep
everything dusted, in view of the fact that there is a lot of flying plaster and brick in breaking through from
the old building to the new building. He gave assurance that there is no immediate danger of losing the Museum.
The Mayor stated that he knows that many members of the Common Council have received telephone calls
regarding the matter of sanding of city streets, asking for information concerning same, and that he himself has
received such telephone calls. He felt that possibly the seriousness of it is that possibly some staff may think
that we are going a little too slow, and that they are doing this with justification. He stated he believes it
is important that the sanding, at least, be kept up to date with the requirements of our streets. He invited
discussion on the subject. Councillor Kipping stated he would like to add to that, that it would almost appear
as if the Works Department has over-reacted to the direction from Council to pull back on the sanding and salting,
because this week-end, he has been inundated with telephone calls - and, certainly, the complaints were justified
in many cases. He cited an example of such complaints, regarding an ice situation at an intersection of two
streets, which made that intersection practically impassable, and noted that there are some things that only the '
City can do - and one of them is to look after impossible situations like that kind of thing - and there are
several other impossible situations, too, at intersections that he cited, as well, that were particularly brought
to his attention and which were all bad situations. He felt that there has been a bit of over-reaction in that
the Works Department apparently did not have crews out on Saturday and Sunday - at least, as far as he could find
out - and he believes that those particular places (the intersections of Westmorland Road and McAllister Drive,
Somerset Street and Wellesley Avenue, where you cannot get up or down the hill at certain times, Woodhaven Drive,
University and Millidge Avenues) and others like them, which he did not' hear about, probably, or the Councillors
did not hear about, possibly - must be looked after so that the traffic can at least move, and there must be some
traction in those places; we just cannot withdraw our services entirely - there has to be some kind of an arrange-
ment made so that a crew can get out and do something when it is required, due to weather conditions and other
conditions. Councillor HOdges pointed out that Saturdays and Sundays are days when double time is paid, and that
since this is a time of economic restraint, it is not possible to follow economic restraints and make such
overtime payments, at the same time. He felt that the Council has to make up its mind as to whether it wants to
look after the protection of the citizens fully - and in such case, it will have to change its policy from what
it said the other day.
(Councillor Green entered the meeting)
Councillor Higgins suggested that either Mr. Gabriel or Mr. Armstrong express feelings regarding what
has been done on this subject, and what they feel should be done. Mr. Armstrong confirmed that crews were not
working in the regular hours on Saturday and Sunday although some time was spent on those days in response to
what he considered to be emergency situations only - the prime reason for that is that the City is trying to cut
back on the over-time, which is very expensive. He added that we do have a night crew that works from 11.00 p.m.
until 8.00 a.m. but it does not work at sanding and salting on Friday night or Saturday night, and so it is
difficult for us in that period to respond to calls and do it cheaply. He added that, of course, the Department
is trying to restrain itself, and it does not like the situation the streets are in, either. Councillor Gould
asked if there is a plan of which sort of dangerous intersections we are salting quite regularly, which hills we
are lOOking after daily, almost, because the traffic warrants that. He stated he travelled on some of the
streets that Councillor Kipping mentioned as being dangerous and by using caution he managed to get through
safely, in spite of their icy condition. Making affirmative reply to this query, Mr Armstrong advised that each
division has its own separate list of its own separate problems. He explained that the recent temperatures have
been so cold that the salt or sand does not really take effect and if there is any wind it sort of blows the sand
to the shoulder of the street, and they have to return regularly to places that they do sand - they try to do
that on hills, intersections, and on bad turns - it is a regular process. He confirmed that in an emergency
situation such as a heavy snowfall, the crews would work on a Friday or Saturday night. Councillor M. Vincent
recalled that a couple of meetings ago he suggested to the Commissioner of Engineering and Works that he felt it
would be highly advisable and well worth while if the Works Department could find some way of advising the
citizens of this city by means of the news media (radio, television or newspaper) of the areas of service the
Department was going to provide in a given period of time and the priorities that the Department established. He
felt that all of the large number of telephone calls that he, and no doubt the other members of Council, re-
ceived, were calls of enquiry, aSking if sanding and salting would be done and what was the delay in so doing.
He felt that if the Works Department could see fit to layout a planned programme on the services to be conducted
in the various areas of the city and as near as possible to when and what time, that this would go a long way in
stopping that Department from receiving criticism and, hopefully, it could cut down some of the telephone calls
that Council members received, because the people simply want to know what is going on. With regard to garbage
collection, he noted that there has been a cutback in that collection service, and people have told him they put
their garbage out on a certain day, expecting it to be picked up that day and it was not picked up, so they take
it back in again, only to have the garbage truck come the next day and pick it up - the people merely want to
know what is going on, and we should tell them. Councillor Davis asked Mr. Armstrong the following question:
knowing what the budget is and how much you are going to have to spend, could you advise the citizens of Saint
John to buy a set of chains, considering the damage to the pavement, et cetera? Councillor Davis asked if Mr.
Armstrong considers it a good idea if everyone bought a set of tire chains this winter. Mr. Armstrong replied
that he personally does not think so. He stated that looking at problems on a year-round basis, and the fact
that we are already talking about cutbacks in what asphalt resurfacing we are going to be able to do, he makes
this reply. He stated that, regarding winter driving conditions, his advice is for motorists to use caution,
which is about the only thing we can do - there is no doubt that our streets are in bad condition until the
weather moderates. Councillor Davis stated that he knows that a lot of people are thinking about buying tire
chains, and he was wondering which would be more costly to the City. Councillor Green asked, in considering the
conditions of the streets at the present time, and alternate cold and thawing, if the Works Department is planning
on putting a night crew on, rather than to have over-time - have a crew that would work at night - maybe go on at
4.00 p.m., or something like this. In reply, Mr. Armstrong pointed out that we already have a night crews, as
referred to in this discussion period, on a regular five shift per week basis, but not on Friday or Saturday
nights; we do get a lot of complaints and calls in that Friday night period and it is possibly a bad night not to
have a crew on because any response we have to make then is on a over-time basis and on call-out; he is thinking
quite seriously of talking with the Commissioner about possibly supplementing that staff with two or three more
operators so that we could probably respond with sand, like in the early part of the morning, at least, through
the bulk of the week - if you can get out on those streets at about 5.00 a.m. you can cover a lot of like the
morning rush-hour problem, and they are giving consideration of that - there is an additional bit of money that
is tied in to those rates, of course. Councillor Green felt that maybe a crew on at 4.00 p.m. would help take
some of the load off the night crew, to get the ground covered because the Council members are receiving a lot of
calls between the supper hour period and as late as midnight.,
The Mayor noted that the information derived from this discussion period is that the Department con-
cerned will study the problem, and the Council might be asking later for a report from it; he thinks all he
wanted to get was that there was a problem and he thinks that the staff understands the problem - he knows that
hen he has made his calls the staff have responded, so it has been very good. Councillor Kipping added that his
point in speaking was to, he thinks, to point out, perhaps, to the Works Department by this means that in the
')'48
- '
~
opinion of many citizens there has been an over-reaction in that we are now doing nothing for long periods
of time - and he thinks that it is impossible for us to do nothing. He stated that the Assistant commissioner.
has admitted that we did nothing on Saturday and Sunday, in this way. The Mayor confirmed that there were
trucks out Saturday and Sunday because he had calls, and the Department did something, but it is not a
general practice to have them out on Saturday and Sunday. Councillor Kipping stated he feels we all agree
with that because if they get called out they have to be paid for four hours, he understands, which is a
pretty big "bite", and he believes through scheduling, through shift-scheduling, and things like that - we
have got to work smarter - not necessarily harder - in this time of emergency - and it is a time of
emergency. Councillor MacGowan offered the following comment, stating that possibly the Works Department
has taken it into consideration, but it is something she thinks we should think about: during snow storms,
she ,has found that in Halifax, for instance, they have a police car going ahead with the "peeper", telling
that they are going to plough that street at that time, and that means the citizens must get their cars I
off that street so they can do a decent job; she thinks it would make things much easier for us (to follow
this procedure) - there is absolutely no parking on the street when the snow plough is around - she thinks
this is something we should be enforcing. Mr. Barfoot advised that we have made a very severe cut in the
operating budget of the Works Department, that we have given instructions to stay within those budgets,
and the Works'Department well know that it is just a waste of money to go around salting streets when the
temperature is zero. He stated he would suggest it is more the part of the citizens, surely, to exercise
caution, and if they cannot drive in those conditions, they should stay home.
On motion of Councillor Gould
/J'Jayf?r
:Bud .let-
Mstrdl/l1-1-s
gtt/tJt~lil?es
~r /976
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the directions submitted by Mayor Flewwelling
at the January 5th last meeting of Council, and which were laid on the table at that meeting, to serve as
a guide to Council for the forthcoming year to enable Council to give responsible leadership to this city
during the present economic situation, be taken from the table at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above named directions submitted by the
Mayor, be received and filed.
Councillor Gould suggested that in receiving and filing the above noted submission, probably
there should be some explan~tion, the said statement reading:- "I submit for your consideration the
following directions for the forthcoming year as a guide to enable us to give responsible leadership to
this city during the present economic situation.
1. Due to the state of the economy, we must give priority to essentials and ensure desirable but
unessential services are kept to a minimum. High taxes can only hurt our general development. A re-
duction in expansion of non-essential services will not harm our people and may help stabilize our taxes.
I
.
2. A new concept of more efficient operation of our city must be enforced. City staff are now
receiving good wages, in some cases leading compensation in comparative private enterprise. We must
expect greater efficiency from our staff. We must look forward to recommendation of savings and economy I
and reduction of waste or loss, which unfortunately too often appears to have affected many City oper~
ations.
3. fa meet increases in costs of necessary services, we must expand our tax base.
done by more building' and more business within our geographic boundaries. We must direct
those policies which will encourage building and business developments most beneficial to
This can only be
our attention to
our city..
4.
furnished
to rubber,
shall not
cost such
In order for Council to appreciate our financial situation both present and future, we must be
with more information respecting expenses and proposed expenditures. Council cannot be expected
stamp recommendations for expenditures merely because they come from our staff. Similarly, we
be called upon to make capital expenditures without being adequately informed as to the actual
expenditures will mean, and how much are to be paid in future years."
Councillor Gould stated he feels he agrees with point number one in the above submission, if the
Mayor had defined "non-essential services". The Mayor replied that he put them in as non-essential and
there are many things we look to the City, and he left this for a staff decision on it and We can make the
decision, but there are things the staff know that are not essential, and he thinks that is where staff
COmes forward with items of recommendation to the Council - this is what he was looking for. He added
that he has some ideas on what he thinks are not essential services, hoping that the staff will come up
with some of these ideas - and as he talks to them, he realizes that the staff are "on line", and the
recommendations will come to Council. Noting that the 14ayor is the author of this particular submission,
Councillor Gould stated he felt he would like the Mayor to say what he thinks are non-essential services.
The Mayor replied that he still thinks there are some things in recreation that we might slow down on and
get community assistance, as we have in, say, rinks and skating, where there have been voluntary workers
who have worked hard and organized groups, and they have come forward even before Council and they have
done a lot of work that otherwise would have cost the City money, and he thinks we can find people who
would do the same thing in other fields of our recreation programme. Councillor Gould stated he will
accept that explanation.
Councillor Gould asked that the Mayor explain what he means by "a new concept of more efficient
operation of our city,must be enforced", stating that he is looking, first of all, for the new concept,
and it must be enforced. The Mayor replied that he believes that such things as attending conferences and
travelling are two items; he added that many times, there are such things as seminars that he does not
think are that valuable to us, and we have to start saying "let us start doing the things, home". Coun-
cillor Gould stated he was wondering what is new about that concept. The Mayor replied that we have not
been putting it to use - we have been going on these trips. Councillor Gould advised that this reply has
provided the clarification he was seeking.
Councillor Higgins stated that, generally, he is full accord with the Mayor's recommendations,
but with reference to item number four of same, he personally as a Councillor - not necessarily as the
Deputy Mayor - takes exception to two sentences, namely, "Council cannot be expected to rubber stamp
recommendations for expenditures merely because they come from our staff." and stated that in his many
years on Council he does not believe he ever rubber stamped any recommendation without knowing what he was
voting on; and, similarly, "We shall not be called upon to make capital expenditures without being adeq-
, uately informed as to the actual cost such expenditures will mean, and how much are to be paid in future
ears.", and he stated that, to'his knowledge, every time he made a vote on capital expenditures he did
have that information. In reply, the Mayor stated that with regard to the sentence, "Council cannot be
expected to rubber stamp recommendations for expenditures....", he says this with sincerity and knowing
that many questions have been asked, and he thinks that his aim is that - as he stated in another re-
.
I
I
.
"
~
".
D~9
~~ .-
. !?1Q!lpr
:gud~et-
re-5 r/"'d; 171:
,ffct/de/il7e'.
,4r If''!?''
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
.....
quirement - more information be made available to Council - this is why the Council members have to keep asking
questions all the time, but if this were put down in front of them in writing, it would not be that difficult.
Councillor Higgins replied that he knows the Mayor~s intention, but the submission just did not read that way and
it was interpreted that way by the citizens. The Mayor added that regarding the actual cost of expenditures, he
thinks in such things and we say "let us spend money" and it is a capital expenditure - what is that going to
cost us in the general budget throughout the year, and paying back on it, is what he is looking for - for someone
to give the Council the figures each time - we may slow down a little on it.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he thinks that under item number one of the above named submission, non-
essential services must be defined and the citizens must be told,what this Council interprets as non-essential
services, and to what degree, and that he thinks it is imperative that the citizens of Saint John be advised and
aware of the fact that there are cutbacks. He stated he hopes that these cutbacks do not become cut-offs because
he happens to agree that in some cases that is perhaps what is being done. He further stated that he hopes this
submission does not say that our operation is inefficient. He stated that he does agree that there is always
room for improvement and, perhaps, re-evaluation, and an improved manpower distribution - perhaps this is what
the Mayor intended for the Council to look at, under item number two of the submission. He further stated that
he agrees with the City expansion that the Mayor mentions under item number three. He advised that he thinks of
the City wanting the City of Lancaster and the Parish of Simonds and now that the City has these areas, they must
look after them, and any step to not expand or not increase or develop our tax base within this greater area is
wrong, and he concurs with the Mayor completely, there, in his opinion. He further stated that, as has been
stated, he does not believe that the Council is, has been or can be classed as being a rubber stamp - he thinks
that it is up to each individual person to know what is being voted on and to vote as that person sees fit based
on the information the person has, and that he hopes that the explanation the Mayor has given Deputy Mayor
Higgins satisfies himself on that point.
Councillor Parfitt felt that the Council will have to call on more community involvement in future,
because of this reduction in budget - people helping one another, like they used to do - for example, regarding
the curbside garbage collection about which disabled people and some elderly people are concerned as to how they
will get the garbage bags to the curbside, we assume they do not have any relatives or a kind neighbour - so, she
intends to try to get the Boy Scouts involved in giving assistance and teach them good citizenship - that when
people are disabled and so on, give them a helping hand without compensation.
Councillor Kipping noted that in regard to item number two in the Mayor's submission, "We must look
forward to recommendation of savings and economy and reduction of waste or loss, which unfortunately too often
appears to have affected many City operations.", he thinks it may be true - that it appears to have affected, at
times - there is bound to be waste and loss, and he thinks that one thing that we should be doing that we have
not been doing in the City organization is keeping open to suggestions from employees. He stated he thinks that
the Council should probably now actively invite and welcome suggestions from any and all employees as to ways we
might reduce waste - if there is waste - and other loss and inefficiencies - we can get recommendations from
employees of all levels whereby we can do things better and we can avoid waste - there is no question about that,
and he thinks that management and supervision must be receptive to good suggestions of this kind, and it may even
be worthwhile for us to consider a suggestion-award system so that we can encourage and foster these things.
With regard to item number three of the Mayor's submission, "To meet increases in costs of necessary services we
must expand our tax base.", he noted that, unfortunately, at the very time we are talking about expanding our tax
base the Provincial Government is removing the one promotional arm from our city which will enable us to expand
our tax base, and that is the Multiplex Corporation - so that he thinks we have to follow up on that - it is our
understanding as a Council, if he remembers correctly, that something else will be substituted for Multiplex and
where we can put or priority, perhaps, in this particular regard is in following it up and seeing that it is
indeed supplied, and that very quickly.
With regard to item number four of the submission, Councillor Green stated that one part that bothers
him quite a bit is the reference to "capital expenditures without being adequately informed as to the actual cost
such expenditures will mean...". He stated we must keep in mind that regarding the growth factor that has been
felt in Saint John in the last five or six years, and regarding the Department of Regional Economic Expansion
programme that the City has been "talked" into and advised that the City would require in the next fifteen years
and what stage the City should be going on - and then to find out that, once we called for tenders and an engin-
eering firm which we hired came in with an estimate of bid of what it may be and should be and we find out the
percentage factor is either ten, fifteen or twenty per cent higher than the estimate of bid - everything is all
set up for the job, it is advised that we go ahead and do it and it is a fact that so many of the contractors
have been so busy that some of them really do not want that work, but they are bidding on it and they get the job
at a higher rate maybe than they anticipated they will get it for - these are growth factors and capital expendi-
tures that really the Council has no control on - the fact that the City has been moving ahead. He stated that
he feels that regarding some of the capital expenditures, we have been too conservative in the past years in
taking a hard look at it and going for some of these capital expenditures when the market was low, and we have
been very narrow-minded, in his opinion, and we should have been pushing for a heavier expenditure in previous
years; you take this year - we are hit with - like in Recreation - three new rinks; now, he supported these rinks
and he feels that we needed them but we should have had some of these here, one and two at a time, ten years ago,
and with this 'growth factor that is coming in the City of Saint John and is being presently felt, we have to make
some of those expenditures - we just cannot close our eyes to them. He stated he feels that with certain re-
strictions - yes, we are hauling in our collars, and so on, and taking a strong look at where we are going, and
so on, but he still feels that how Saint John goes, the rest of the Province goes - and he feels that the Pro-
vince of New Brunswick has a great responsibility to see how things are contemplated and planned for the City of
Saint John - go ahead, because the rest of the Province will "reap the harvest", as well.
Councillor MacGowan, referring to the thinking of Councillor Kipping on receiving suggestions from
C1V1C employees, recalled that when the City was occupying the old City Hall on Prince William Street there was a
"Suggestion Box" that the citizens or staff could deposit suggestions in, and she suggested that if the said box
is still there, we bring it back again, immediately.
Councillor Davis stated that he takes from the four paragraphs in the said submission from the Mayor,
that the 14ayor is saying that the Council must assume its responsibility - that it is very easy for the Council
to sit here and blame the Province or the Federal Government, or staff, or somebody else - we are the Mayor and
Council of the City, we have to assume all the credit and all the blame for just about everything that goes on
here, he noted. He noted that the Mayor has narrowed it down to four items and stated he is sure that if the
Mayor gave it some thought he would probably have four dozen items that the Council should become involved in.
Hhe stated he feels that, generally speaking, what the Mayor is saying is the Council must be responsible for
everything it does - occasionally, it lets something run through a little too fast, but not very often, and
things are getting tighter and the Council therefore has to tighten up. He stated that he does not want to get
into specifics: he does not think our situation that we are in today, which is really not as desperate as people
want to believe - we cannot be as generous as we once were, but we certainly have not got a catastrophe going on
here - and if there is nothing else to write about, it will become a catastrophe., He stated that we cannot blame
three rinks for that: the rinks were not built as rinks, they were built as neighbourhood centres and we hope the
City will benefit in less crime and more fun for everyone. He stated he thinks it is just nonsense to blame a
small item like that - it is something we seemed to think we required, at the time, he pointed out. He advised
that the blame does not fall on the Council alone, in that regard: the country and the world is in a predicament,
')-0
....0,
.~
/lJaypr
:gu~~t'1-
~slr.a/J1-1s
g~/a'e//)?e>5 A
/"76
..J;iJhJtf'S k:
'PopA-//1 S
21<</1 t1I/l?f
~-A'07W
pu///t'//1j;
f?el'/17/-I- 0-~s
1?;Jrl/l1./f jilekI'
.zy-MW
FArk/nj'
Mt'kr /-t?f?$
but anything that happens in this city is our fault, and he takes that blame, and he takes from the
Mayor's Item number three that he wants. us to assume that responsiblity.- and Councillor Davis thinks,we
(the Council) should, there is no question.
.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
The Mayor stated that the only other item he would like to broach at this time is that he takes
a dim view of an individual coming into our city from another municipality and making statements about how
to run the city, when an individual has been away from the city or has not been connected with the operations
of the city for a period of time. (In this regard, Mayor Flewwelling was referring to comments that
appeared in the local newspaper during the week of January 5th last resulting from an interview by the
newspaper with former City Manager of the City of Saint John, Mr. James K. Perkins).
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager's letter of
December 15th, 1975, the present rate structure in the Saint John Building By-Law regarding permit fees as
noted in the letter be replaced by the proposed new rate structure, as follows:-
"Estimate cost of work
Up to $1000
Over $1000
Permit Fee
~$2.00 per $100 of estimated cost or fraction thereof.
.~$2e.00 plus $4.00 for each additional $1000 of estimated cost or
fraction thereof.
I
During ensuing discussion, Councillor Gould noted that it has been mentioned at a couple of
Council meetings that we suggest a partial or a staging of building permits type of things, and he asked
if that procedure has been considered for this new by-law; that is, each stage is worth X dollars in the
construction, and are we considering that, to cover those big projects, or not; in other words, it is
sometimes his understanding that they are actually building without a building permit. In reply, Mr.
Barfoot stated that it is his understanding that if the plans are not finalized or if there is some reason
why a building permit cannot be issued for the whole project, a building permit is issued for the foundations.
or has been issued for the next stage of the building, under the present by-law. Councillor M. Vincent
stated he can see it coming back in accusation to Council - that being that the Council members all spoke
very strongly for development in the City of Saint John - houses, industry, et cetera - to increase our
base, and the Council is probably going to be accused, now, of saying that we are making it more difficult
to have contractors and developers build because we have increased the costs of the building permit - but,
certainly, in a time when we are trying to get money and save money, this seems, to him, to be an area
that can afford to take the increase - and perhaps better than some other areas.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended in the City Manager's letter of
December 23rd, 1975, the Parking Meter By-Law be amended as follows:- with regard to parking meter fees,
(a) where the parking meter indicates twenty-four minutes of parking, the fee is 10if, (b) where the
parking meter indicates one hour parking, the fee is 5if for each twelve minutes thereof, or 25if for one
hoUr, (c) where the parking meter indicates two-hour parking, the fee is 5if for each 12 minutes thereof,
25~ for each hour or 50if for two hours, (d) where the parking meter indicates five-hour parking, the fee
is 25if for each hour thereof and $1.25 for five hours; that Subsection 2 of Section 14, as amended, of the
said By-Law, concerning the voluntary penalty of $2.00 be amended to read $3.00; that a new subsection be
added to the said By-Law to provide for offenders to whom a summons has been issued but who, prior to
Court appearance, might wish to pay a voluntary penalty of $8.00 and avoid a Court prosecution.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated
December 23rd, 1975, advising that in order to handle the parking meter rate increases recommended in his
letter to Council dated December 23rd, 1975 (which recommendation was adopted in the aforegoing resolution
of Council at this meeting), mechanical adjustments to the meters themselves will be necessary and to that
end, the City staff recently met with the General Manager of J. J. MacKay (Canada) Ltd., the suppliers
~ of the Duncan parking meter system now in use throughout the city, to discuss how the mechanical ad -
justments might best be achieved; and advising that the following three options necessary to effect the
proposed rate increase were brought forward: (1) conversion of old meters at $60.00 per meter for 950
meters - $57,000.00 (this is the least expensive option but cannot be considered expedient since the
conversion will take up to five months for completion by the City's work force - the City's present meters
are the oldest in Atlantic Canada, ranging up to eighteen years of age, and they are not considered
adequate for the major mechanical conversion necessary to adapt to or sustain the rate increase); (2)
install complete new meter mechanisms in the present housings at $64.57 for 950 meters - $61,341.50 (this
change could be completed in two months' time and would require little time or effort on the part of the
City's technicians - there are aesthetic and security disadvantages to this proposal but neither of these
will worsen the City's present position); (3) install complete new vault-type meters at $152.81 each, for
950 meters - $145,169.00 (the advantage of this option is the package price - the three components of the
vault-type meters, namely, the mechanism, the housing, and the lock, would be $178.16 if purchased sep-
arately - the disadvantage is, of course, the high original outlay) -- and recommending that, considering
the age of the City's present meters together with the fact that the cost of new mechanisms can be recover-
ed through increased revenue in seven months, the mechanisms of all meters be replaced under option number
two, with the mechanisms to be factory set to give the equivalent of parking times now in effect in
various sections of the city -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted:
.
I
I
AND FURTHER that the policy adopted for the negotiations and the contract that the City will
presumably enter into with J. J. MacKay (Canada) Ltd. be subject to a valid by-law being presented to
Council, containing the above noted recommendations of the City Manager for amendments to the Parking
Meter By-Law.
The above noted addition to the resolution was appended, on recommendation of the City Solicitor.
In reply to various ,queries from Council members, Mr. Barfoot supplied the fOllowing information:
the reason the new vault-type meters are more expensive than the ordinary type meters, and what is a
vault-type meter -- he displayed a picture of a vault-type meter and advised that they are used in the .
City of Fredericton -- the advantage of a vault-type meter over the parking meters that the City of Saint
John presently has is that it is more secure against being broken into and against being tampered with -
he thinks that is the major change - the newer type of meter has proved more secure against tampering _
there is tampering with parking meters in some areas of our city and the thought is that with more mdney
being in the meters this might increase the risk of tampering with the meters - however, it is possible
~
"..
')-1
_b.
.
I
I
.
I
..J:E ~~
(call~U-6
7?J,.k/J7~
m&kr
meMdlll/SnJ
C'/fy /fJ fro
I
I
-PkhJb! !!1
7n:7t:t.e ~-
,,{.;,W
'p/u/J?Pjllfp_
j!M1'V71/r-fee.
.
II....
for the City to subsequently purchase the new housings in a subsequent year - the cost of change-over is slightly
more expensive to do it in two stages- it is an additional $25.00 per unit. On the question of whether the City
can trade in or sell its present parking meters, Mr. Barfoot.made negative reply, pointing out that the City's
present meters are quite elderly and have been repaired due to the skill mainly of the City's meter repairman,
Mr. Devenne, who has done an excellent job in keeping these meters in shape for the long period that he has done
it, and there is no value left in these meters, for disposal of them. He advised that the life of the present
meter housings, with the new mechanisms, could be another ten to fifteen years; he did not have the figure with
him, regarding the cost of repairs to meters per year (when damaged through attempted break-ins, et cetera) to
keep them operating and repaired, but he advised that it is one man's job, who maintains the parking meters and
traffic lights. In explanation of the reference in his recommendation "with the mechanisms to be factory set to
give the equivalent of parking times now in effect in various sections of the city", Mr. Barfoot advised that
there are different parking times in various areas of the city - some are 4-hour, some are 30 minutes, some are'
2-hour. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that the purchase of these mechanisms would be dependent upon the passing of the
amendments to the Parking Meter By-Law which were dealt with in the preceding resolution at this meeting, and
that it was the intent to amend the By-Law in this regard. The Common Clerk noted that the pertinent amendment
is not prepared, as yet - this matter would have to be referred to the City Solicitor for preparation of the
amendment. He added that this will be referred to the City Solicitor to prepare the proper amendment to this By-
Law. In reply to the question as to whether the purchase of these meter mechanisms would be a capital expenditure,
~tr. Barfoot stated that the recommendation to purchase is essentially incurring an expenditure which is not
budgeted for - we are going to recover this expenditure through increased revenue - it is not really a capital
expenditure, either - it is just an operating expense. In reply to the question as to whether the company can
guarantee this working and that it will be functional and that the City will not run into a lot of problems - the
point being that if it is going to be a capital expenditure, why not buy the new parking meters, and know that
the City is going to have something that will last and that is not going to cause the City a lot of trouble, and
that the City is going to get the money that is in the meters -- Mr. Barfoot stated that it is the opinion of the
staff that the City does not have a great deal of money ,to spend here (we are taking here about an item out of
the City's budget); and it does not have that much money in its budget, he pointed out, but it hopes to recover
that cost ($61,341.50) by revenue.
Mr. Park was asked for his comments on capitalizing this expenditure, and what the costs would be other
than the sum referred to. He stated that the City's practice of the past many years has been to treat as capital
expenditure items of a major nature which have a relatively long life - by which we are thinking of perhaps, ten
fifteen, twenty years, and upwards; to treat as capital expenditure items that are relatively small and have a
shorter life than those periods is not a good way of financing; we have followed the practice with all our heavy
automotive, mechanical equipment of paying for all this out of our operating expenditure and by so doing, we have
kept the cost of such asset acquisition to a minimum, by being able to pay cash for it; to start to capitalize
relatively small items like meter mechanisms and to pay for them over a period of time would be ill-advised, in
his opinion, and he would not like to see such expenditure treated as capital expenditure for long-term financing;
at the same time, this is not going to be easy to handle, in view of the budget restrictions that have been
placed on us at the moment, and Mr. Barfoot and he were discussing this matter, today - at the moment, they do
not know exactly how this is going to be handled; he added that his comments would apply equally to buying the
complete new meters and mechanisms.
In reply to the suggestions that the Council request a repoTt from Mr. Norman Devenne, who has functioned
as chief repairman for many years in relation to parking meters, giving his views as to just what is required,
meterwise - whether it is essential to change the system and the type of meters - a complete report from Mr.
Devenne before the Council launches on any purchase of any new meters -- Mr. Barfoot advised that Mr. Devenne has
been in on the discussions with respect to purchase of new meters, from the very beginning and the staff has
leaned heavily upon his advice in making the recommendation as to the meter replacement.
In reply to the question as to where the City would get the money to pay for this expenditure, Mr.
Barfoot stated we know that if the new parking meter rates go into effect the revenues derived from these new
rates will be sufficient to pay this year the money for the installation of the new mechanisms - we can be
assured of that; but, the problem is, at the moment, that because of a Provincial restriction on expenditure,
eVen though the City is going to fully recover it, and more, the way the legislation is written it restTicts
expenditure, and even though the City's net expenditure is negative, it may still be difficult to justify this
$61,341.50 - that is why Mr. Park and he are still discussing as to how best to finance the purchase of these
meters.
The Mayor stated he would like to see the matter tabled, in that case, until we come up with this
Mr. Barfoot replied that it may be necessary to do so.
answer.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the Council has the full
details from the City Manager relative to financing the purchase of the proposed new parking meter mechanisms.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
Councillor Hodges expressed his concern regarding the above discussed matter, pointing out that when
the Council budgeted, the money the City was going to get from these meters, and the expenditure for the new
meter mechanisms in question, is part of the City's budgeting - the purchase of these mechanisms was to come from
the amount of money the City was going to use in its budgets - the amount of money it says it is going to get
from the meters and from the violations -- and yet the Council is now tabling the matter. In reply, the Mayor
pointed out that.the problem is that, even then, you have to have that cash to go out, first - and what is going
to hold up until you get the money to recover. He added that the tabling motion means that the matter is tabled
for a week or so, until the Council receives the City Manager's report.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter from the City Manager, dated
December 23rd, 1975, the present Plumbing Trade By-Law, that was approved by Order-in-Council Number 67-615, be
amended to conform with Sections 169-179 of the Municipalities Act, and that the said By-Law, as amended, contain
authority for the Plumbing InspectoT to charge a fee of $5.00 for each permit issued plus $1.75 for each plumbing
fixture shown on the plans submitted with the application for a permit, and if the application and accompanying
plans are for two or more identical buildings, the fee shall be chargeable for each building.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated January 8th, 1976,
advising that in line with suggestions made to the Budget Committee of Common Council regarding the impToving of
revenue in the City's 1976 operating budget, he has reviewed the fee section of the by-law which provides for the
collection of garbage, and, as well, the Commissioner of Engineering and Works and his staff, with a view to
I)>=; ,)
.tbIU'~
~
I
i
tlClf'b';lj'e ~-
~/'Jd1"e
(J~//~cli ~)1
.?!/.5/-t?117
t/~!f .5bltc-/-/tJr
t!<<,,#.5/'d e
C?lll/6>cl-i on
$u6-,;{/v- ....L
ei1 N?e//le /rl
"f:;;stSII/ e
hkl'f/r~/6
/If/I#/lfftf?t/i /Ie /
Edales ~p=-
d/tt '1%.;;Jse /4/
reducing expenditure, have given consideration to the requirements of curb pick-up and to the by-law
changes necessary.for implementation, and, to this end, the by-law has been re-drafted to incorporate the
rocedures required for curb pick-up and for the proposed fee structure, as shown in the submitted draft
for a new garbage collection by-law -- and recommending that the principles set forth in the said draft
by-law be adopted by Common Council and referred to the City Solicitor for legalities and form, and
further recommending that, to cover the period of review required by the Solicitor, and the time necessary
for the required readings by Common Council, and to ease the strain placed on the Sanitation Department by
winter road conditions, reduced staff and the mechanical conditions that have resulted, from extremes of
weather, authority be granted to the Commissioner of Engineering and Works to commence immediate curb side
pick-up -- be received and filed and the recommendations contained therein adopted.
Mr. Barfoot, in reply to a question, confirmed that in the definition for "garbage container"
means that cardboard boxes will not be allowed to be included therein; it is the intent of the by-law, that
the garbage collectors will refuse to pick up garbage packed in cardboard boxes; it is the intention of
the Department to publish a schedule to inform the citizens of the exact garbage pick-up day, should there
be a change - and so on; he would not recommend that the said schedule be a part of this by-law because
this system that is being set up will require a lot of adjustment before it gets back into shape. On the
question as to whether the wording in the draft by-law should say "shall" instead of "may" in Section 10
(2), Mr. Barfoot replied that this wording was based on the wording in the present by-law - this would
have to be referred to the City Solicitor, he noted.
Councillor Green, speaking in support of the recommendation, noted that in view of the economic
situation at present and the matter of efficiency of the Department concerned, as recommended by the City
Manager, and his Department, he feels the Council has no other alternative but to follow along with the
recommendations, and he feels that the Council should go along with such recommendations as this means of
economy has been forced upon the City. The Mayor asked that I~. Barfoot explain a suggestion he made
today regarding what we could do for elderly people or those who are suffering from disability, who could
not get their garbage to the curb side. Mr. Barfoot advised that in other cities which have made a
transition from ground floor/back yard pick-up to curb side service, there has been the same problem that
we may be going to encounter, here - and.one city tried registering those elderly people who are in some
way disabled from carrying out garbage to the curb side and could not get other assistance, and they were
given a notice to put in their window to identify them and allow them to get this special service until
such time as they could get other assistance. He suggested that maybe we could look into some scheme like
this, to ease the transition between the back yard pick-up, and the curb side pick-up. Councillor Parfitt
noted that we will have to get after the landlords for tenants and roomers putting their garbage out two
or three days ahead of the garbage pick~up time, and be very strict about that. She suggested that we try
the suggestion, and see that the elderly and disabled persons are looked after, either through a community
spirit - or how about these young people who are on Welfare - she suggested that maybe they could be given
the task of going around and do some kindly deeds for the money that these taxpayers are giving them.
In reply to the question as to when the new by-law could be expected to go into effect, if the
above motion is adopted, !4r. Gabriel stated it would take approximately one week, and that the routes are
pretty well set up to start under the new by-law; it is the Department's intention that the routes schedule
will be published for the information of the citizens. Councillor M. Vincent commented that the curb.side
pick-up system has been in operation in the eastern sector of the city for quite some time, and with all
due respect to the aged and elderly people, and we have to be concerned about them, there was not any
notice cards placed in windows of their homes in the eastern sector of the city for a lengthy period qf
time. In discussion with Councillor Hodges on the question of using cardboard boxes as garbage contain-
ers, Mr. Gabriel noted that if we were to permit all types of garbage containers which includes cardboard
boxes, you have the argument: why not permit cardboard garbage bags? - he pointed out that we cannot
control, really, the type of garbage put in it - therefore it has been discovered in regard to most by-
laws that the best method is a pla~tic bag or a metal or fireproof container. Councillor Davis suggested
to'Mr. Gabriel that when the Department is announcing this change in service that a list of rules could be
prepared as to where the garbage bags are to be placed for curb side pick-up (on the curb, next to the
house, or so on) . and how they should be tied, et cetera - he stated he thinks it is quite important that
this be done, otherwise, the garbage bags will be allover the street. Mr. Gabriel pointed out that the
by-law specifies the location, and that the Department's intention is to print those sections of the by-
law in the newspaper. Councillor Davis felt that the Power Commission of the City would be very happy to
enclose copies of these printed garbage collection rules and regulations with the Commission's light
bills. ~IT. Gabriel agreed. Councillor MacGowan stated she has reservations about plastic garbage bags
because they do break - she did not know whether the plastic bags referred to in the draft by~law would be
strong enough, or not. She pointed out that in the winter time they do freeze and there is a problem, and
if we could encourage the citizens not only to have the bag but to have the container that the bag could
be removed out of it, she feels that then they would not freeze and there would not be the problem of
garbage allover the street. She noted that Councillor Davis had just mentioned garburetors, and that she
had mentioned this before - she wished that there was some way that the City could install garburetors the
same way as it does water meters, and have the citizens repay for it; she thinks it would cut down on :our
garbage a great deal and that it would be to the advantage of the City. She suggested that perhaps we
could think of this method. The Mayor agreed that we can think of it,. and added that they (the City
staff) have put some thought into it.
On motion of CouncillOr M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that
Eastside Enterprises Limited is developing two cul de sacs, each approximately 350 feet in length, for
Millidgeville Estates Phase IV, off University Avenue in the area between Candlewood Lane and Millidge-
ville Estates Phase I, that the area will consist of 17 lots to be used for 12 unit apartment buildings,
that the developer's servicing plans met with the approval of the Engineering and Works Department, and
that according to the City's sub-division policy, the City will be responsible for the following costs:-
(1) water materials (watermain, gate valves, fire hydrants, et cetera) $14,500.00; (2) sanitary sewer,
materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $4,800.00; (3) storm sewer materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera)
$12,500.00 -- totalling $31,800.00 -- and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water
and sewerage materials to be charged to the 1976 capital budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in due course -- be received and filed and the recom-
mendation adopted.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
Councillor Gould asked if Saint John is the only city that pays for these materials for devel-
opers. 14r. Barfoot replied that, to his knowledge, Saint John is the only city that pays in this partic-
ular fashion - other cities contribute in other methods to sub-division improvements: other cities pave .
~~_~'~ the streets or do the curbing or build a sidewalk, or landscape - usually, finish services of a more usual
U . ~~_ way of cost-sharing; he believes there are cities of the size of Saint John that do not share in that
~ervl~~ /. manner to a sub-divider. Councillor Gould suggested that even for one year, maybe, that type of involve-
~1'/i7J' ~//Cjf ment with developers might be curtailed, stating he thinks that the reason for that type of development
was probably to help building, first of all, but second of all, also, to ease the cost of serviced lots to
the purchaser" and he is not so sure that .that is any longer valid. Mr. Barfoot advised that the Council
~
r-
.
I $ub- :t/p;
Serv/ ~I?S
Ct?.sI- .5h,;Jf'/h.
~//ey
I
.
I
$lfl-P(/J/,
a#.f'Rel716'//C
/l1f?h';; IlJf/e
mel'7r $9"-
1t,eI?C/f!'S .It
w4rh~~S
. ;t(P!I.iI/
%rA-w~
1.1), J(..k ,;:::
(fia~#K/.;;J'ff
~~Y8b7r
~in~.4~ .
I
.e{dA,~/h
L'tJ// :St9~"r
a/157/d' :T
h';t.P1)7 /-6rI
.....
25~?
requested staff to review the City's sub-division policy, and this is being done, and the staff hopes to have a
report before the Council, shortly, possibly in a couple of months, on changes in the policy; there has been a
lot of information gathered from other cities as to the way they handle sub-division cost-sharing. Councillor
Gould stated that his suggestion does not refer to Millidgeville Estates only, and that he wonders if it would
apply to the whole area and that the Council could save some money -.and particularly this year - maybe we could
get back into the policy another year, but for 1976, at least, we could curtail this part and maybe save our-
selves a lot of money. The Mayor noted that a while ago another organization, under another name, did some work
out there with services, and he asked if these people are making use of those services for which the City can
collect, rather than be paying out. lillo. Barfoot replied that he is not really aware of the extent: the services
which are being installed here are in accordance with the designs which have gone through the planning process,
et cetera, and he thinks they differ in detail from what was submitted maybe two or three years ago, but no
services were actually installed at that time, two or three years ago, with the previous owner. In reply to the
question as to what the City is planning on spending in 1976 for all water pipes and so on, and underground
services, gate valves and so on) - a rough estimate - Mr. Barfoot stated that the figure that comes to mind, for
water and sanitary and storm sewer, altogether - he thinks we are looking at about $300,000.00, or of this order,
roughly. He explained that this is Council's approval for this particular phase of this sub-division, if Council
approves it, but this money would not ordinarily be paid out probably for another year or more, until the whole
sub-division is completed and the finished services are installed.
Councillor MacGowan asked that the staff make an effort to have the report on the staff's review of the
sub-division policy before Council in a couple of months. Mr. Zides made affirmative reply.
In asking if the developer will be using these services materials before April or May, Councillor Gould
stated that his reason for asking this was that if it did not need to be done so soon, the Council could certainly
table this item and the item dealing with Millidgeville Estates Phase V, until that report from the staff is in
(regarding the sub-division pOlicy) to see if the Council is going to reconsider - if the developer is not in a
big rush - because they may not be eligible 'for things if the Council decides to change the City's sub-division
policy. He stated that $300,000.00 is a lot of money, in his view, and he thinks that would not be a bad place to
start, for 1976, and save the City from laying off an awful lot of employees. In reply, Mr. Barfoot felt that in
fairness to the developer, he has gone ahead with this proposal on the basis of the present sub-division policy,
and has gone through all the processes of getting approval for these particular sub-divisions, and if the Council
is going to make a cut-off it should decide On a date in advance of a cut-off if it is going to change the sub-
division cost-sharing policy. Councillor Gould made the point that the developer is just getting approval now
but if he is not going to use them for another four months then he will probably fall under that policy, anyway,
if it were to be changed; he felt that we may be approving it now and the developer may not use it until after
the policy would maybe be changed, and that, therefore, that is not quite right. Mr. Barfoot advised that the
registration of the plan or the completion of the arrangements of the sub-division depend upon the execution of
the sub-division agreement, he believes, for the installation of services. Mr. Zides added that, although we
sometimes bend the law a little bit, not to hold people up - legally, the plan cannot be signed until after there
is, at least - even if the agreement has been signed, or arrangements satisfactory to the City have been made, to
enter into the agreement; so, that has to be before the sub-division plan is registered and before very much, if
any, building takes place. Noting that this is a normal and proper sub-division agreement, he would think, and
that the City is not going to be paying this money out for some time, he would assume (this observation was
confirmed by Mr. Barfoot at this time), and that he thinks it would be very unethical to this developer, or any
other developer, to decide, as the request for cost-sharing comes in to Council, at that time that the Council is
going to cut developers off without some bit of forewarning, Councillor M. Vincent stated that he thinks the
Council is going to give an awful slap in the face to the developers and builders in this city, if it does that.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that Alpha
Investments & Agencies Limited, represented by Gordon Myles, is developing approximately 700 feet of Royal
Parkway, that the area will consist of four lots for 12 unit apartment buildings and two lots for 24 or 30 unit
apartment buildings, that the developer's servicing plans met with the approval of the Engineering and Works
Department, and that according to the City's sub-division policy, the City will be responsible for the following
costs:- (1) water materials (watermains, gate valves, fire hydrants, et cetera) $10,500.00; (2) sanitary sewer
materials (pipe, manholes,'et cetera) $3,100.00; (3) storm sewer materials (pipe, manholes, et cetera) $8,200.00
totalling $21,800.00 -- and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water and sewerage materials
to be charged to the 1976 capital budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-
division agreement in due course -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
In reply to Councillor Kipping's question as to whether the above noted development is already under
way, Mr. Barfoot stated that Mr. Zides has made negative reply - there is no work done.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services,
regarding projects that have been undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
1. Courtenay Bay Causeway
(a) Goodyear Paving Limited
Eastern Approaches
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 15
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 15,
dated October 1, 1975
$ 671,856.00
753,628.57
113,044.27
636,688.89
$ 3,895.41
(b)
Goodyear Paving Limited
Eastern Approaches
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 16
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated November 25, 1975
16,
$ 671,856.00
753,628.57
26,418.86
640,584.30
$ 86,625.41
2.
Champlain Heights Collector Sewer
Gerald J. Ryan Limited
1vo pumping stations and sewer lines
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 5
$ 178,810.23
171,919.04
254
-~
.2J.;R.F.E: Retention 4,080.35
Payments previously approved 139,140.57
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 5, .
dated December 30, 1975 $ 28,698.12
:;B~~S/tf e 7Jr. 3. Bayside Drive Reconstruction and Extension
'KU'ti1hslrp~,+ Murdoch-Lingley Limited
Kt<'e: Engineering Services (Property Survey)
;?1<<I"'/~M- Payments previously approved $ 16,333.80
//I7~/ey ,Lcd. Sum recommended for payment, Progress Certificate Number 16,
ta July 31, 1975 $ 348.50
4. Bayside Drive Reconstruction and Extension I
~W6'/' t:$J'J?P?/j:s-.I. Power Commission of the City of Saint John
Relocating Power Commission of the City of Saint John
facilities
Payments previously approved $ 72,462.98
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Payment Number 7,
dated November 18, 1975 $ 17,536.95
Car.e,enkJ't '7>~ ' 5. Carpenter Place Lift Station I
W. Ii. Crandall & Associates
/t'r~ St-~-i-/ tJ,n Engineering Services
;r:/I. C~h~~//. Payments previously approved $ 93,785.65
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 14,
/lSSf7C. dated December 18, 1975 $ 1,343.22
C~///'fP9I.. ~
"/-. ?rtyI5?Ct:
t9/e?IJ~/e
$z't'1m seIPel"'
'Pbse 7T
;:aliwPJ!e a. h
S. T,PtJl't-.2k.cf
in dew;{. r/f,
Wh/fd.;;// ,{/6);-
ehliW? C/4'.b
/1.>5~d"illes
C'Mf ~//ler ;
r%lI7..$;:t?}>t-~-f1 (J.
/Y.;;f/. '/I~#~
23L
$, T ';7br;f5 ~
/n 05. T
Sih7t7/1d S ,f/IJJ1S
/odfZit7/ld
tI/lb ..inf!.
?ed'es-/ri,5li?
.
~r()S S I nq
(,P'et'f1~~ t:lr)
t{ IltJf #~ass
hlJCi Aomol1L
~.
7r.ilh4'c /tjJ;ts
J), 111-t-f'/R/d ..(-6
S-te~e~ c;~~
e",,'x6d. /:
(,~/if/oJrs (/j'6:l
,('-t-L
In reply to Councillor Hodges' question as to whether all the power lines have been moved yet,
~~. Barfoot stated that he can obtain the answer from the engineers. In relation to the two items of
payments above noted, regarding the causeway eastern approaches, Councillor M. Vincent asked how much
money the City has saved in penalties for the tardiness of the contractors in completing the project. Mr.
Barfoot stated that he understands that the amount of penalty has not as yet been finalized - however,
there is sufficient money left in the retention to pay for what the City claims as penalties.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engin-
eering services, regarding the following named capital project:-
1.
Greendale 36-inch Storm Sewer - Phase II
Fairvale Co. Ltd.
Construction of 36-inch storm sewer
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated November 28, 1975
$ 89,170.00 I
90,189.74
13,528.46
50,447.50
2,
$ 26,213.78
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of two-thirds of the submitted invoice from Whitehall Luncheon Club, New York, in the
amount of $3,554.32 (Which proportion is the City's share of such bill), payable to Associates Container
Transportation, 90 West Street, New York, U. S. A., which invoice covers expense of holding Saint John
Port Day in New York on November 20th, 1975, which was attended by 142 representatives of the transport-
ation industry - it being noted that one-third of the above named expense, as per cost-sharing agreement,
is being billed to the National Harbours Board.
.
Noting that the Saint John Ports Day in Saint John realized a profit from its registration fees,
the Mayor stated he wonders why that money was not used to pay the above named expense of the said function.
t4r. Park replied that if the Mayor wishes, a report can be presented on this, giving the full details of
expenditure and the recoveries by way of registration fees. The Mayor agreed that this be done.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that with
reference to a request received by Common Council on December 15th last from the Simonds Lions Club for an
over-pass or under-pass at Loch Lomond Villa across Loch Lomond Road, and the requests received by Council
on December 29th last from the residents and administrators of Loch Lomond Villa for pedestrian traffic
lights at this location which were tabled pending receipt of information from staff, the submitted report
from the Commissioner of Engineering and Works recommends the installation of traffic lights at the
intersection of Loch Lomond Road and MacDonald Street which will not only serve the pedestrian movement
across Loch Lomond Road but will assist vehicular flow at this location -- and recommending that traffic
lights be installed at the said intersection to include a pedestrian signal with the cost to be charged to
the 1976 operating budget -- be received and filed and the said recommendation adopted.
I
I
In explanation of the fact that this set of
that we budgeted for several such sets of lights, but
one, which will be used in the above named location.
these traffic lights.
traffic lights is budgeted
through the budget cuts we
He added that it will take
for, ~tt. Barfoot advised
reduced the number to
three months to obtain
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
14anager, authority be granted for payment of the fOllowing noted invoices:-
.
D. Hatfield, Ltd.
.Stephen Construction Company Limited
Chit ticks (1962) Ltd.
$ 18,780.65
$ 14,688.40
$ 4,140.60
December 17, 1975
December 23, 1975
December 17, 1975
~
"...
255
. ~Yh?.;?/">k
Sff. ~y~
~/~6?~ ~ .
11 odi"/4/ /?IJd
Cd-;
Th~f?;?~
~ r::dO:(/lNA:.
~rh 'lJre-..r1ff'
I v.iJf/pJ? /!sst?
.JJepf: 7h';;/l~-
fltJ.!'-t Pil-/ OJ?
Jf';/Mf? +
Sf.;;J/;rs
ifYt? J'I ,..J. .
;id&,,,r-""~
I
.
111e-ZdJ?l/1f
f(emleb eCCJsl
.IhJ/edmenf
L-ftl.
1?e-.un/i7f
. ,4/C/7/Dl
e Md1"tt.dlo.
,( -t-d.
I
1ie-;uJI1/htf
/lI;A.;;; .7/1tW-
l/ned-so/-
/1fC'l1co/t?S
/-1-4.
IYPP//iJ,;;!il13
Cp 117n1.
.5 .IGtw,~
N. tJr
a/llPl/5S/~/7<
.....
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, stating that a further
meeting .was,.held on January 6th last concerning the Haymarket Square - Gilbert Street - Rockwood Court area _
Throughway construction and the problems of future pedestrian access between Rockwood Court and the Haymarket
Square area, and that this meeting was in response to an earlier meeting on November 12th, 1975, requested by the
Rockwood Park Area Preservation Association, at which the various concerns of the people were aired, and the
Provincial Department of Transportation agreed to look at ways of improving the situation; and further stating
that at the said January 6th meeting, an improved scheme was presented by the Department, providing a level ramp
rather than a set of stairs from Wright Street onto the Gilbert Street over-pass, and that with this new ramp the
residents will be able to walk on gentle grades over the top of the Throughway, the railway and City Road right
into the heart of Haymarket Square; that the meeting agreed to this ramp suggestion, but a motion was passed
asking also for a set of stairs from the over-pass down to ground level between the tracks and City Road, so that
residents having business in this area would not have to cross City Road and walk around - and that from a
maintenance point of view, there is a problem with keeping the steps in a safe condition during winter - there-
fore, the steps would either need to be covered or heated in some way -- and recommending that the Council
endorse the above suggestions as to the improvement of pedestrian access -- be received and filed and the said
recommendation adopted, which is endorsation of both the said ramp and the said stairs.
Councillor Parfitt stated that she could go along with the said ramp, but with regard to the stairs,
she understands that there are a number of elderly people in that area and that these stairs will be over two
storeys high and hard to maintain in winter, and so on; she would like to know about how many people would use
these stairs and if they would be dangerous and hard to maintain. Councillor Davis pointed out that there is a
ramp in the design, at the moment - people who cannot use the stairs will be required to walk all the way down to
over Haymarket Square, then turn around and go through the Square and go back to the corner of City Road, and
cross there - the object of the stairs is to avoid all this. He noted that the stairs will be 13 feet high -
there will be a difference of elevation of 13 feet, which is not all that great - at least, that is what Mr.
Armstrong said. He added that the object of the stairs is to get the people, particularly the children who have
to be on this side of City Road, down on that side. With regard to the said stairs, Mr. Barfoot advised that he
thinks, fromcthe point of.view,of pedestrian access, the people would be a lot better off with the stairs as
well - it would give them the option - however, from the costs that were mentioned at the said January 6th
meeting, he thinks the Province would give pause to putting the steps in as well as the ramp because the number
of people who would use the stairs is probably quite small as the stairs are quite high; he thinks they may be 18
to 20 feet above the ground. He added that he believes that the Council should endorse both the ramp and the
stairs. Councillor Gould noted that consideration has to be given to the fact that there are stairs leading from
the said ramp, on both sides.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting during the above discussion period)
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning the undeveloped or unsub-
divided portion of the Bon Accord Subdivision, which lies on the northerly side of Loch Lomond Road opposite the,
Hickey Road and more or less in line with the apartment project known as Century 21, from "R-2" One- and Two-
Family Residential district to "PD" Planned Development district, be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-Law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto",
was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto" insofar as it concerns re-zoning (a) a parcel of land on the
northerly side of Thornbrough Street approximately 400 feet from Sandy Point Road, having a frontage of approxi-
mately 400 feet and a depth varying between approximately 175 feet and approximately 225 feet, from "R-IB" One-
Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district; (b) the land to the north of the lots on the
odd-numbered houses on Parks Street Extension, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple
Residential district; (c) a parcel of land adjoining on the east the property known as 39 Parks Street Extension,
from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential district -- be read a third
time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
'l'he by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments 'fhereto",
was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land with a width of
approximately 215 feet along University Avenue and a frontage of approximately 910 feet on the easterly side of a
new street, Royal Parkway, running northerly from University Avenue, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Residential
Suburban district to "RM_l" Multiple Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate
Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto",
was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report from the Nominating Com-
mittee, Messrs. Joseph A. Likely and David R. Carlin, and Councillor Samuel Davis, be appointed to the Board of
Commissioners of the Saint John General Hospital for a three-year term from January 1st, 1976.
Councillor Pye asked if Messrs. Likely and Carlin have been contacted and if they have indicated their
willingness to serve. The Common Clerk replied that they have not been contacted. Councillor Pye stated that
the Council members are well aware of the seriousness of the situation existing at the Saint John General Hospital,
and noted that it is only through the grace of God that there has not been a loss of life, which could occur very
easily by an after-midnight serious accident. He stated that, in view of this fact, he contends that a man with
the expertise and the willingness to bring this problem at the hospital to a quick head, should be placed on that
25ti
..,
JJr.II;/!!I
~ -s
/1l'r/htl?1~d$
s.:r b'tr?I1. /ft;$"P-
:JJ1t', 6,h)',h)'/:S-s/ell
~s, /1, ..(/1;6>~.
2)cilY/,( Il (;JJr//
aUh. .:7)dY/S
7ib7175rF/M
t:bm,m.
.::Bus sJe/ier
Bkrtl&9/e Sr.
'/tJch 4me>nd
Vil/q he.
Board - and that he would like to nominate Dr. Henry Watts as that man. He added that
that one of the above three names be removed from this nominating list in view of the
two names have not been contacted.
he would suggest
fact that the first
.
u'
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that this matter be laid on the table, until next week.
Councillor Pye stated that the situation is very serious and the matter of these appointments
should not be tabled, and immediate action is what is required on the Hospital situation. The Mayor
commented that he has been told by the Administrator of the Hospital that they do have doctors on call -
there is a list of doctors on call - so he does not know if the situation is as serious as we have read
about or whether it is normal in other hospitals. Councillor /1. Vincent stated that he appreciates Coun-
cillor Pye's concern, but he thought - while a person has the right to bring in additional names at the
open session of Council - that if Councillors had names of people they wanted to offer to the Nominating
Committee that they should do this before a report is brought in. Noting that the three names have been
submitted, he suggested that perhaps the Council might consider adopting the three names rather than going
to eliminating one person of the four names that were brought forward. The Common Clerk noted that
anybody is permitted to place another person in nomination, at any time, and it would require, now, a vote
of Council, by ballot. He explained that Mr. B. Huestis who is Chairman or President of the Hospital
Board, and Dr. R. M. Pendrigh who is Vice-President or Vice-Chairman, whichever, have both resigned, and
this is the reaSOn the Nominating Committee's report was brought forward - because the Board has no
President or Vice-President, or whatever the titles are, at the present time, and the Hospital people have
asked that, if at all possible, Council make the appointments this evening. Mr. Rodgers gave the opinion
at this time that Councillor Pye's placing of a name in nomination would be in the form of a resolution,
at this stage of the proceedings.
I
I
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the name of Dr. Henry Watts be added to the list
of nominees for membership on the Board of Commissioners of the Saint John General Hospital.
.
Councillor Higgins noted that although what Councilor Pye has done in making this nomination is
right and above board in any type of democracy, what it does do is that three names which are now public
information for the three opening positions have been moved and seconded, other nominations are made, and
it is going to be public information who of the four was voted down in public. He stated he thinks that
the timing is wrong because it creates embarrassment to certain individuals. Councillor M. Vincent
advanced the suggestion that Dr. Watts' name be the fourth in line in the event that one of the original
three nominees does not accept appointment to the Board. Councilor Kipping felt that if the fourth name
is also accepted, and if by chance one of the two people who have not yet been contacted down turn down
the nomination, then there would be a fourth name at the disposal of the Nominating Committee which has
already been accepted, and it will expedite matters. Councillor MacGowan recalled that the nominating of
a person in public session of Council when a report has come in from the Nominating Committee has happened
twice, and stated she finds it a source of embarrassment to all parties concerned, both for Council and I
for the individual whose name was rejected. She stated she feels that the Council had better have a look
at its policy of nominating persons to commissions, boards and committees, therefore. Councillor M.
Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the matter be tabled until the next meeting of
Council.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Pye, A. Vincent, Green, Kippihg,
Parfitt, Hodges and the Mayor voting "yea" and Councillors MacGowan, Davis, M. Vincent, Higgins and Gould
voting "nay".
A ballot was taken on the four nominees, and the Mayor appointed the Common Clerk to tally the
votes that 'were cast. The Common Clerk asked that the City Solicitor assist him in taking the said count
of ballots. The Common Clerk, following a tally of the votes cast, advised that Messrs. Joseph A. Likely
and David R. Carlin, and Councillor Davis, received the highest number of votes.
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above noted ballots be destroyed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that Messrs. Joseph A. Likely and David R. Carlin, and
Councillor Samuel Davis, be appointed to the Board of Directors of the Saint John General Hospital for a
three-year term from January 1st, 1976.
I
Councillor MacGowan suggested that the Council examine the policy as far as submitting names for
nominations. The Mayor replied that he will accept that suggestion, and that the Council will look at
this policy.
Councillor Pye proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that Councillor Davis withdraw from
that committee and be replaced by Dr. Henry Watts.
Consideration was given to the letter, dated January 9th, 1975, from the Transportation Committee,
in reply to the request for a report on the cost factor of constructing a bus shelter on Ellerdale Street
as referred to in the letter from the Loch Lomond Villa Inc., and on who would be responsible for the cost
of such a bus shelter, advising that the Committee has been advised by the Works department that the cost
of building such a structure would be approximately $600.00 exclusive of any land costs which may, or may
not, be necessary; and further advising that the matter of erecting and maintaining bus shelters has been
discussed by the Committee on many occasions with officials of City Transit Limited and they have advised
that they are not in a financial position to assist in any w~ to construct or maintain bus shelters ~
therefore, any cost in this connection would have to be borne directly by the City or by Loch Lomond Villa
Inc. In reply to a query as to whether such cost is in the City's budget for 1976, Mr. Barfoot stated that
it is not budgeted in the operating budget. Councillor Higgins noted that the request for this bus
shelter would not have been made unless it was something that was quite needed in the area, and with the
involvement of the Lions Club in Loch Lomond Villa and the fact that the City does have a responsibility
towards senior citizens, he stated he feels that a common sense meeting could be held, say, between any
member of senior staff who may contact the President of the Lions Club and discuss a mutual problem. He
stated he therefore feels the matter should be tabled, pending a meeting of a member of City staff who is
a member of the Lions Club and the executive of the said Club about a mutual problem.
I
.
~
~
'.9-~
'..,;04
· :Bus $)~/~
Sler~.;;Ile
,(jO/7$ e/~.6,
Ct?lVl7 ./II#~I
~P/?, /l~,.J-
V/J78B17b
I
,(~I?d
I amm.
fro" ~fi c
cLeslffn
/lJa~JJtJl?aU
51;
.
I
,/ poA .{ (J/7/tl.
I////R he.
.
/1/ll7lsi"er
llea/-IA
:z;,/t;X/~"
'PRI'Sl?hS
'JJetBhli ()/7
&c-C
I CtJ'hI"Pj/%/M
C'1l$t't?jolt ~
f
I /lJa!/tJ;-:~
eel, I-n-ee
t?///f!cojo/t-s.
.
llr....
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table pending a meeting
between a member of the City staff who is a member of the Lions Club and the executive of the Lions Club to
discuss the problem of the said requested bus shelter, and a report back to Council, with regard to the mutual
requirements, and that Deputy Mayor Higgins and Councillor A. Vincent be a committee with regard to obtaining
this bus shelter, at no cost to the City.
Councillor A. Vincent suggested that if the Mayor could set up a small committee, that committee could
probably obtain some volunteer labour and maybe some building materials, and under the Mayor's name, build the
said bus shelter at no cost to the City. The Mayor replied that if the staff and the Club executive come up with
this answer and report back, the Council will proceed with it at its next meeting. Councillor A. Vincent stated
he would like to see Deputy Mayor Higgins on that small committee, and that he could guarantee it would be a
brick shelter, at no cost to the City. The Deputy Mayor stated he is willing to serve with Councillor A. Vincent
on such a committee. Councillor A. Vincent added that this small committee will meet with the Lions Club and
solicit the donation of the brick material, and start from there. In discussion with Councillor Kipping, the
Mayor noted that the above motion carries the intention that the discussion referred to in the motion will
include the location, size, and so on, with relation to the proposed bus shelter. Councillor Kipping, referring
to the question of whether or not land is necessary to be acquired for this shelter, and the fact that there may
be a cost related to same, therefore, stated he feels that the Land Committee has to find out whether the land is
available to us, and at what cost, if any.
Councillor Davis pointed out that there is a whole design necessary for this intersection because of
the increased traffic on MacDonald Street - there is a tremendous amount of traffic going to go across the
causeway and up this street, so there will be a whole intersection design which will require a place for a bus
lay-by and an island for crossing the street. He stated he is sure this will all be dealt with before this
shelter is built. Councillor Kipping, in reply, noted that, in which case, there will be no shelter until
spring, of course, and he felt that this ,is a very unfortunate thing. He suggested that a plywood shelter be
erected there to keep the wind off some of these elderly people from Loch Lomond Villa, and off any others who
want to use it - in the meantime. He felt that the question of such a temporary shelter should be considered
before the Council finalizes on the matter under discussion. In reply to Councillor Kipping's question as to
whether the City has built any bus shelters in the past, ~IT. Barfoot stated that the last involvement that he can
recollect, having to do with a bus shelter, was when the City moved one across to the foot of St. John Street,
approximately fifteen years ago; he believes that the bus shelters that presently exist in the city were built by
City Transit Limited, many years ago. He commented that the City, in the past, has not really favoured the
erection of bus shelters because they are quite a maintenance problem, and are "hang-outs" unless they are
designed in a particular fashion which does not encourage people to stay in them. Councillor A. Vincent asked
that the City Manager obtain information about the bus shelters that are used in the City of Halifax, that are
all glass - as to how much they are worth. Councillor Kipping reminded the meeting that the purpose of shelters
is to protect people from the weather - they serve a good purpose. He asked what the bus franchise contract
calls for regarding shelters - is it in City Transit Limited's contract that the company'will provide shelters at
some, or all, or any, of the bus stops? Mr. Rodgers replied that he does not recall any reference in the con-
tract to bus shelters - if the Council wishes him to take a reference look at the contract in this regard, he can
do so. The Mayor pointed out that he believes that, in light of what Councillor A. Vincent has~aid, the Council
should not worry about the matter of the bus shelter in question. Councillor Kipping stated that could well be,
and in that case, he could support the motion, but he thinks that the Council should do something in the meantime
so that there should be some kind of a shelter there, for the rest of the winter. Councillor MacGowan stated
that she understands that this shelter is primarily for the senior citizens and that the shelter would be used by
them in waiting for west-bound buses. She asked if there is any reason whY,the bus stop could not be changed so
that the senior citizens could wait inside the vestibule at the front door of the building, and why the bus could
not pull in that way. In reply, Councillor Davis noted that it is hard for vehicles to get in there. The Mayor
noted that the committee can look at all these various suggestions that have been made by Council members.
Councillor MacGowan felt that if it is possible to do as she has suggested, it. would be much better, all the way
around. At this point, the Mayor asked that the mover and seconder of the motion agree to add to the motion the
fact that a small committee, composed of Deputy Mayor Higgins and Councillor A. Vincent, will take part in the
discussions regarding erection of a bus shelter. The mover and seconder of the motion acquiesced..
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Minister of Health in reply to Common
Council resolution of November 17th, 1975 (which asked that the Provincial Government enact the Intoxicated
Persons Detention Act and provide suitable accommodation for detention, and to provide an effective mechanism and
a temporary facility to provide for the needs of the homeless alcoholics in the city until the said Act has been
enacted and permanent detention facilities established), advising that, at the present moment, it is Government's
intention to defer the enaction of this legislation until the permanent Commission on Alcoholism has been final-
ized, and, in addition, it is necessary to finalize the provision of adequate facilities in the City of Moncton
and this is now under way; and further advising that in respect of the request for a temporary facility in Saint
John, the i1inister is informed that Mr. E. A. Young, Director of the Alcoholism Programme for the Department of
Health, has met with representatives of the City in September and he stressed that it was not the Department of
Health's responsibility to provide pure hostel facilities - however, he did make some alternative suggestions to
be explored by the City, and the Minister would reiterate that no person requesting shelter has been turned away
from One Hazen Avenue; and further advising of his thanks to Council for the interest the Council is taking in
this extremely important programme -- be received and filed.
Councillor MacGowan stated that as the Mayor's Committee on Alcoholism was responsible for the Council
adopting the above noted resolution of November 17th, 1975, she finds the above letter is just saying what we
have been hearing for the last year, and that it does not tell us anything new - anything other than what we have
said, except one thing: first, it tells us that there is no legislation until the permanent Commission on Alco-
holism has been finalized - she added that we know this and that it is the same old "runaround". She noted that
the letter says "In addition, it is necessary to finalize the provision of adequate facilities in the City of
Moncton...", and stated she finds that very interesting - "this is now under way" - she would like to ask later
on if anybody knows anything about the facilities in the City of Moncton. Referring to the section of the letter
which says that Mr. Young stressed that it was not the Department of Health's responsibility to provide pure
hostel facilities, she stated that it is strange that when the Mayor's Committee on Alcoholism brought it to the
attention of the Government and thought Justice, Health and Welfare should all be involved, that the then Minister
of Health felt that it was the responsibility of the Department of Health, and "he did make some suggestions";
and regarding he would reiterate that no-one has been refused shelter or turned away from Hazen Avenue - she
stated she thinks it would be interesting to find out from the Chief of Police if he is still finding that there
are alcoholics who are seeking shelter in the gaol, as many as previous. Chief Ferguson made negative reply.
She asked how many he would say there are, now. He replied that the number is a little less than 1975, but not
very much; with the cold weather we are getting a lot more. Councillor MacGowan noted that we have said there
are about 20 and they do not receive assistance, up at the shelter - so, this letter, to her, is just a "runa-
round" and we have achieved absolutely nothing - and it was at their suggestion last year that the Salvation Army
attempted to set up a hostel, and after getting the "runaround" they finally told them in July that there would
25&
S :J: 2}/slnd
,,(~b()ttr CtU.I1ci.
/Ire S-tOl-t/()'*s
(11(?,I?t? -C-p e/t?se
G?~5Z: Gr/:;:,4,
Il/;J/'/M K$fir//n.
I/eldn 7Uf?f?t?r
1J//6'~ &~I'.>W7
Curls/de
.1a/"bA~e
CfJ/lecl-iol7
,s5.$t-em
~rbafe ~-
C/lffj /If~r.
JQ.;m ad -/rey
/J1(lb1Ie ,4tJlne
?!.;;ml'), Ilks. ~
~h~ //,1,5"
I/, :T 11/&';'/-/17
(1;& S,t?~/6r
~l7d CPhlhf/&e
X;CK iY<<5e.
~
be no money available. She stated that she is most dissatisfied with the Minister's letter and that she
thinks that the alcoholics programme in the Province of New Brunswick leaves much to be desired. Coun-
cillor M. Vincent, speaking in support of Councillor MacGowan's comments, stated he cannot understand'what
the second paragraph of the Minister's letter is saying - he does not know what the deferment of the
enact ion of this legislation until finalization of the provision of adequate facilities in the City of
Moncton have to do with each other. He felt that the Minister's letter is valueless. The Mayor stated
that he agrees and knows that there are people turned away from One Hazen Street, and he knows the Pro-
vincial Government is interested in finding a place in Saint John - a building - that will house certain
numbers of the Half-Way House - the Government says that the number of persons is around six. He stated
that his argument is: who is going to make the decision? Councillor MacGowan noted that if the Province
were to check with the Chief of Police they would find the figure is more than six.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from The Saint John District Labour
Council, advising that that body has gone on record as being opposed to the closing down of any fire
station in the Saint John area, and asks the support of the members of Common Council to also oppose any
cutting of this essential service, be received and filed and the said Labour Council be thanked for their
interest and advised that the Common Council has no intentions of closing fire stations at the present
time.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the joint letter from Mrs. Gladys I. Griffin, Marion
Y. Stirling, Mrs. Helen Tipper and Mrs. Alice Henderson, who reside at 89 Pitt Street, advising that they
are senior citizens, in their seventies as to age, and that they are deeply concerned that under the new
proposed regulation that all garbage must be placed on the sidewalk not more than five feet from the curb,
they may have to carry these bags out to the sidewalk, as this area seems to have many cats and dogs, plus
young lads looking for carbonated drink bottles, and having to carry the bags to the sidewalk location
would present a great problem, and if they were to put their garbage out at noon, the contents would be
allover the street before the afternoon pick-up time for their area; and advising that under the present
system whereby the men on the garbage trucks walk into their yard, pick up the plastic bags out of the
garbage barrels, no litter is allowed to fallout, either in the yard or on the street -- and requesting
that before putting the proposed new Garbage By-Law into force the Council consider well what hardships
the senior citizens will be up against -- be received and filed.
.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the contents of the above noted letter be con-
sidered by the City Manager and a reply be forwarded on to the above named residents of 89 Pitt Street.
Prior to making the above motion, Councillor Green had expressed the view that the contents of
the said letter, with its request for consideration, should be turned over to the City Manager with the I
thought that he had expressed - namely, that he would check into it, and he felt that this should have
been included in the motion for receiving and filing made by Councillor Gould. In reply, Councillor Gould '
expressed the view that it was.not necessary to include same in the motion he had made, in the light that
the Council has~alr~ady passed a resolution leading to enactment of a new Garbage By-Law, and in the light
that, apparently, curbside pick-up has caused no hardship in the eastern part of the city; however, he
felt a reply should be given to these people to explain that.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Joan E. GOdfrey, making ap_
plication for renewal of permission for placement of her mobile home on the Old Black River Road location,
be referred to'the Planning Advisory Committee.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that permission for placement of a mobile building owned by Mr.
Martin, at the pre-cast concrete company plant site on the Golden Grove Road, had been denied by Council
several months ago, and he pointed out that the said building 'is still at that site and no charges have
been laid, or anything, regarding this violation of the regulations. Mr. Zides noted that the said matter
has been referred to the City Solicitor for resolution. Mr. Rodgers advised that this particular individual
complaint is in the Legal Department and it is being examined. Noting that the City presently has one
mobile home matter before the courts, and the Council is aware of what that involves, he pointed out that
it is just a question of commencing prosecution at a certain time, and he is not going to get involved at
this stage, right now, on when that is going to be.
.
Councillor Davis advised that there is a rush item from the Land Committee which he would ask be
placed on the agenda at this time.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the item from the Land Committee referred to by
Councillor Davis, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
I
Read a letter from the Land Committee, dated January 12th, 1976, stating that on July 15th,
1974, the Council passed a resolution to sell three acres, more or less, of land located on both sides of
Meadowbank Avenue in the vicinity of Bullock Street, to Jack Nugent for the appraised value of $5,100.00,
and to include in the deed to Mr. Nugent a covenant stating that construction must commence within one
year or the land shall revert to the City for the sale price, and providing that all legal and surveying
costs be paid by Mr. Nugent in connection with the transfer to him of the said land. The letter further
advises that on November 25th, 1974, transfer of title was effected and the Legal Department had included
an option for the City to purchase back the property for a period of sixty days from November 18th, 1975
if work had not commenced upon the property. The letter states that no work had been carried out on this
property, and on December 19th, 1975, following a meeting of the Land Committee, a letter was sent to the
City Solicitor aSking that the City exercise its option before January 18th, 1976 and grant a new sale to
11r. uugent on the same terms subject to him starting development within one year or the land will automatically
revert to the City for the sale price; and the Land Committee recolrrmends that the City exercise its option
to retain possession of the property and to grant a new sale to Mr. Nugent on the same terms subject to
him starting a development within one year of Council'S resolution or the land will automatically revert
.
....1
r-
')-9
"",D.
.
1.M/7/f {;h/?7,
Ja(!ff IYItf'
;?1t!"~
/lve', /and
I
Jack
. /Vuft!"l7t-
I
.
to the City for the sale price.
Councillor Davis pointed out that the City's sixty-day option period is up on January 18th, 1976, and
that although Mr. Nugent has not commenced construction yet he has had engineering work done, and in his ap-
plication to the Land Committee he says he would start work in the spring. He stated that the Land Committee felt
the delays were quite honest, and therefore makes the above noted recommendation to Council.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Com-
mittee, the City exercise its option and repossess for the sale price of $5,100.00 three acres, more or less, of
land located on both sides of Meadowbank Avenue in the vicinity of Bullock Street, that the City had sold to Mr.
Jack Nugent under Council resolution of July 15th, 1974 and had conveyed to him by deed dated November 25th,
1974; and that the City grant a new sale to Mr. Nugent on the same terms subject to him starting a development
within one year of Council's resolution or the land will automatically revert to the City for the sale price,
which is $5,100.00.
Councillor MacGowan suggested that the option to Mr. Nugent be for six months, if he is going to
commence development this spring, anyway, because if he cannot develop it, then somebody else might be interested
in it. Councillor Davis replied that the normal option time is one year. Councillor Kipping asked if the
appraised value is still as it was when the original sale took place. Councillor Davis stated that as far as our
appraisers are concerned, the value has not changed. Councillor Kipping stated he would submit that that is
quite unrealistic.
Moved in amendment by Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the City repossess the above named property and re-
negotiate the terms for re-sale back to Mr. Jack Nugent, which would involve a new appraisal of the property, and
that this matter be brought back to Council again, after the appraisal.
Councillor MacGowan stated that if the delays are through no fault of Mr. Nugent, and if the City sold
him the property for $5,100.00, she does not think it is quite fair to try and sell it at a higher price - she
does not think this is quite ethical. Councillor Green stated that, from what he has been told, Mr. Nugent had
some trouble arranging for the financing, and so on. He noted that this was set up by the Land Committee and the
property was appraised at $5,100.00 and was passed by the Land Committee, and the matter would not have come to
the Council except for the fact that there is the restriction in the deed that we must deal with the matter of
the non-construction within the year. He added that Mr. Nugent has gone into the problem of arranging the
financing, and so on, and that, as a member of the Land Committee, and, personally, he feels that the City should
try to give an opportunity to citizens who want to build within our city, to do so, as this increases the tax
base of the city. He stated he feels that the Council should support the Land Committee's recommendation.
Councillor Kipping noted that when this land was originally sold, he was assailed, really, by people who said
"How can you justify selling land at this price in Millidgeville, when everybody knows that a single lot out
there is now selling at at least double that price which is a price for several lots?" - he noted that, therefore,
there is a very strong question as to the City's business sense in this regard; he felt that in no way should the
City just allow this purchaser to go ahead, hold the land for a year and a half, which he has now done, despite
the terms of sale which were that he would start development on it within one year of the time of sale, and now,
go to sell it back to him, take it back from him - re-sell it at the same, old price, when in the intervening
year and a half it is for certain that the prices of real estate in Millidgeville have advanced. He urged that
the Council be realistic and businesslike, and be fair, indeed. Mr. Rodgers advised that all that is required at
this point is for the City to exercise its option, and, in due course, the Land Committee will be coming back to
Council with another recommendation.
Councillor Davis pointed out that, with regard to the land under discussion, Meadowbank Avenue goes
into this area, but there is no street there - it is one, big formation of rock; even though the real estate
value of the lots may be going up, the cost of the developer to put that street through has probably gone up much
higher; the Land Committee takes all these things into account - it is not a simple matter of sitting back at a
table and saying that the lots in Millidgeville have gone up, ten, twenty or thirty per cent in the last year _
we know that the cost of putting that street through has gone up probably thirty per cent - the Land Committee
went over all these facts - it did not use any special techniques - it used straightforward techniques, and it
decided that the price had not changed all that much. He felt that Councillor Kipping has a perfect right to ask
for a new appraisal, and he agrees with that, but he does not think Councillor Kipping has the right to criticise
in this regard. Councillor Gould stated that when this land came to Council in 1974 for sale to Mr. Nugent he
was very surprised at that number of lots being sold at that price in Millidgeville, but when you consider the
nature of this land and figure out that it would cost around $12,000.00 to develop each one of those lots so a
house can be put on it, because the land is sold rock, then he came to the conclusion that there was no problem
about selling the land to Mr. Nugent at that price, because it was a gift, to get it off the City's hands.
I Question being taken, the amendment to the motion was carried by a majority vote, with some Councillors
voting "nay".
~h~ ~~t'~ Following a session in Committee of the Whole, during which time Councillor Parfitt withdrew from the
, meeting, the remaining members of the Committee arose at 9.00 o'clock p.m., and the Mayor resumed the Chair in
legal session of Common Council.
LEG A L
1!fJJ3;/d (j,
I ,(/5#2(2. t'.
CNy ~bt>lfo.
b!rieve5/J7('!e
:r h S~ea
ST1Meel7l61
Jh -ted, fl
.,.(~/ N(/. 6/
lr....
Mr. Rodgers distributed to the meeting copies of an opinion,
received this afternoon from Mr. Ronald G. Lister, Q. C., of McKelvey,
regarding the grievance of Inspector J. F. Shea. Discussion ensued.
dated January 12th, 1976 that he had
Macaulay, Machum & Fairweather, Barristers,
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the grievance of Inspector J. F. Shea be compromised in the
best interests of the City provided settlement were effected without prejudice to the disposition of any future
grievance of a similar nature, by awarding Inspector Shea the differential in pay for the two-week period between
August 31st and September 15th, 1975.
Councillor Hodges suggested that the motion be worded: that the Council finds that regarding the first
section of the grievance, the Council denies the request that is being made; from the last two weeks, the Council
awards the difference in pay of $50.00. He pointed out that by using this wording, there is no compromise, no
seniority, and we go along with what Mr. Lister says. Mr. Rodgers suggested that the Council not make a decision
at this meeting - that it authorize the Common Clerk to find out from the Union Grievance Committee whether that
compromising position is satisfactory - and'if it is not, that the Council then make a decision next week and
deny the grievance. The Common Clerk stated that he wished to declare a conflict of interest, in that Inspector
Shea is a first cousin of his. He stated that he does not mind doing what the City Solicitor suggested, as long
260
~
Ct:t!l 7r.rll7S/'-I
-< -t-/
~n~;>>r-t.;l-t/()
{}t?PlH7.
(}()l7/m, Whole
C/I-~ /Il~l7a1'er
/Jtr:'hdeet l
se/"J/kes
1(. 7), 'Pu rtl!fer
Ilssp/!.
/lffr t't'/7J e I1C"
S;J.;j/71NcA- '1.1n
~/t(bJ"lLse
J dell/?!!
:IN/", 1?~re.al-/~h
.,. 'J> ark..>
t:t'-fy ~!tt:-/i()r
as the Council knows he is a close relative of this man, and that he does not take any brief with him,
whether he is right or wrong in this grievance. Councillor Higgins stated that, on the advice of the City
Solicitor, he asks that Mr. Garey in his role as Common Clerk approach the Grievance Committee of the
Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. The Mayor noted that there was only
the one motion, that being the one that was drawn up. Mr. Garey confirmed this, stating he was just
waiting for the proper wording.
.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Read a letter from the Transportation Committee, dated January 9th, 1976, submitting a letter
from the President of City Transit Limited, dated January 7th, 1976, addressed to the said Committee,
which states that as it is not possible for the company to continue operation of the bus system in Saint
John under present conditions (the company states that since 1973 the financial position of the company
has steadily worsened and it is no longer possible for the company to provide a viable bus service through-
out the city), the company requests approval of the Committee under provisions of paragraph 10 of the
Agreement between the City of Saint John and the company dated October 28th, 1971 to terminate bus service
in the city on January 31st, 1976. The letter states that in the event the said Committee determines not
to approve termination of bus service as requested and wishes to attempt carrying on a limited self-
supporting service, the company requests approval of the Committee under provisions of the said paragraph
10 of the said Agreement, (a) to discontinue feeder line service and establish an east-west bus service
according to the submitted schedule effective January 31st, 1976, and (b) to increase the single fare
rates to 50~ effective January 31st, 1976 - and stating that if these measures are effective in elimin-
ating losses it may be possible to continue a limited bus service in the community. The letter from the
Transportation Committee asks for the guidance of Common Council as to what action, if any, the Committee
should take with respect to this letter from the said company, and states that the Committee feels that
the proposal as made in items (a) and (b) in the alternative outlined in the company's letter, should be
clarified, and before doing so the Committee would like to discuss the matter in more detail with the
Common Council.
I
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the Common Council meet in Committee of the Whole
with the Transportation Committee, at a time to be decided by the Common Clerk, following the open session
of the Council meeting of January 19th, 1976.
.
Consideration was given to a letter from the City Manager, dated January 9th, 1976, further to
his recommendation of January 5th, 1976 and to the discussion at the Council meeting, regarding the
architectural services agreement proposed between R. D. Purdy & Associates and the City, submitting a copy
of the proposed standard agreement with the said architectural firm, regarding athletic facilities at
Shamrock Park, and advising that he proposes that the following clause be inserted in Article VIII of the
Agreement, "Article IV (a) of this Agreement is amended insofar as any sums awarded by arbitration set up
according to Article IX of this Agreement shall not be considered as part of the cost of the work on which
the Architect's fee is based.".
Mr. Rodgers stated he has no quarrel with what the City Manager has stated in the above men-
tioned letter, but he would like to make this additional comment, and this applies to all construction
contracts in which the City is involved: that the City Manager - whoever is involved in negotiating these
contracts - attempt to have the following wording:- "that if both parties agree - if there is a dispute
and both parties agree - the matter shall go to arbitration". In explanation of what he is saying that,
I~. ROdgers stated that if the wording is if both parties agree the matter shall go to arbitration, and a
dispute arises, and you are suspicious of the individual you are dealing with, then you do not agree to go
to arbitration and you let the individual sue; if there is no suspicion, you agree, and you go to arbit-
ration. He stated that he puts this wording forward on the basis of the recent arbitration matter that
involved the Power Commission of the City of Saint John, in that he understands it is a well-known and
accepted fact that when the contract was entered into the individual had intentions of going to arbitration,
and the fact that arbitration decisions cannot be appealed, arbitrators want to compromise, you are
usually left paying extra money. He pointed out that if the contract says that both parties agree in the
matter of going to arbitration, that, to him, protects the City if the City is involved in a dispute and
you know what the intention is behind that, you just refuse to go to arbitration. Councillor A. Vincent
noted that this standard agreement form is for only an agreement between the City and the architect, but
this is not the standard form that you use with a contractor - this particular agreement under discussion
is between the old client (the City) and the architect. He asked what form of contract is going to be
used between X construction company, when they build; because it is not the architect that is going to
take the City to arbitration, he added, but the contractor. He stated that he agrees with the clause
referred to, provided it is in the contract with the contractor, as well. Councillor Higgins asked if
that clause being inserted, as noted in the City Manager's letter, is what the Council requested of the
City Solicitor in that agreement between Purdy and the City and is the City now covered the way it was
suggested to Council. Mr. Rodgers, in reply, stated he does now know what contracts have been signed that
we cannot re-open; his recommendation is with respect to no contracts that have been signed and in the
future before they are signed that attempts be made to have that clause inserted. Councillor M. Vincent
asked if the original company has been paid any money for the services it provided under the original
architectural presentation. Mr. Barfoot replied that he reported on that question at the last meeting of
Council: there was $1,995.00 paid about two years ago and there is $15,555.00 owing at the present time
under the existing contract, for the design which the City did not proceed with; what the architect is
doing now on the basis of the Council resolution of November 3rd, 1975 is making a redesign, charging on a
per diem basis which is not to exceed $4,500.00 - until he comes up with a new design which is to be shown
to Council before we proceed with it. Further discussion ensued regarding architect's fees.
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Director of Recreation and Parks and any
members of the City staff who have been involved in the matter of new clubhouse facilities at Shamrock
Park and architectural services for same, be asked to give a complete briefing to Council regarding this
matter (on the various aspects of the matter; and the background of the architect; and what the carry-over
is; how much of the architect's original design fees are coming forward, to this much less of a building,
when we are gearing over the next few years to hosting a tournament; and whether we want to be "penny-
wise and pound-foolish" now or if there is some other way of approaching government, or any number of
things; et cetera) -- as soon as possible, including all the plans that have been prepared regarding this
proposed facility.
.
Mr. ROdgers explained that on his recommendation regarding the proposed wording, it was with
respect to construction contracts, and that he does not see anything in this contract with the architect
with respect to arbitration, at all. He stated he is not recommending that we have the words with respect
to arbitration inserted in the contract with the architect.
~
"..
')6:1
~ -,-
.
{',C!!
$pIle/for
~fer
1-/'/tJPY//;4 (In
-t tl S /lfeul::ii/J
/f'tlm uI~
I/ne b,.~k
tf/.;;;fer; c/-
~ elf/er.?Jj"e
.L3!f-JOI W
Co u.n s 11-
1/1 nee nt9--'
f(/j?f/il1.f
I
.-
I A';:)I7,f~/er
etC'. 1/$.
() h7o/f' 7-
Cj t-!j
,t;,1?~ c;~m-
~/?.;1,,{a
'?epPt. /I"U.5
CO.
X/I;~ 5e;
Msr.,c/re
. .5~a-c-/pn
'p1'~er1f!:f
'-tf,. t-7e
I
I
.
....
LEG A L
..:0. ~6; '/;; $,
{l.c.
'<.;1~/e,.. elf-
d/I vs.
U"m~ 4-
2J;tij
Read a letter from the City 'Solicitor in reply to a question raised by Councillor A. Vincent at a
recent meeting of Council relating to a break in a water service connection resulting in a waste of water over-
flowing on to a City sidewalk, stating that it is his opinion that this matter can be dealt with under the City
by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Water and Sewerage", and that under that by-law the Commissioner who is the
Executive Director of Works Operation is authorized to suspend the supply of water until such a defect has been
appropriately repaired, and that under this approach, the point will inevitably be raised that the termination of
one of the necessities of life, such as water, will create a hardship out of proportion to the problem. The
letter states that another approach to such a problem is for the City to bring an action in a civil court of law
against the owner of the property to abate the nuisance he is causing by the flow of water on to public property
under the control of the City. He recalled that in the particular case referred to by Councillor A. Vincent (at
the December 29th, 1975 Council meeting, regarding a private property at 10 Brinley Street), Councillor Vincent
was talking about a particular problem in that the water was leaking on to the sidewalk and road and freezing and
causing maybe hazardous conditions, and he pointed out that under the by-law the Commissioner has the authority
simply to turn off somebody's water if that is occurring - he does not know how practical that is or what sort of
a fight the City is going to get involved in, and so on and so forth, with respect to taking away one of the
necessities of life, which is water; the other approach is to sue the individual for causing a nuisance in
letting water flow on to a city street. Councillor A. Vincent stated that with respect to the street about which
he is talking it must have cost the City anywhere from $800.00 to $1,200.00 in having a scraper there and taking
truckloads of ice away - the ice. was about three feet high there, and the water is still leaking. Councillor
Kipping felt that if a check were made with Mr. Charles Sullivan of the Works Department it would be found that
this is the same owner that he himself had complaints about last spring and summer and he went to Mr. Sullivan
and had him check it because water was coming out on the road and neighbours were complaining, on Brinley Street -
a house was torn down next door to the property about which he was speaking, and the leakage of water was on this
man's property, and the man was told to get it repaired at his own expense - that is the way it turned out - Mr.
Sullivan looked after this complaint and he went and he got it cleaned up - at least, to Councillor Kipping's
satisfaction - at that time, and the man had been told, but it looks know as though he never did it - if, indeed,
it is the same person to whom Councillor A. Vincent refers - and it is still leaking. Councillor A. Vincent
stated he feels that the Council should try to get some kind of a by-law, or something, that we notify the person
and if the person says he does not have the money to correct the situation, the City will do the necessary work
and add the cost of same on the person's taxes. He asked the City Manager for his views on how this water
leakage problem at the said property on Brinley Street can be stopped. Mr. Barfoot replied that he does not know
for sure because he does not have a report in this matter, but he would assume that they would again go after the
cause of the water and try and prevail upon the property owner to repair it. Councillor A. Vincent advocated
shutting the water off because it is his feeling that that is the cause of the water leakage on this private
property.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the matter of the leakage of water from the property at 10
Brinley Street on to the City sidewalk and road be referred to the Commissioner of Engineering and Works for a
report with the information regarding the legal procedures that he may follow if he deems it necessary, and that
a check be made with the Water and Sewerage Department to determine whether this is the same person on Brinley
Street who was spoken to last summer about water coming from his property on to the road.
I~. Rodgers advised that the next item, regarding the Omega Investments court action, was placed on
this legal session of the Council agenda in the event some of the Councillors wanted to ask some questions
pertaining to the matter that is presently before the courts. He advised that there has not been a settlement
made, and he is not sure whether the case, that is proceeding on, is going to be finished this week or not; the
plaintiff, Lanthier, is just about finished its case - the next step is Omega and we do not know what witnesses
Omega is going to call - after Omega finishes its case, then the City calls witnesses.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Chairman of the Land Committee, Councillor Davis, would agree to
contacting Canada Permanent Trust Company with regard to the building the City bought for the site of the new
King Street East fire station, because there is a problem regarding title to this property, which he understands
is an estate. He added that he will discuss this matter later with Councillor Davis.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
/;;f;1~o9'CM
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Tuesday, the thirteenth day
of January, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Gould, Green, Kipping, Parfitt and A. Vincent
- and -
Mr. F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor
meeting.
Mr. D. M. Gillis, Q. C., counsel to the City with respect to the Omega action, was also present at the
Mr. Gillis recommended to the Council that the City accept a settlement of $29,000.00 in this matter,
1
.)ti ,)
_u....
..,
~ The Mayor stated that in the latter part of last week he received a letter, hand-delivered, from
///~~t'~ the T. Eaton Company, advising him that the company was doing away with its catalogue business and that
~ L---L ~ the company's losses were very high in the operation of the catalogue business and it would mean the loss
/. Kon"pn L-e-.
/ of employment to a large number of people (4,500 regular employees and 4,500 part-time employees) but that
~dtOl/O~(.6e the company was trying to establish stores throughout Canada so that stores would be within a half an:
J<<~/)?e$S hour's drive of any citizen. He stated that he called the President of the Company and told him about
~ ' ~~ ~~ Saint John and City's desire to have Eaton's in Saint John. He stated he thinks this should be known
/~eOI7 ~ because he knows that the Provincial Government has taken an interest. He stated that he was able to talk
with the secretary of the Chairman of the company (he could not get the President) and the secretary
passed the message on - that Saint John is a viable location for a store of that size (Eaton's) and that
there were so many customers here that would be ready to move right in; he stated he gave the company a
figure with their credit ratings, and that the company that would be interested in tFem would be interested
in using them as a loss leader in their costs of floor space and that the day they could be assured that
they would be going at the full operations of their company because of the desire of the people; and he
stated that he explained, also, that roughly 200,000 people including Saint John, Fredericton and the area
between here and St. Stephen live a distance greater than 90 miles from their main store in Moncton, but
due to the fact that the company is going to take a loss of thirteen million dollars in trying to settle
with the employees that the company is releasing and the seventeen million dollars it lost in its catalogue
business, the company felt at this time it could not make any move into Saint John. He advised that he
feels that the public should know that.
C'/t-';1 Sot.;./~
.2J,~ ~;lh:s,~,
C/cJU /e ,4h7f~A
e-t- a / 1/$.
Oh7o/e? Jh J/6'Sr.
meds "'(~L.,..
~7f!/
$eH/tn?Bd
hfu/ft!/
blepr1'e ;:: ffl
G!ar~a~e
CLl/~t!--ff-i 017
S Y.5-1-e ft?
tParba5e
.2Jy-/aW
~-
and he advised that this is the end of civil action in the matter, although perhaps under the Enquiries
Act further action will be taken.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor and Mr. D. M. Gillis, Q. C., counsel
to the City, be instructed to settle the action regarding the Claude Lanthier and Omega Investments Ltd.,
together with the City as Third Party, forthwith and that the Council accept the recommendation of Mr.
Gillis for settlement of the said action in the amount'of $29,000.00, with proper releases being obtained
and the dropping of the counter claim action.
Councillor Kipping requested an enquiry, if at all possible, to bring, out all matters regarding
this subject.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
q-:~
~..O" "",k.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the nineteenth
day of January, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy
Commissioner of Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works
Department, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development,
C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, J. Brownell, of the
Recreation and Parks Department, E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police, and
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Eric J. Davidson, Pastor of
Central Baptist Church.
Mr. George F. Teed, who resides at 120 Mount Pleasant Avenue in the central part of the city,
resented a written brief regarding the garbage collection system, which notes that the institution of
garbage collection by the City which began within the last twenty years was supposed to eliminate the
accumulation of garbage around tenement houses and other similar types of close-grouped housing, and to
generally improve the sanitation and cleanliness of this city, and that, if anything, the opposite has
occurred: the brief states that the city is certainly no cleaner and debris and fall-outs from the City
collection trucks is evident every day, and that the accumulation of garbage around the city is a disgrace
and is getting worse, not better, and further expresses the view that the proposed garbage collection plan
(as provided for by Council resolution of January 12th, 1976) will not improve sanitary conditions and
general'cleanliness, but will only make them about one hundred times worse. The brief gives the opinion
that the collection of garbage from residential areas which, under the new regulation, must be placed on
the city sidewalks for collection, instead of being picked up, as has been the practise, from the house or
building where it is accumulated, is a backward step, and points out that it has happened many times that
garbage boxes and bags that have been put on the street are broken and the contents allowed to spill all
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
..-.l
"'"
~") Q :3
~~,.
.
I
I
tJ.ePJ?fe ;::;
-,eU
~07r~/e
. Cf1/le /~
s!/~lfeln
Ga/?~~~e
.7J.;:t-kw
I
.
I'
I
.
~
over the sidewalks and streets, ,providing both unsanitary and unsightly conditions - and adds that this happens
regularly, even under the present garbage collection system; and speculates the. conditions that will exist when
it becomes compulsory to put all garbage on the street for.collection~ The ,brief .notes that, sometimes, col-
lection days for one reason or another are missed altogether; and the garbage sits on the street for several
days, especially in winter, which further adds to the general unsanitary and unsightly conditions; and antici-
pates that the present proposed new system will compound this already bad situation. The brief asks how are the
elderly citizens supposed to get their garbage to the street, and notes that in many cases they are not physically
able to do so, and asks what provisions will be made for them - and notes that this also applies to citizens who
are not necessarily old, but are sick or infirm, or for other reasons not able to carry the garbage to the
street; the brief also asks how are residents, some of whose houses are quite a distance back from the street
line, supposed to get heavy garbage to the street without extra expense and difficulty, and notes that in some of
these cases it will be impossible to put the garbage on the street - particularly in winter. The brief expresses
the view that it is doubtful if the proposed system will reduce costs in any way (Which Mr. Teed is told is one of
the chief reasons for this new plan), and that it is imposing additional hardships and costs on an already over-
taxed taxpayer, and asks what sensible and realistic plan is proposed for those who simply cannot arrange for
their garbage to be put on the street - and notes that because other areas use this system does not make it
acceptable. The brief asks how much actual realistic research on costs has been made with respect to savings that
can be effected - in actual figures - and asks why not consider reverting to private garbage collection, and ad-'
vises that Mr. Teed is sure it would be no more costly, as the citizens are already paying through taxes,
seemingly uncontrollable costs with regards to this service. The brief advocates that the Council should not
authorize the implementation of this plan until all its advantages and disadvantages have been carefully che~ked
and properly weighed, before a final decision is arrived at.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Supplementary to the brief, Mr. Teed made the following further points:- he is not too convinced that
the "free" garbage collection service is the best idea because he still thinks that if you pay for something you
expect it to be better, and you probahly get better service; the collection of garbage by the City within the
last twenty years was not because of any particular demand by the citizens but was brought about because of
continual lobbying and petitioning of Council by one or two small groups, mainly the social service group - at
that time, the citizens did not come forward and express their views, and as a consequently, as so often
happens, a few voices implement changes which are completely out of proportion to their actual influence; during
the past Christmas season, in the area in which he lives - and he supposes it happened to some extent in other
areas - three weeks went by without any collection of garbage - if that garbage had been piled on the streets
during that period, he speculates there would have been a mess with snowfalls and digging out afterwards, and a
general mess being made of the area, as a whole - Mount Pleasant Avenue, which leads to Rockwood Park, is a
favourite walk for a lot of pedestrians and probably more people walk out there than in any other particular
section of the city, as far as for enjoyment is concerned - he thinks that in view of the thought that garbage
bags could line this street for perhaps weeks before being picked up, it is a serious matter and deserves every
consideration before the Council actually makes any serious decisions on the proposed plan; with relation to the
delay in garbage pick-up during the past three or four weeks, he was told yesterday by the person involved, that
in one instance the truck arrived with the men to pick up the garbage and they picked up most of the garbage but
left one container that was partially filled and when this lady aSked that the garbage from that container be
also taken, the man r~plied with profanity and the inference was that he was doing her a great favour by picking
up that garbage - eventually, he did it and she pointed out to him that he had already broken the plastic garbage
can that she had and that he might as well take that along, too - with bad grace, he did this and threw it in the
truck but later on they again tossed it out and put it up on the lawn of a neighbour down the street -- he knows
this is not a regular thing and most of the employees of the City (who are also employees of the citizens of this
city), both male and female, are pretty fine people, but there are the exceptions and nobody seems to take them
to task when there are exceptions such as this -- he told the person involved that the best thing she could have
done was to call City Hall and explain what had happened and he was sure there would have been some sort of
action taken_-; he does not think that the citizens of this city should be beholden to any employee - they are
the buyers and are out to be serviced, and are paying good money in the way of taxes for this service, and every
courtesy should be shown them; the same thing happened with respect to his wife - they came in to pick up the
garbage container and came across from the adjoining property to do this, which is just fine - and then they
placed it on the wall of the other person's property - when his wife brought this to their attention, because
they always have brought it back, she was told there were not supposed to be taking those back, anyway, and that
next week they would not be doing that, at all -- he noted that that is a reaction the City is getting with its
employees -- it does not lend to good feeling or to good citizenship on either the part of the employee or the
citizens involved, because everybody gets annoyed; these are things that he thinks we run into in this service to
the community, that is an important service - and it has to be handled in a very diplomatic and proper public
relations planning, to get it through -- it should be emphasized to every garbage collector that this is some-
thing as a service to the citizens and a service to the City, and it should be handled in a diplomatic, pleasant
way; he asked if the new plan for garbage collection will be maintained, over a period of time to complete the
collection route in half the time - because he noted you can make an example of one particular area, if you want
to, and then say, "Well, we can do this...1I - but, the big thing is, "Does it maintain itself?H, he asked;
additional monies will be required from the taxpayers in implementing this proposed plan by way of using special
garbage bags that are stipulated - and, in addition, those who themselves cannot physically place their garbage
at the street for collection, have got to arrange to either have their garbage collected independently by some
trucker or else pay to have somebody put it out on the street; a good garbage system should not require the
particular type of garbage collection that is proposed (curbside pick-up), and he thinks it is more important
that our city be beautified and that the citizens be accommodated than that they say - well, this is the easiest
way of doing it; on the subject of the main city streets, he noted that at times they are littered with pieces of
garbage merely because the garbage bags have broken and nobody makes any effort to shovel it back into the
garbage truck and hence it is left on the streets -- he has noted that this has happened several times on Union
Street where he has an office and time after time he has had occasion where they have had to scrape up glass and
other garbage right in front of his office, which has been left there by the garbage collectors.
Councillor A. Vincent asked Mr. Teed for the following data:- the number of the City garbage truck
involved in the incident referred to, the date of the incident when the collector was being saucy to a citizen,
and the garbage route. Mr. Teed replied that he does not have that information, but he feels he can obtain the
date and approximate time of day, and route. Councillor A. Vincent added that he would like to have, if possible,
the name of the driver or the garbageman who left the garbage container on the stone fence. Mr, Teed, in reply,
stated that if he can get the time and the area, he thinks the remaining information can be pinned down - he does
not believe the person involved in the incident can tell that information because the person did not have occasion
to question the garbage collectors, nor does he believe that the person paid enough attention to detail to get
the number of the truck. Noting that the new amendment to the Garbage By-Law has not been enacted as yet,
although the Common Council by resolution of January 12th last adopted the City Manager's recommendation that, to
ease the strain placed on the Sanitation Department by winter road conditions, reduced staff and the mechanical
conditions that have resulted from extremes of weather, authority be granted to the Commissioner of Engineering
and Works to commence immediate curb side pick-up, Councillor A. Vincent stated that really the citizens are not
under any obligation to comply with this regulation until it is passed. Mr. Rodgers confirmed this observation.
~. Barfoot noted that, in compliance with the said January 12th resolution of Council, which also passed the
garbage collection policy statement recommended by the City Manager, in addition to implementation of the curb
side garbage collection prior to the adoption of the new Garbage By-Law, and the Works Department is following up
on this matter now - that is, on the policy statement, not the by-law. Councillor A. Vincent commented that,
264
tPet?J?fe "c.
7eea
Gariajj;e
cp/kd!/Ph
5.!:f .s~e J?1
lI- 1(, ::Br/en
~.;lp.J~~e
J3 :1- ;,(e>/W
C/-ly /lfa17aj'er
J?e:5t5'~ecSku.
PafQmetZ/c
et?u/f?!71e;77f-
S,:T: J3d. ~e
IrI/lJ?ff t:l/I {'b,
~-c-a.
St-e r / Sy;>tl?h7S
-;.( -,f-,L
If~d re
/l/>eI7IJS
1-17?-/f7~
(7 ge/'dlt-/ p)?
1(M/?~/Ph
.:z; ept:
?ro~)'1;;1/7?h?es .
CbUh, /?
!//)7el?}fr-
;fi,11- re $/i:le/?
A/~A se~Cf?/
s.ha( l? /1/- $
US! I7f C/6-!?
arel7<;1.5 -;::'t?r
ItJCKey
(j:iy..)t?hl:-/zft7.
C/8~a,e 417f7M
e-?e7/ "'s.
(J /170/'" ..u,P'd-I?/t?
,.,(-c-d'.
Sememdd-
~
therefore, anyone who does not do what the policy statement says, cannot be penalized until the by-law is
approved. Mr. Rodgers replied that that is how he sees it: the by-law is necessary to have the regul_
ations in effect and valid, and we cannot have regulations on both sides, in and out - there is just one .
area for it.
Mr. Teed felt that it might be a possible solution, as pointed out in his brief, if
charge for garbage collection service if the collectors came in off the street to collect it.
that he, 'for one, would not mind paying it, if he has to, because he does not want to have to
garbage at the street.
there was a
He stated
place his
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. V. R. Brien of 110 Central
Avenue, advocating that the Garbage By-Law not be changed and that the proposed curb side system of
garbage collection not be introduced, and submitting comments in support of this view, and requesting
that the Sanitation Department, instead, give the citizens a set of guide lines for 1976 in connection
with the garbage collection system -- be received and filed and Mr. Brien be thanked for his concerns and
advised that the Council is going to consider his suggestions before the proposed new Garbage By-Law is
passed.
I
(
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, whose letter advises that funds for Rescue Squad equipment (paramedic) were raised through
efforts of the Saint John Board of Trade, and that, to date, the sum of $10,083.00 has been received from
the said Board of Trade and the sum of $500.00 has been received from Irving Oil Company Limited, making
a total of $10,583.00, and that expenditures to date total $5,459.40 -- the invoice of Steri Systems Ltd.
in the amount of $2,928.74 for supplying such equipment, be paid.
Mr. Barfoot confirmed that the said payment amount is to be taken from the above noted $10,583.00,
which was raised through public subscription. Councillor Kipping stated he was wondering why one company
was singled out to show its donation when there were several other companies which made donations of
similar size, to his knowledge, to the Saint John Board of Trade. Mr. Barfoot replied that he under-
stands the reason for this is because this one donation was made direct to the City.
.
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the above named bill be
tabled and that the Board of Trade itemize the said sum of $10,083.00, for the information of the Common
Council so it will know who Councillor Kipping is talking about. The Mayor noted that we will get that
list, anyway. Councillor A. Vincent expressed the view that citizens who donate that amount of money
should be made known publicly, and that that one company should not be singled out, having made a con-
tribution of $500.00.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager and the Director of
Recreation and Parks regarding the 1975-1976 operation of the three new arenas as related to the recreation
programmes of the City in this area thus far, be received and filed.
I
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to know how many hours more would be available to
Saint John residents if the residents of Kings County were not using the City arenas, and he explained
that, in this regard, he was shocked to find that a lot of people from the Rothesay and Westfield areas
are attending our high school (Saint John High School) and taking on sports - he added that there is
nothing wrong with that - but the citizens of Saint John are picking up the complete cost in this regard.
He felt that if the Provincial Government is going to continue on with its programme of financial re-
strictions, then the City should find out just what it is doing. He stated that from personal knowledge
of conversations with persons he picks up along the road, who are hitch-hiking, he has learned they live
in Kings County but go to Saint John High School, and that they have their sports activities in the City
of Saint John sports facilities. He stated he is wondering if there is any rebate on this. I~. Nicolle
advised that he submitted a report earlier on the number of non-residents who were using the City's
arenas under organized programmes - we do not know how many are using the arenas on a public basis, but
we do have a report that there is some 40 young people who are participating in organized, scheduled
activities in the city. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that the report did not single out how many lived
in Rothesay who were registered in the Saint John High School - the report just singled out 40 who we,e
not registered; he stated he would like a true total of Kings County residents - the elite - who are
causing the City of Saint John the problem. Mr. Nicolle confirmed that the report just referred to the
non-residents outside the City limits. Councillor A. Vincent added that he would like to have, for his
own information - because a lot of our poor children are deprived the skating and hockey use of the rink
because it is full - he knows of one case where a young boy has to get up at and go to the rink at 6.00
a.m.' while residents of Rothesay are permitted to skate or play hockey at 10.00 a.m. because of being on
a Saint John team although they live outside the county - and he stated he feels that is not fair. The
Mayor advised that we will get Councillor A. Vincent that report. In reply to Councillor Gould's question
as to where Saint John High School obtains its rink time - from the Recreation Department, or from the
Lord Beaverbrook Rink or from Simonds and Lancaster rinks - Mr. Nicolle stated that the said School has
.some limited time from us - very limited. Councillor Gould asked if the said School or the School Board
pay for that time. Mr. Nicolle replied that the High School does not pay, but the organizations pay the
non-prime rate, he believes. Councillor Gould noted that Mr. Nicolle is suggesting that the School Board
pays for High School or St. Malachy's or anybody else to pay for non-prime rate. Mr. Nicolle stated he
believes it is the Interscholastic Association. Councillor Gould asked if Mr. Nicolle would suspect that
there would be more than five or ten per cent of, for instance, Saint John High School students, coming
in from Rothesay and playing hockey. Mr. Nicolle stated that he would not have any idea what the numbers
would be. Councillor Gould stated he would think it would be a very small number and that the whole High
School team would be there, anyway - and he asked what is the difference for one person, if they are
paying - if the School or the School Board is paying on their behalf. The Mayor interjected that we will
get the report.
.
I
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Kipping
.
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting a brief
summary of the Trial of the civil action between Claude Lanthier et al (Plaintiff) and Omega Investments
....1
~
c:1....uk
A'an#/e/1
. efc>lll'$.
(}meffOl
Inv8~e
fitd,
t/~, C/-f!f
$e6flemen
I
lu kf"<</!"'/I
JJp/781/d
.9/11/$, 6?e.
elf!! .541~/
.
I J>4nn,
/Jdf//s-
CtJmm.
'Pdro.I'; 17<>1
Qmad01..4
tbr U/,R sA 4-
Sendee
:;-c-at-/pn
.
.B/liff. tt'P/J?/
I
I-ran/r
/oll'U:t'r!l
I
, 'l?oane:tJ
. (;2////5
(mpi"iim
/(Js-t- )
ll....
265,
Limited (Defendant) and the City of Saint John as the Third Party, from its commencement to the point where
settlement has been reached, be received and filed and as recommended therein, the Common Council authorize the
Commissioner of Finance to issue a cheque in the amount of $29,000.00, payable to E. Neil McKelvey, Q. C.,
Solicitor for Claude Lanthier & Associates and E. J. Mockler, Solicitor for Omega Investments Limited - which
cheque will be exchanged with opposing Counsel in return for the requisite releases and closing documents - and
that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute any documents pertaining to the closing of this matter.
Councillor Davis asked the Council, regarding the above named matter, if it would consider that the
solicitors be asked to bring in a recommendation with respect to the falsified accounts and what action we should
take in that regard.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above named subject, referred to by Councillor Davis,
be placed on the agenda of this meeting at this time.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the City's General Counsel, Mr. Donald Gillis, Q. C., and
the City Solicitor be asked to bring in a recommendation regarding what action, if any, should be taken with
respect to the evidence concerning the foregoing Court settlement as it relates to falsified accounts.
Mr. Rodgers was asked for his opinion as to whether the above is the correct procedure to follow. He
stated that it is in order for the Council to ask for the views of General Counsel, Mr. Gillis, and the City
Solicitor, and he added that he will be reporting back at a later meeting on the item, and that he was not going
to express the views, at this time. In reply to Councillor Gould's query as to whether Common Council is in
order doing what the motion calls for, Mr. Rodgers stated that if the Council wishes that information, it is in
order. Councillor A. Vincent stated he understands that this case is going to be heard again on the morning of
January 20th, and that this case is not settled yet. He stated that this is the question he is asking. He added
that what the Council is doing now is almost in contempt of Court. He stated that, in such case, he is forced to
vote against the motion. Mr. Rodgers replied that the resolution put forward by Councillor Davis is in order -
if Council wishes to deal with it, it can - any further questions about the item that was dealt with regarding
the settlement is a separate matter and he just does not want to get involved in discussing that - it is finished
with. He stated that if Council wants any further questions on it, he will have to discuss it in legal session.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising
that the Committee now recommends that the Common Council approve the proposal by Petrofina Canada Limited to
erect a car wash and service station on the property west of the new lillo. Muffler building on City Road, and that
the major reason for the Committee's previous point of view, when it earlier reported to Council against the oil
company's application, had to do with traffic considerations as the Committee felt that the newer drive-in
establishments on this stretch of City Road and the relative location of driveways of these commercial establish-
ments would create undesirable traffic conditions in this vicinity - and further advising that, at the request of
the said company, this matter was taken off the Council's agenda of January 5th last for further review by the
Committee and consultations were held with the Traffic Engineer in the Engineering and Works Department and the
said Department then advised as follows: "We do not foresee any major problems with traffic if the proposed car
wash-gas station is built. The construction of any business will result in increased turning movements, however,
business cannot be banned. Providing the entrances are constructed according to the By-Law requirements, there
should be a minimum of problems. Also, the development of this site will result in it being easier to remove the
on-street parking, resulting in it being possible to have another lane on the street. The site location is far
enough away from the intersection of Wall Street-City Road (270 feet) so that no problems should be encountered,
also, in the future after the new Wall Street interchange is constructed, it will be even further from the inter-
section of ramps"; and further advising that, after reviewing the proposal again, the Committee resolved that,
having regard to the Engineering Department's report, it would now recommend the proposed establishment; and
further advising that the matter of minor variances reported in the Committee's letter of December 15th, 1975 has
now been resolved by the Planning Advisory Committee so as to permit the proposed car wash and service station to
be erected as proposed once approved by Common Council, and a building permit subsequently obtained -- be rec-
eived and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Parfitt advised that Mr. Frank Landry, who was present at the meeting, had asked if he could
speak on the above named matter. She asked if it is the wish of the Council that Mr. Landry so speak.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that Mr. Frank Landry be heard.
Question being taken, the motion was lost, with Councillors M. Vincent, A. Vincent, Cave, Green, Pye,
Hodges and Parfitt and the Mayor voting "yea" and Councillors Kipping, Gould, Davis and MacGowan voting "nay", a
total of nine affirmative votes being required on such a motion.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he presumed that Mr. Landry had come to the city from Moncton re-
garding the subject that is being considered and that a group of people was present at the meeting from the
Gasoline Dealers Association, and that Mr. Rodney J. Gillis, Barrister, who represented the Association, was also
present. He felt that the Council would not be discourteous enough to disregard the presence of people who have
come to this meeting.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that Mr. Rodney J. Gillis, who has been the solicitor for the
Gasoline Dealers Association, be allowed to be heard.
Councillor Cave stated he would go along with hearing Mr. Landry providing anyone present on behalf of
Petrofina Canada Limited is allowed to speak. Council members concurred in this view. Councillor A. Vincent
proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that this whole matter be tabled until the Council gets an independent
legal opinion on what constitutes a two-thirds vote of Council (in voting on whether or not to hear matters by
Council). Mr. Rodgers pointed out that the by-law reads "two-thirds of the total membership", not two-thirds of
the members present.
C. 'eo.:!
200
..,
74/7/7 ,/}dv/s_
ammo
'?etfro-l'/nC/
CanadC/ .4-t-d
Car fl/61 $,4 y..
$el"v/ee SCCl-a'
Question being taken, the motion was lost, with the Mayor and Councillors M. Vincent, A. Vincent,
Green, Pye, Hodges and Parfitt voting "yea" and Councillors Davis, Kipping, MacGowan, Cave and Gould .
voting "nay", "a total of nine affirmative votes being required on such a motion.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table for one week and
that the Council get an independent legal opinion.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors A. Vincent, M. Vincent, Pye and Green
voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors MacGowan, Cave, Kipping, Davis, Gould, Hodges and Parfitt
voting "nay".
1
Councillor Green expressed his deep concern that the Planning Advisory Committee sees fit to
open another gas bar and car wash and service station on City Road along side another which serves that
area, and stated that he feels that the traffic situation on City Road is extremely serious and that a
serious situation is being reached in that we are gradually, by creating self-service gas bars, allowing
other service stations who hire employees in the line of mechanics and so on, to be squeezed out. He
noted that the latter type of service station is closing, allover the city, and stated it is his feeling
that with self-service gas bars we are taking away the livelihood of some of the service station operators
who employ mechanics. Councillor Kipping pointed out that self-service gas bar is not mentioned in the
Planning Advisory Committee's letter regarding the car wash and service station that is under discussion.
Councillor Green replied that he has been told that there will be a self-service bar there, as well - and
he also mentions the fact of another service station - it will be another car wash, and he feels that in
that area, we should not allow it. He noted that service stations have been having difficulty to retain
their employees on the job due to the comptetition of cutting gas price, and so on; he feels that with
this attitude we are putting the service stations in a very bad light, and he strenuously objects to the
Planning Advisory Committee reconsidering the proposal and recommending in favour of it.
I
Noting that the City engineering staff says it cannot see any problem as far as City Road is
concerned, Councillor Cave felt that it would appear to him that every time a company comes in here,
'unless it is a certain company that does business here, there is objection from this Council; he added
that he thinks it is very unfair.
.
Councillor Kipping noted that the Planning Advisory Committee letter says, "The construction of
any business will result in increased turning movements, however, business cannot be banned.", and stated
he thinks that is the whole point on which the Council has to make its judgement at this meeting. He
stated he personally cannot see why any company would want to build another car wash and service station
next to the very highly successful and efficient Irving station which is already there - however, it seems
to him that there is no way that the Council can tell a company what the company can and cannot do - that
is what the "free enterprise" system is all about - if the company concerned wants to go and build a car
wash and a service station next door to an existing one, that is that company's business, and he does not
see how the Council can go against a recommendation coming in from the Advisory Committee which has
considered this proposal very deeply and very carefully and has stated that business cannot be banned for
no good reason.
I
Referring to the sections of the Planning Advisory Committee letter which explain the Committee's
reasons for changing 'its recommendation regarding the Petrofina proposal, Councillor M. Vincent stated he
finds it difficult to understand the Committee's change from recommending against .this project to now,
recommending in favour of it - and he noted that this Council is sitting considering to approve this,.
after being told there should be a minimum of problems and there should be no major problems, based on a
report - he added he feels it is completely ridiculous to approve the proposal on the basis as given in
the Planning Advisory Committee's letter. He stated that the point he was making is: the last time the
matter was before Council, it was turned down. It was pointed out to Councillor M. Vincent at this time
that the report from the Committee recommending against the proposal was withdrawn from the agenda of the
Council meeting of January 5th, 1976, and the Committee reconsidered the matter. He noted that the only
difference in the report from the Committee that is now before Council is that the Engineering and Works
Department said there should be a minimum of problems and the Department can foresee no major problems,
and the Committee makes that summation, based on the said Engineering and Works Department report.
.
Councillor Hodges stated that he agrees with what Councillor Kipping has said: it is not the
Council's job to regulate how many filling stations and who is to own them, in the City of Saint John-
everybody who wants to make application for a filling station in Saint John should be treated the same,
and as far as he is concerned, they are going to be treated the same. He stated he fails to see the
argument that this service station that is proposed is any different than any other one on City Road - as
far as he is concerned, every filling station on City Road is a problem, getting in and out, from his'own
experience with them - City Road is a problem street, and he fails to see Councillor M. Vincent's argument
on this case. Councillor M. Vincent stated that is his point: it is already admitted it is a problem-
now, we are going to create some more problems.
I
Councillor MacGowan asked if the proposed facility is a service station. Mr. Zides replied that
a service station, in the language of the by-law, can be just even a gas bar; it is not necessarily a
facility that provides automobile repair service; the proposal of Petrofina does not provide such repair
service - it is a combination of a car wash plus a gasoline sales outlet; at the moment, self-serve bars
are not permissible within the city. Councillor MacGowan stated that it has been brought to her attention
that by having these service bars we are doing away with,the service station and that in some cities it is
almost impossible to get your car serviced - she would not want to see that happen in the City of Saint
John. She stated she wonders, if we are opening a whole new sphere, here, of gas service, will it lead to
the closure of our service stations; she added that at the present time, customers wishing to have their
cars serviced have to wait in line, and she would not want to see the situation get any worse.
1
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is opposed to anyone coming before the Planning Advisory
Committee without the proper options or the ownership of the land, and that he thinks Petrofina should
produce at this meeting information confirming its ownership of the property, which he knows this company
does not have. It was pointed out to Councillor A. Vincent that this company has an option on the pro-
perty in question. He asked for an answer to the following question: is it a criteria for the owner that
the application for re-zoning have legal title to the land, because he was told in the case of the Alpha
Investments & Agencies Limited re-zoning application that the said applicant should own the land, and he
voted for that opinion from the City Solicitor. He noted that although this present matter that is before
Council is not a re-zoning matter, it is permission that is being sought. He stated that on Waterloo
Street, Shell Oil and Stanley has closed and to this date the City did not see fit, which is a dangerous
matter, to see that the underground tanks are removed; across the other side of the street, back of the
boiler house of the Saint John General Hospital, the Esso service station has closed its doors to the car
wash - he does not know what is going to happen to that nice block on the corner of Waterloo and Pitt
.
....t
r-
26'7
.
I
IfJ/OIn/7 ,
/lat//S. a~
/lead/.;;j
t'P /} Cl'blC-tC,.,
~-6-t.
/l?e-hon/J?
F/an I"t!W50
t>e .?~-//Y..
. aeilelu~meh
(}",ule/I
f'e:J{}lut-lPh
~h?endi2d
I
/IltJJ//e jQ/;f
I5aJe/
tP/b spn
f3;Jymt?d /n
/teu Y'-,t!
pwp//c
;?UI''pbSeS
. /';;j7d /17
Sub -d'"/t/ S .
.Tt:1hn Szf<<.oI
"2)diJ1'J-td
1(e/d91-
tf/~~/hS
Su.l-~/y,
I
CQM' .
Kt',P,P11? .ff
& K esfl t-h '?'-
l/7nswel" ...L
;:,er//)~ ",7-
'{!"ttl7c//
,m-i-.f' s".
"Time tJ..,e
. C,;,u~/I
m-f,j'$".
II....
Streets, but all he is wondering is, the number of service stations - and he does not care who owns them - he
thinks that this Council should get together and decide - you have ,to have outlets - and he is concerned about
whether or not we are doing the right thing, here and whether or not we should from now on ask everybody whether
they own the land. He stated that the question he is asking is: do we have to own the land, or not? The Mayor,
in reply, stated that this is not a re-zoning matter. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is in favour of the
Petrofina proposal, but he is not for the proposal if you are going to say they can have it without owning the
land, and someone else can have it.
Councillor Parfitt stated that her concern is that there are three gas bars in that block of City Road,
and we are told that service stations are to become bigger and fewer - she would not like to see one closed one
in that block - she is told that Esso closed its doors this afternoon on Waterloo Street - she asked if it is
going to be like Wellesley Avenue, when there is one on each corner - or what? She added that is her concern _
with the gas going up ten cents a gallon in April, will there be a reduced consumption of gas - she does not want
to see a closed station.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Gould, Kipping,
MacGowan, Davis, and Hodges voting "yea" and Councillors Green, Pye, M. Vincent, A. Vincent and Parfitt voting
"nay".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising that
the Common Council at its meeting of December 15th, 1975 re-zoned a property on Forest City Street to allow
construction of a 12-unit apartment building, pursuant to a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning
Act involving certain conditions and all in accordance with the plot plan for the development which was filed
with the Common Clerk, and that Acadia Contractors Limited now find it necessary to reverse the location of the
building and parking area on the lot because of soil conditions and relative costs involved in extending the
water and sewer lines and have asked the Common Council to substitute a new plan for the one now filed with the
Common Clerk (there is no change in the size of the building or the number of units and so on); and recommending
that the Council alter its resolution to authorize the substitution of a plot plan revised to January 6th, 1976
which is being filed with the Common Clerk for the one attached to the previous material (the earlier plan should
probably be retained for the records, but it should be marked by the Common Clerk to the effect that it has been
superseded by the new plot plan) -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted:
AND FURTHER that the letter from Acadia Contractors Limited, requesting that the above noted permission
be granted, and explaining the reason for requesting the said change, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, to whom had
been referred the application from Mrs. Isabel Gibson for permission to renew her mobile home permit for the year
1976, advising that in 1969, permission was granted to her on compassionate grounds to occupy a mobile home which
is located on the property of Colin Kennedy on the south side of Loch Lomond Road, immediately east of the
Lakewood Grocery Store (formerly Karne's), and that the permit was renewed in 1970 through to 1975, and recom-
mending that the Council grant Mrs. Gibson permission to renew her permit for the year 1976, be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Cave withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recom~
mending that the following sums of money be accepted in lieu of land for public purposes with respect to the
fOllowing named sub-divisions, and advising that in both cases the figure is at 8% of the value of the proposed
lots as estimated by the Property Management Branch of the Department of Community Planning and Development and
that the monies are to be deposited in the City's trust fund for the acquisition and development of land for
public purposes:-
(1) from John Stuart Baird, Lorneville Road, L-144 - the sum of $304.00 (the John S. Baird lot on the westerly
side of Lorneville Road about 230 feet north of Second Creek is being sub-divided into two lots; the said Pro-
perty Management Branch has appraised the proposed new lot at $3,800.00 before sub-division);
(2) from Reid and Wiggins Sub-division, Dwyer Road, L-64 - the sum of $880.00 (Messrs. Reid and Wiggins own
42,000 square feet of property with a frontage of approximately 265 feet between Dwyer Road and Mosquito Cove;
the proposal is to divide this property into two lots; the market value estimate from the Property Management
Branch for the new lot which would be thus created is $11,000.00 before sub-division).
Read a letter from Councillor Kipping, stating that sin~e he does not believe that the Council does not
wish to improve communication between it and the public and city staff, he wishes to present again the proposal
made for a Question and Answer period during Council meetings. The letter provides elaboration of the format
such a period might follow.
Councillor Kipping proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that a Question and Answer period be a
part of the regular agenda at future Council meetings.
On motion of Councillor Gould
"
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named letter submitted by Councillor Kipping, be
received and filed.
Councillor Kipping voted "nay" to the above motion, commenting that it is only left for the public to
conclude that the Council does not wish to improve communication.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor Kipping, requesting the
Council's consideration of changing the time of the four o'clock meeting of Common Council to seven o'clock, for
the reasons set forth in same, be received and filed.
Councillor Kipping pointed out that he introduced the above named item, and stated he believes it
should be his prerogative to make a motion on it.
; ,
268
~
77m e -/'or
Ct?Uht!' / / /77--6-.:/
C/J1vcio)"J /ose.
{l,<</l, 1);'J;f//J7f
$/7PW C'I'dm/
.~ '
~J7K jce
Ehfl'.!, q<- ~J'?k.
.2Je,Pt:
. ,.'.C'._ I. '.'- On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the four o'clock p.m. meetings of Council be changed
to seven o'clock p.m. for the reasons as given in the memorandum which Councillor Kipping provided for the
edification of Council at its meeting held on January 12th last.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he feels that the reasons given by Councillor Kipping in making the
above recommended change in Council meeting times carries some merit; but, he has to vote against the
motion because of one particular reason, and that is that if the Council commences all of its Council
meetings at seven o'clock he thinks it is going to be attempting to accomplish too much between the hours
of seven o'clock and midnight or one or two o'clock a.m. - he thinks that the Council needs, perhaps, more
time, and therefore he has to vote against the motion on that reason, only.
Councillor Cave re-entered the meeting.
.
I
Councillor MacGowan advised of her opposition to the motion because she knows, from her ex-
perience in the past that meetings that commenced at seven o'clock p.m. lasted until as late as one and
two o'clock a.m., and that after eleven o'clock p.m. no Councillor can give his or her best, after a full
day's work and then coming to a Council meeting; she noted that last week's Council meeting, for an
example, comme~ced at 4.00 o'clock p.m. and the Council members got home around eleven o'clock p.m. and
the Council at that meeting certainly did not do any more business than it had to do in that seven-hour 1
period. Councillor Cave stated that he is opposed to any change in the time of meetings - he recalled
that in the past, Council meetings that commenced at seven o'clock p.m. did not finish until one o'clock
a.m. - he suggested that the Council leave the meeting times as they are presently scheduled. On the
matter of staying until one o'clock a.m., Councllor Kipping felt that the Council would agree that this
took place not during this Council's life but during the previous Council's life, when it stayed until one
and, indeed, two o'clock a.m., sometimes, and this was usually the result of a lack of control of the
meetings. He suggested the thought that if the Council has its meetings starting at seven o'clock p.m" it
may indeed lead to a little more efficiency and a little more dispatch in the conduct of the Council's
business. He added that as far as starting at four o'clock p.m. is concerned, this was done in the first
place, back in the last Council, when one Councillor made the request that the meetings be moved back from .
seven to four o'clock p.m. for the single purpose that he could attend other meetings that night, and for
the main reason that he was only in town on that day; it did not work out that way, he never got to attend
other meetings - the Councillor about whom he was talking is Councillor Albert Vincent, he pointed out.
He sta~ed that if Councillor A. Vincent would like to state now whether the reasons he asked for the four
o'clock p.m. meeting are still valid, then he thinks the Council might have a little light shed on the
whole thing. He asked: are the reasons which Councillor A. Vincent asked for and received the four
o'clock p.m. meetings, away back in the last Council, still valid? Councillor A. Vincent replied that he
never asked for those meetings, and that he was going to support the motion, but that he was now with~
drawing his support of the motion. Councillor Davis suggested that the motion be amended to read that the
meetings start at 4.30 o'clock p.m., because the civic staff has gone at that time and the Council me~bers
have lots of space in which to park, whereas at 4.00 o'clock p.m. the staff is still in the building and
there is no parking space.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Kipping and Davis voting "yea" and I,.
all other Council members present voting "nay". _
Read a letter from Councillor Kipping which states that, due to the number and the wide range of
comments and complaints about the condition of the city streets and sidewalks during the past few weeks,
he wishes to have the subject placed on the agenda so that both Councillors and the City Manager may have
an opportunity to get more direct information to the public on this matter which affects us all. Coun-
cillor Kipping noted that at the last Council meeting, he said that the Engineering and Works Department
had over-reacted to Council's restraint directives, and he believes that was an accurate assessment of the
situation at that time. He added that, unfortunately, it is still true, only this time the over-reaction
is in the opposite direction: this past week-end, ploughs were on the go very early and continuously;
sanders and salters were, practically everywhere; and the over-time wage bill is undoubtedly going to be
very high. He stated that he knows you cannot do anything for nothing - but he also has learned in his
experience that most often, neither of the extremes are necessary or desirable; somewhere in between is
the balanced way and the better way. He stated that his message to the Works Department is simply that:
find the proper balance and work smarter, not harder; the eyes of the community are upon the Department
and the voice of the community as represented by those sitting around this table will be heard; generally
speaking, as far as he is concerned, the Department's efforts are appreciated - he and those he represents
expect, however, that the Department will adapt to changing circumstances in an intelligent, co-operative
and practical way, resulting in the best solutions to the Department's problems which the Department knows
are the Council's problems, too.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named item that has been presented by
Councillor Kipping, be received and filed.
Councillor Cave, in reference to Councillor Kipping's use of the words "over-reaction", asked if
Councillor Kipping realizes that in the first two weeks of 1976 the Works Department over-spent $10,000.00.
He pointed out that in the storm to which Councillor Kipping referred at the January 12th Council meeting
there was no snow, but it was cold weather and the roads were slippery, whereas this week, there was a
snow storm and the circumstances were much different when the crews were out, than in the other storm. He
felt that if Councillor Kipping wants to spend money in this regard, the City can do so, but Councillor
Kipping had better talk with the Provincial Government about it, first.
Councillor Davis suggested that this discussion period could be ended with a report, if any,
from the Works Department, and he asked the ,City Manager if there is such a report on what action has been
tru<en in the past month, or so. Mr. Barfoot replied that he believes Mr. MacKinnon has some information
on the conduct of the Works Department in the past three weeks. Mr. MacKinnon, in making his report, felt
that the question really in the first two or three weeks of the year is probably as to whether or not the
sidewalks and streets were in good condition: the answer is fairly simple - they were not in good con-
dition - the weather was certainly against the Department - on a number of occasions the temperatures
changed drastically - there was a great deal of ice created - the Department had other jobs to do at the
same time, cleaning catchbasins, relieving storm drainage in areas, and, as a result, the streets and
sidewalks got iced up considerably; over that same period of time, the City budgets were approved by
Council -- not approved _- however, the Department was working within accepted budgets that were passed
down, he thinks by the Province and the Department was asked to live within those budgets - the approxi-
mate projections for the Works Department in the snow and ice patrol area for the first week were ap-
proximately $30,000.00 in amount and the actual amount spent was $34,000.00 - and that was on the 1975
.
I
I
.
~
"'"
269
.
I
I
~/JtJW
(!(;7 l77fr t1 1
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
wage packets rather than the 1976 wages because the new rate. did not go into effect until January 4th; the next
week the Department was allowed $25,500.00 and it spent $32,000.00; the following weeks, which ends on Saturday
night, the Department was allowed a projection of $25,500.00 and it spent almost $36,000.00; at the present time,
the Department is over-spent $21,000.00. He noted that it is not something that is out of the ordinary for any
particular snow and ice budget - the City does that from year to year because it is extremely hard to project
it - however, this year, because the budgets have been reduced drastically the Department was ordered by the
Council to live within its budgets, and that is exactly what the Department attempted to do; however, it still
went over because it had to work during the storms with a fair amount of over-time. He noted that the last storm
was not followed by rain, as has been the caSe in quite a number of our storms this winter when rain followed the
snow, and the Department was able to do a creditable job in the last two days; he thinks that the driving con-
ditions are pretty fair as are the walking conditions - there were a few areas the Department did not get to for
the first part of this morning and, as a result, there were a few telephone calls -- however, over-all, the
reception was fairly good for this week-end, but it did cost some money; he thinks that the only that the De-
partment has got left to do is that you have to decide whether you are going to react or over-react, or under-
react -- all the Works Department has to do, of course, is to react to the money that Council gives it -- and if
the Council will only give it so much money then that is all the Department has got to live with -- and he thinks,
at the end of the season, if the Works Department over-spent by some $150,000.00 or $160,000.00, the "voice in
the community" would not be to the community at large, to ask them what they thought of it, but it would rather
be to the Works Department to find out why the Department spent it -- certainly, the Council has already given
the Department direction by giving it a budget and the Department is trying to live within that budget -- cer-
tainly, if the citizens want more, then the Department has to have more with which to operate; at the present
time, the Department is already operating with more men on the payroll than it should really have and there
should be even less, and in order to get back into line, it is going to have to do less in order to get back in
the budget figures.
In reply, Councillor Kipping stated that his point is that the Department has a budget, but it does not
spend it all at One time, and it does not spend none at another time, and what he is saying is, that the Works
Department has gone to extremes. He stated that the week-end before last, it would appear from what was done and
not done, and from the condition of the streets, sidewalks and roads that very little effort was being made and
very little money being spent; this past week-end, however, the Department spent it all - in other words, we were
overwhelmed this past week-end and we were "under-whelmed" on the week-end before; all he is saying to the
Department is: avoid the extremes and live within its budget, at the same time. The Mayor pointed out that there
was an over-expenditure in each week, as mentioned by Mr. MacKinnon. Councillor Kipping asked if the Department
spent that on storm clearance - or what else were these over-expenditures spent on - and he conjectured that
maybe it was spent on garbage collection. Mr. MacKinnon replied that the figures are broken down into the number
of personnel who worked each day since the first of the year; the figures vary; some days the men were working on
winter maintenance versus storm control - but only those men that worked on storm control - and that 'would
include ice sanding, salting, ploughing (if there was ploughing) and if it was a condition resulting from a
storm, then it would have to be a cost attributed to that - if it was flooding as a result ~f the storm, then it
would have to be a cost attributed to the snow and ice budget; regarding the figures starting on December 8th,
starting on a Monday, we show about 90 men on that budget; Tuesday, 94; Wednesday, 114 - and he would assume that
there was manpower transferred to it because there was a storm; Thursday, 104; Friday, 92; Saturday, 60; going
back to Sunday, there were still 44 that day because of a storm; we went up to 106 on Monday - it varies, all the
way through, he pointed out, with the numbers of people that were put on; on one Saturday, we showed 2 people
out, namely, January lOth. Councillor Kipping stated that the January lath week-end is the week-end he is
talking about. He noted that the whole picture has to be together, in order to understand his point; his point
is, simply, that things cannot be done in extremes, and his point is that they were done in an extreme on January
lath and they were done in an opposite extreme on the week-end of January 17th.
Councillor Hodges stated that he has to travel a lot on the city streets and he has noticed that some
of them are in bad condition - for example, Harding Street, which is just a rut to drive your car in, from
Germain Street to Charlotte Street; and the driving this morning on Duke Street from Charlotte Street to Crown
Street was just a nightmare. He added that this is not the. fault of the civic employees - one of the faults is
that there is parking on both sides of the street - he followed the snow plough on the main streets On Sunday and
the plough turned into the street in the St. Peter's Church area but could not plough that street because there
were cars on both sides of the street. He felt that we are not giving our employees the chance to do the ploughing
in the manner in which it should be done. He stated he is very dismayed at this attack on the snow control
system. He noted that the Council has been made aware from the beginning of the fact that when storms occur on
the week-ends, involving Saturdays and Sundays which are penalty days and the City crews working those days, it
will cost the City extra money. He felt that by the end of the winter, because of winter storm conditions, the
cost factor is going to over and above what was alloted to Mr. MacKinnon for cleaning the streets. Councillor M.
Vincent stated that he, too, had considerable opportunity in the last couple of storms to travel quite thoroughly
throughout the city, and he pointed out that a lot of the plough problems were the result of the fact that cars
were parked on both sides of the streets, as was clearly visible by the efforts of the plough to weave its way
around the cars that were parked and still do its job of ploughing the streets. He felt that it is important if
we could still get public some of the steps that are going to be taken after a storm - what areas are going to be
ploughed and approximately when - and some of the things that people could do to assist the Works Department in
its job, such as going back to parking on one side of the street only at certain times, staying off certain
streets on the roads during plough times, and it is going to go a long way to help the operations of the De-
partment. He asked if we have now caught up with the effort to try to get some of the roads and highways and
sub-divisions in the outlying areas of our city at least on a passable par: Lakewood Heights, Glen Falls, Red
Head - some of those areas - the western end of the city; he thought that the last time, we seemed to be working
in the centre core of the city and going from the centre core, out - he was on centre core streets that were
sanded and ploughed and yet some of the other areas in the area he just mentioned had not had a plough on it. He
asked what is the procedure, there. Mr. MacKinnon replied that the supervision in the areas is: three super-
intendents in three areas - in one of those areas - the centre area - there are two divisions (a north and a
centre area); in the west, there is just the western superintendent in the western area, and one in the east; all
of these areas have their foremen and crews and equipment; in the east, the superintendent there is responsible
for just that area and when the storm starts, he, in turn, has his manpower delegated to certain areas in that
area - what he does in the east has no reflection upon what is being done in the centre - however, on completion
of any work in any one of those areas, the engineer in charge, Mr. Armstrong, is moving it back and forth so that
it complements the areas that are short because of either breakdowns or heavy storm conditions; as far as sanding
and salting - there has to be a heavier commitment of it in most of the centre areas because it is much more
built up and there is much more traffic; in the outlying areas or even in the residential areas, there is not the
same volume of traffic and the cars for the most part are all off the street - it is not so in the centre and
that is where a lot of our problems are, so that when you get an opportunity you either have to remoVe the snow
or, at least, to wing it back as far as possible - you can leave things, for example, just a seventeen to eight-
foot passageway in the eastern area, where you cannot, in the centre, or in the west - some of the western areas
are like the centre area in that the down-town portion (for example, the area of West Saint John near the harbour)
is a built-up area like the city centre -- so that each area has its own complement of manpower and equipment and
they are delegated to handle that area.
Councillor Davis noted that generally at these meetings we deal in generalities - and that there is a
Committee of Councillors, chaired by Councillor Cave, with Councillors MacGowan, Hodges and himself, and that
Committee meets regularly with Mr. MacKinnon at which time the Committee is given particulars. He stated he does
2,70
~
Snow.
~ont-rtll
tf/pr/r 5 .
Cbmm/t-tee
Illtttrl7ate
FrA-/112 tll1
stl>eet-s
.L n 6Ui'701J7de
I""t'?~,,~~
not know if other Councillors knew it, but there is a Snow and Ice Control Division, and it has nothing
whatever to do with garbage - there is a Garbage Division - the garbage collections rules and regulations
will be going out, he assumes, with light bills, for the information of the public. Insofar as snow and
ice control is concerned, he stated that it is not always the easiest thing to handle because right after
a snow storm, while they are clearing snow, there can be a flood, and they are out looking for the
catchbasins and trying to open them - and they are shifting the crews from one job to another - but there
are judgement decisions to make and they are made three times daily. He pointed out that you can over-
react for eight hours, or for a couple of hours, but you cannot do it for a week-end -- so, he thinks it
should be clear to everybody that there are decisions to,be made but they are not for long periods - if
you do make a mistake, it is only for an hour or so until you can undo it; so, he wanted to simply say
that he thinks the Department is doing a manful job - the Council has put some restrictions on the
Department but when the emergency arises, we lift these restrictions and tell the Department to do the
work because we are on a spot - that is the way adults act, and that is what we have been doing. He
stated he would like to commend the Department - he felt that the said Committee would concur in his
feeling that the reports that Mr. MacKinnon gives that Committee are very good - the Committee gets
details and he thinks that is what the Council Committees are designed to do.
.
I
Noting that the winter weather already this year has been exceptional in the variation in
temperatures interspersed with rain and freezing cold and snow, Councillor Gould expressed concern that,
if for the first three weeks of 1976 the City is 25% over-spent in its budget over the amount alloted,
and if this situation were to continue at that rate, there would be an effect on the 1977 budget. He
asked what is the City going to do, in this regard. Mr. Barfoot replied that the City should make some
attempt to recover those expenditures during the balance of 1976 - it is a six-month budget, and we will
have to hope for less severe winter weather. Councillor Gould noted that it is being admitted now that
the service that is being provided at the budget cut-back rate is inadequate, and he asked, supposing we
did work at that 25% over-expenditure of the budget allotment to provide some kind of service, what does
it really mean for a deficit to be carried over - probably not in 1977, but, more appropriately, in 1978.
Mr. Barfoot replied that it means approximately $250,000.00.
1
Councillor Parfitt noted that the Engineering and Works Department is a very important one,
providing essential services, and she stated she was wondering how over 1,000 city employees, including
Council, would react to get upwards of three-quarters of a-million dollars from a 3% to 5% reduction in
wages, and get that type of money so that essential services can be supplied.
.
Pointing out that he did say that the efforts of the Works Department were appreciated, so far
as he was concerned, Councillor Kipping commented that he had just asked that Department to try to find
the best way of doing its very difficult duties. He asked how much money the Department spent on the
week-end of January lOth and 11th on snow control Mr. MacKinnon replied that the amounts of money he had
indicated were for week ending periods and were not for the days - the figures he had given for the
individual days were the number of men actually working on those two days - the money was for the full
week. Councillor Kipping noted that regarding the January 10th week-end which was the week-end he was
complaining about, that the Works Department had over-reacted, in a negative way, there were 2 men
working on January 10th; he added that he thinks that proves his point. Mr. MacKinnon stated he believes
that was probably the day that Councillor Kipping called him with regard to street conditions. In
further comments, Mr. MacKinnon noted that if the Council feels that crews should go out at any time it
has to appreciate that it costs money; he added that not only would he request that the crews go out, he
would request that the Council give the Department the money, too. Councillor Kipping replied that he
has never yet asked for a crew to be sent out, nor does he deal with isolated incidents - he stated he
was dealing here with the over-all picture of the City on that week-end during which the intersections
were not passable in many cases hills were not passable and sidewalks were very treacherous - indeed,
most of our roads, streets and sidewalks were extremely treacherous on the week-end of January lath and
11th, and no-one here can deny that, and that is why he says there was an over-reaction in a negative way
on that week-end - this past week-end the service was excellent - we were overwhelmed by it, and all he
is saying is, to find the middle way - don't do it all one way one time, and all the other way, another
time.
I
Councillor MacGowan stated that she was present at the Works Committee meeting and heard Mr.
MacKinnon tell the Committee the problems; she noted that, unfortunately, no matter what you do, it is
wrong - you over-react one way, or you over-react the other way; she thinks this is ridiculous. She
noted it was mentioned that the Council should have the whole story, and stated she feels this is very
important, and if Councillor Kipping is not satisfied with the storey as Mr. MacKinnon has tried to glve
it to the Council, she suggested that if he had an hour he could do it in much more detail, and that she
thinks he should go and find out exactly what happened. She noted that it costs a great deal more to
remove ice than to remove snow, because the salt is very expensive, and no matter what you do, you have
problems and you have to send out your graders. Mr. MacKinnon confirmed that this observation is essentially
correct - if it is just ploughing of snow - for example, in these storms, we would rather see just snow,
but with,the ice and the changing weather conditions these present problems. In reply to Councillor
MacGowan's 'question as to whether a mild spell of winter weather would give an opportunity to off-set the
over-expenditures in the Department's snow control budget, and thus balance it, Mr. MacKinnon explained
that if that were to happen - that we had a mild week that did not require work on that budget, or, as
happens during the winter thaws when there is no snow at all on the streets the streets will break up 'and
pot-holes develop - so, when the pot-holes develop the manpower will go on street maintenance, which is a
separate budget and this work is then not reflected on the winter street budget - however, it then starts
to balance out and there will be a reduction in that budget. He added that, at this point, there is not
any indication that you can project the $20,000.00 to something at the end of the 16-week period - you
just have to hope that it will balance out and that it will show a favourable figure at the end of the
budgeted period.
.
I
,
On the subject of alternate parking, Councillor MacGowan stated she thinks the ploughs could do
a much better job, and the citizens would be much happier if the alternate parking were enforced, and if
in the areas where there are driveways the residents would park their cars in those drivewayS rather than
on the street. She felt that such regulations and co-operation by residents would also facilitate summer
street cleaning work.
1
Councillor Green spoke on the importance of maintaining snow control measures to meet the needs
of the citizens of this city and of those who travel to and from this city, and of ensuring that monies
are available to provide such service in a budget that the Province of New Brunswick can be prevailed
upon to approve. Councillor Cave spoke of the difficulties facing the Works Department in trying to
maintain snow control service in as economical a manner as possible. Councillor A. Vincent spoke in
commendation of Mr. MacKinnon and his Department regarding their.efforts to provide the snow control
service.
.
Mr. Barfoot advised that the item regarding payment of insurance premiums was placed in error
on the legal session section of the Council agenda, and he requested that it be now taken up in open
session of Council.
....1
".
'-:>"'1'1
I'eIJ 4 . -
.
1
I
.
l.:znsu~ne
j/re;n/ Uh1
1111-1-/ - .
....Ln-f'/~i-i()
73d.
Jns~~e
pIYJ,fers
..,:;dv/StJ./'9'
PP.aJ'1~
/J1,;f-e :8~
/!l1do/'StJI1
ksuran
I ~-hI.
1? tJ7'd/1,4s-f.
.r/J'/,~e Ie/:
#o..f'E" Cn;:,n
I /~d.
IlrenCi/s
.
....
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named item be now placed on the open section of
the Council agenda at this time.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of Fire Insurance premium.of $62,175.09, and of Comprehensive General Liability premium of $48,774.00,
for 1976 coverages as explained on the submitted report from the Commissioner of Finance to the City Manager.
Councillor A. Vincent asked when the City is going to call ~enders for this insurance coverage. Mr.
Park stated that, on the matter of insurance, tenders were called for the years 1974 and 1973 - in each case,
there were two replies received and a selection was made; the whole matter was handled for the City by three
brokers and each of the three brokers has, in turn, been assisted by an advisory committee of two insurance
agents; the three brokers and the six advisory board members this year considered the situation in the insurance
market and their recommendation to him was that it was rather pointless calling tenders again in the very res-
tricted market that is available under today's conditions for the three insurance lines to be placed - and so, on
the strength of this recommendation, he asked them to do what has been done to date, namely, negotiate the
insurance premium, and the insurance premium for each of these two lines is now before the Council; there will be
a third one coming, which will be for the fleet but that is not quite ready for submission to Council, at the
moment. Councillor A. Vincent stated that all he is trying to point out is that it is very interesting to him
that out of the five cases before the Federal Anti-Inflation Board the one that was withdrawn and "put under the
rug" was the insurance claims, or the insurance prices, and stated that he notes that number two and and that he
will not become a criminal of Canada by violating those rules of the said Board, that this number two is up
fourteen per cent, which is above the guidelines of Canada, and he will not violate a law. He felt that if the
Council adopts this fourteen per cent it will be violating the law because it is above the guidelines that they
can charge, or are we only talking about wages. Mr. Park stated that, in commenting on the fourteen per cent, it
should be noted that this is by reference to the total premiums - it is not a rate increased - the rate increase
is up eleven per cent over 1975; the principal reason for the total premiums being up is explained in the ref-
erence to the new arenas - the premiums expressed in a dollar amount naturally have to refer. to the values that
are covered - we have an increase in values as well as an increase in rates - the two combine to form, of course,
an increase in the amount of the premiums. He stated he thinks, to be significant, it is t~e percentage increase
in the rates that would perhaps fairly be compared to any Federal wage and price guidelines - and in this particula
case, the rate increase is an eleven per cent increase for 1976 over 1975. Councillor A. Vincent pointed out
that only a ten per cent increase is permitted.
Moved in amendment by Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended .by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of Fire Insurance premium of $62,173.09, and of Comprehensive General Liability premium of $48,774.00,
for 1976 coverages as explained on the submitted report from the Commissioner of Finance to the City Manager, and
that the matter of these premium rates be forwarded to the Anti-Inflation Board of the Federal Government for the
Board's approval.
Councillor A. Vincent commented that he understands that the said Anti-Inflation Board has the auth-
ority to roll back wages - the Board certainly has the authority to roll back premiums.
Mr. Park stated that, anticipating questions on this matter, he had arranged for representatives of two
of the brokers to be present at this meeting, and that the two gentlemen were present, if the Council would like
to hear from them either on the matter of the fire insurance, or the liability insurance. Councillor A. Vincent
stated that he is in favour of paying the bill, and if the Federal Anti-Inflation Board says it is alright, that
is fine with him and he is satisfied. He stated that he is all for paying the bill, but he has had some bitter
experience, the last two weeks. In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's questions, Mr. Park advised that the six
members on the advisory board are Armstrong & Bruce, George Pridham, Hall & Fairweather Ltd., Robert Scott,
Eugene Zed and Buckley Insurance Ltd.; the two insurance agents who assisted him in the presentation of the
report now before Council are representatives of J. M. & C. W. Hope Grant, and Anderson Insurance Ltd. Coun-
'cillor MacGowan stated that recently she had heard that there is an insurance company that deals only with church
insurance and that she finds that their coverage is anywhere from fifty to one hundred per cent better, all the
way along the line, for the same premium. She asked if there is such a thing as municipal insurance - any
company that covers municipal insurance only. Mr. Park stated he does not know the answer, and therefore he
would like to refer that question to one of the two gentlemen present. Mr. Mike Brown of Anderson Insurance Ltd.,
in reply, stated that he knows of no market that specializes only in municipal insurance; primarily -- no. He
added that they have gone to the very few markets that there are, that write it at all - over the last four or
five years each year - and he thinks that Mr. Park's comments are quite correct. He stated that he knows the
company (Church Insurance) to which Councillor MacGowan was referring, and there is nothing similar for munici-
palities, that he knows of. Councillor MacGowan suggested that it be looked into because our own insurance
brokers get the business, if there is such a thing. Mr. Brown replied that they would be glad to, but he does
not believe there is - however, they will certainly look into it.
Councillor Davis noted that the rate for the arenas is very high - it is nearly three times as high as
the other. He asked what it would be, unsprinklered. Mr. Roger Aske of J. M. & C. W. Hope Grant Ltd., in reply,
stated that if you are referring to the three new rinks specifically, the rate on the Hilton Belyea Arena on
Lowell Street is particularly high because at the present time it is rated as an unsprinklered building - all
these three rinks were equipped with sprinkler equipment when they were constructed but at the Lowell Street rink
the water supply is inadequate at the present time - he understands from consultation with the City that that
water pressure will be brought back into shape this spring or in the summer at which time that very high rate
there will be reduced to the level of the Charles I. Gorman Arena on University Avenue. He explained that the
original rate at the Hilton Belyea Arena as originally quoted was 2.5% but it must be borne in mind that the City
of Saint John received considerable credit and hence where said Arena is currently $12,390.67 the original
premium as promulgated by underwriters amounted to a premium of $22,390.00 and the credit has been applied to
that premium to bring it down to that level - the credit enjoyed by the City of Saint John. He stated that the
rate on the Charles I. Gorman Arena is 27~ (.27%) and regarding the rate on the Stewart Hurley Arena on the
Hickey Road, the water pressure is marginal for that rink and there is a one-third credit given to that rink at
the present time -- this means that the rate on this rink is two-thirds of the rate on the Hilton Belyea Arena if .
the rate on that arena is 2.53%. Councillor Gould asked if those rinks improve in water pressure will the City be
reimbursed for some of that premium. Mr. Aske replied that if the water pressure improves, the City can be
immediately reimbursed. He was asked by the Mayor how a rink is assessed, from the viewpoint of what will burn
and what the danger is, and he replied that this is not his particular job - it is the job of the Insurance
Advisory Organization who inspect the rink. He stated that, however, he can comment that the metal rinks - metal
construction - are particularly susceptible to collapse should a fire occur and the insulation in those rinks is
the real fire hazard he understands, from the Insurance Advisory Board. He added that rinks generally have a
poor reputation across the country.
I .,
'Y*} ,)
....1-
~
,
.znSUrd7h~e
~1't?/"1/U~
41'71/- .Lndd/
'231ft!.
ah7m<!!"'.lJL~/p.
&.7/Yd~e t"6;y:;s
Hl"e ~pIJce
;P",IJce :7)~
F/re dl-C-
.;266-27'/
~ler/op ..>t;
In reply to the following questions put by Councillor M. Vincent: who took the flow tests for
the Hilton Belyea Arena, and who did the sprinkler tests: Mr. Aske stated that the flow tests were done
by the Insurance Advisory Organization, Special Risks Division; he presumes that the sprinkler tests were
done by the said Advisory Organization. In reply to the further question as to when was the information
supplied to himself as an agent for the policy, regarding the readings and results they found from taking
the tests, that the supply was inadequate, he stated that it was not supplied to him until recently but
it was supplied to the City and to the contractor in April, 1975. In reply to the query as to when the
rate of .783 struck, that is when were the rates for the rinks struck, he stated that those rates were
struck about three weeks ago - not prior to him getting the results of the tests. Councillor A. Vincent
asked who took the tests of the sprinklers at the Hilton Belyea Arena. Mr. Aske replied that it was the
Insurance Advisory Organization, Special Risks Division, which is an organization set up especially to
maintain and inspect... Councillor A. Vincent interjected with the question as to whether Mr. Aske would
be surprised if they did not take any tests, and with the request for the date and the name of the man
who took the tests. Mr. Aske replied that he cannot give that information at the present time but he can
obtain it for Councillor A. Vincent. Councillor A. Vincent asked that Mr. Aske get it for him. Coun-
cillor A. Vincent asked Mr. Barfoot on what date he gave permission for these tests to be taken. Mr.
Barfoot replied that he was not personally involved in the giving of tests and he would have to defer
that question to the Works Department to provide that information. In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's
question as to whether he would be surprised that no tests were taken, he stated he would be surprised.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if Mr. Barfoot knows of any tests being taken. Mr. Barfoot replied that he
has not received the results of any tests, but it is not normal for him to receive test results in
matters like these. Councillor A. Vincent asked if Mr. Barfoot would be shocked if he told Mr. Barfoot
there were no tests taken. He concluded his questions by stating he will wait until a convenient time in
this matter. He then asked if he could be told whether or not the sprinkler system is working in the
Lowell Street rink under discussion, or will ever work. Mr. Aske replied that he understands from the
Insurance Advisory Organization that the water supply at this Lowell Street arena is inadequate to
operate a sprinkler system to make it worthwhile. Councillor A. Vincent stated that his information,
without prejudice, is that it is not the water system - it is the sprinkler system. He asked if that
could be verified. He added that he has gone into the matter because he has this before Council before,
consulting with the consultants, and that he maintains publicly that there is no sprinkler system in that
rink that works. Mr. Aske replied that he does not know what the routine is in this matter because it is
not part of his work. Councillor A. Vincent asked that Mr. Aske and the City Manager, or somebody, get
together and just tell him how they make the tests and how him how to make the tests, because he is
contending that even if we put a 36-inch main up to that rink that the sprinkler system will not work.
Councillor MacGowan asked Mr. MacKinnon if he has received notification that the sprinkler
system is not working, or that there is inadequate water pressure there. He replied that his Department
may know something about it - he does not personally know anything about it - Mr. Remete, the Engineer,
is handling it regarding the engineering portion of it. Councillor MacGowan felt that if this is the
case, we should have been notified of such, and she stated that she would therefore ask Mr. MacKinnon if
there is such a report that he bring it in to the Council. Mr. Barfoot stated he thinks it was pointed
out very early in the project, when the selection of the arenas procedure was going on, that the water
supply at the Hilton Belyea Arena was deficient and would have to be improved in order to give proper
service.
Councillor M.-Vincent supplied the following information: the Insurance Advisory Organization
is the insurers advisory organization who are a rating agency for the insurance 'agents and for the '
insurance industry, and they are made up of professional engineers, et cetera who do various tests,
basically in sprinklered occupancy but in other types of buildings which may be insured, and they have no
responsibility to report to the owners of a building or buildings on the results of their findings -
their responsibility is to provide a rating to the insurance agents who sell fire insurance in a par-
ticular area - and in some cases they will contact management or owners and advise them of their results
or their findings and make recommendations as to what they might do to lower the rate, but it would not
surprise him if we found out that staff did not have that Advisory Organization's results because,
specifically, their responsibility is to report to people such as the insurance agents who are doing
business. He asked if Mr. Aske could clarify that subject. Mr. Aske commented that a meeting was held at
the Insurance Advisory Organization with Mr. Remete and himself and members of the said Organization and
these pressures were discussed and the test graphs were actually examined at that time, at that meeting.
He added that he has not seen charts for all three rinks, whereas Councillor A. Vincent was mentioning
one' rink, he noted.
Councillor Kipping stated that with regard to the increased insurance rates that are referred
to in the above motion and amendment to the motion and that are eleven per cent in each case, he thinks
that that is within the guidelines of the wage and prices control authority, and he added that it might
be unnecessary, in view of that, to send it. He stated he would favour doing it if he thought we were
above the guideline, but he does not think we are, and, therefore, what is the sense in making ourselves,
perhaps, look silly in forwarding ~he matter to the Anti-Inflation Board.
Question being taken, the amendment to the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors A.
Vincent, Green, M. Vincent, Pye, Gould and Hodges voting "yea" and Councillors Kipping, Davis, Cave,
MacGowan and Parfitt voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent asked that an item be placed on the agenda of this meeting, having to do
with commendation of the Salvage Corps and Fire Police, in regard to a recent fire at 266 Waterloo
Street.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above named item be placed on the agenda at this
time.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that Numbers 1 and 2 Companies of the Salvage Corps and
and all other City staff involved, including the Police Department, be commended for their
with relation to the recent fire that occurred at 266-274 Waterloo Street.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
Councillor A. Vincent commented that due to the care taken by the Salvage Corps and Fire Police .
embers in their work, most of the furniture was saved at 266 Waterloo Street, according to his information,
on the ground floor and on the second floor in the above noted fire;'.
~
"""
2'1 ~3
~/"fe r.
.;;eyPlqe
('p//ee-#7 ())?
sy;;-h?m
bl,;;t/J;;,ffe
~-,..f~W'
I CtJM/7l/~
$/7p/e
LEG A L
I n;:/J7~~
-t"-/tJ/7 nb?m-
I
e,& .J;~e, .
Aepl ~h$li?
FAaht'h/.se .J-
~I'eem.e>>{,
{..:'/ff/ /J1;1nS/
. AM.
G~ /J1fr.
:Z;Jm~t?$
(J/a/,;n
1?tJJt!?.I'r
lYe; -/-er.s
I C/~ /J1fY'.
.
1
I
.
ll....
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that with regard to the brief presented by Mr. George F. Teed on
the subject of garbage collection, the said brief be received and filed and considered in relation to the dec-
isions on the new Garbage By-Law.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
The meeting adjourned to Committee of the Whole at this time, and at 9.55 o'clock p.m. the Committee
arose and the Mayor resumed the Chair in legal session of Council.
Discussion ensued regarding the presentation made in Committee of the Whole by Mr. K. Walls, Chairman
of the Transportation Committee, in connection with a letter received by the committee from City Transit Limited
concerning the company's financial position and the question of continuing the bus system. Mr. Rodgers noted
that City Transit Limited has said it is terminating the bus service January 31st, 1976, and he stated that
suppose the company should terminate the bus service then he expects that the Council will want some legal action
taken, and that he would like at this time a general auth~rity, if that does take place, for him to engage legal
counsel to take whatever action is necessary. He stated that he requires a motion in this regard.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be authorized to engage a legal counsel
to examine the franchise agreement between the City of Saint John and City Transit Limited in anticipation of
termination of the contract by City Transit Limited.
Consideration was given to a report, dated January l6th, 1976, from the City Manager regarding the
Robert Waters claim for damages, which notes that the agreement with Mr. Waters which the Council on January
13th, 1975 authorized be executed, expired on December 31st, 1975 and that two alternatives are open, as outlined
in his letter to Council, and that he recommends that alternative number one be pursued, namely, that a meeting
be set up of the Council Committee, City staff, and Mr. Waters to attempt to renew the Agreement of January 13th,
1975 -- and notes that this alternative may be justified on the grounds that the City was in the process of
replying to j~. Waters concerning the claim when the Agreement expired.
Mr. Barfoot advised that the City attempted to get some additional advice on the value of the claim of
Mr. Waters and this advice could not be completed before the weather has kind of closed in on us, so that some
advice could come back to Council on the value of the claim; in the meantime the above mentioned agreement
expired on December 31st, 1975; he believes in all fairness to Mr. Waters that we should attempt to renew the
agreement that has expired, for a period of, say, six months - in any event, long enough to get the assessment
completed and go through the stages of meeting with him and trying to set up the value of the claim.
The Council members, following discussion of the above matter, agreed that the matter will be brought
to open session by a recommendation from the City Manager, at the next meeting of Council.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
JJ:::L ~~
Common erk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-sixth day
of January, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations, and
J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply, of the
Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community
Planning and Development, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police, P. Clark, Fire Chief, A. W. C. Robertson,
Deputy Fire Chief, G. Baird, Commissioner of Economic Development, D. McCaig,
Planning Assistant, and J. Brownell, of the Recreation and Parks Department
The Reverend Layne Daggett, pastor of Hillcrest United Baptist Church, offered a prayer which opened
the meeting.
274
~
;Pd-~r f
tP~"!/
;?1t(Il/(:O~/
/e1JourIfe4-
-1-/0)'7$ tbl7$ul6
/n.f Pltl"eaa
2Jept; /Ylu I?
/l#<il/rs
/J/pd-)(y !'eo
J?ee/!q.-jb.rls
~(od.-
':vet",.3/, Ir7.
$f/ru~e /aA-e
IJ/ater :50/;&
~()eh h/7lo,hd
;valer "'>O/j7~
e~/prl//e
~/V-.a in S .
heldhtJuse
:gtt/Ytl'/~
'per.m/~s
{:bUll. .4 tIi'l1Cl!'h
JrUMJ / h.ff-:
r-rM/7fs (h~
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
.
January 12th last, be confirmed.,
Councillor Kipping noted that at the commencement of the January 12th Council meeting he had
asked how soon the Council might expect a report from the City staff on the proposal made to Council on
December 22nd last by Mr. Peter E. Grady for the formation of a Municipal Labour Relations Consulting
bureau with the advice there was a possibility of financial assistance being provided to municipalities
via the Department of Municipal Affairs with respect to Labour Relations problems, and with the request
for Council's support of his proposal. Councillor Kipping further noted that it was stated at the
January 12th meeting that this matter was to be on the agenda of the Personnel Committee, and he asked if
Councillor Green, Chairman of the said Committee can advise whether any response is coming to Council'
soon from the Committee in this matter, as a report or recommendation, because it seemed to be a matter
of some urgency, at that time. In reply, Councillor Green stated that the matter was just briefly
discussed, and the meeting of the Committee that was arranged for Thursday, January 22nd last, had to be
cancelled due to the snowstorm - therefore, the matter has not been brought back up again; he presumes
that the Committee 'will endeavour to arrange a meeting on January 20th. Councillor Kipping asked if it
would be the hope of the Committee that it might bring in a recommendation for the next meeting of
Council. Councillor Green replied that he would hope that the Committee would have something on the
matter, and he added that the Committee will report at the next Council meeting to the Mayor and Coun-
cillors.
1
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held
on January 19th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins .
RESOLVED that the following reports be received and filed,
namely:- Technical and Inspection Services (and Plumbing) for December; Water and Sewerage Division of
the Works Department for December; the quarterly report of the Recreation and Parks Department covering
the period of October through December 31st, 1975.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Councillor Davis noted that the number of pounds of chlorine per million gallons used in the
Spruce Lake system went up in December, 1975 to 10.2 compared to 2.8 in December, 1974, and that the
number of pounds went down in the Loch Lomond system, using 14.3 in December, 1975 compared to 17.1 in
December, 1974, and that the amount of chlorine used in both sources is reaching the point where they are
both about the same. He asked if there is any particular reason for the huge increase in usage of this
chlorine in the western water supply. Mr. Barfoot replied that he did not have any explanation of that, I
and he will be pleased to obtain that information.
Councillor Davis asked how much use is being made of the University of New Brunswick in Saint
John field house, noting that the City has made quite a contribution towards that facility. Mr. Brownell,
in reply, supplied the following information:- the Recreation and Parks Department is basically running a
tennis and jogging programme, and the field house has extra-curricular use sponsored by the Department of
some schools - basically, those are the three programmes that the Department is doing, now; the field
house is definitely being used to quite an extent - and the Department is also running some keep-fit
classes in the mornings - basically, their programmes in the mornings are tennis and keep-fit classes,
and in the evening another tennis programme on Tuesdays and Fridays, and a jogging programme on Tuesdays;
there is a men's recreation basketball league which the Department sponsors, in part, but it is not
instituted by the Department.
Councillor M. Vincent noted that the amount of increase in monies derived from building permits
issued in December, 1975 as compared to December, 1974 is about three and one-half times, yet the com- 4It
parison table of the December, 1975 Building and Plumbing Report, shows in the column entitled "Accumulated
Revenue for Year" only $52,000.00 more in 1975 as per 1974. He asked for an explanation in this regard,
and whether the December, 1975 figure for revenues from building permits is projected in the 1975 accumulated
revenue figure. Mr. Barfoot felt that the column entitled "Accumulated Value for Year" has to be examined
for both 1975 and 1974, which shows that over the year the two columns under discussion have balanced
out, which reflects the difference between the building permit fees for the year. Councillor M. Vincent
stated that he will find out further information in this matter from the City staff, later on.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if he could have a progress report on the "bootleg" permits that he
sked for at the meeting last month when he was told they were looking into and going to prosecute. He
stated he has not received any information through the local newspaper to the effect that it has been to
court, and he therefore wants to know what we are doing, or is it true that we are not going to take this
fellow to court, who is actually taking permits and selling them, which is what he calls a "bootleg"
plumbing permit. He asked for a progress report in this matter from the City Solicitor. Mr. Rodgers
stated that the only progress report he could give at this time is to check into further what Councillor
A. Vincent is raising. He stated that he recalled Councillor A. Vincent talking about the matter before
and he believes he used the term "bootleg" permits. He advised that he is not familiar with that term,
at all, and he will just have to research it further. Councillor A. Vincent asked for some guarantee
that it would be, adding he did so because after he made that remark he received a couple of telephone
calls and one was not too nice, and he is certainly going to raise the matter again - and he cannot help
that these permits were done on certain people's homes. He stated he felt that Councillor Cave, who is
doing an excellent job on the Master Plumbers Licensing Board, could support him. He suggested that
Councillor Cave could help in enlightening the matter because Councillor Cave is doing an excellent job
on the licensing permits and he knows that this is going on. Councillor Cave stated at the present time,
the Board is expecting to have a meeting on January 20th, and he would hope that Councillor A. Vincent
would wait until the Board has that meeting; he added that he is sure that the Board will distribute the
report from that meeting to all the Councillors. Councillor A. Vincent replied that he is willing to
wait, and that he just wanted to let Councillor Cave know that he is supporting the Board. Councillor
Cave added that if Councillor A. Vincent will wait until January 20th, the Board will make a complete
report. Councillor Davis asked for an explanation regarding what is supposed to be going on. Councillor
A. Vincent advised that there are people who have master plumbers'licenses - they get their license from
the liCense inspector and they are giving it to. people to do their own work - it is what we call "bootlegging".
Councillor Cave stated that, further.to what Councillor A. Vincent has said, at the present time our
legal advisors are looking into the possibility of cancelling a few licenses, and he would hope that the
Board would get the support of this Council because we have given them all the opportunity in the world
I
I
.
~
""
.
bJp/-;/3
O<JMr$ e-
/)Jf?n?Jt?,.~j~
I F/17Ol.l1ci.;;/
S t-.;;leme
16t!~ ~r-
~JY-~
Setve-/1
e;;;5.P~eht-
iA.nae-r
r.a/I~y
//l1e
A'/et?hSe
. dlj/J?eeh?eA.
/JIe>n-c-h (1/
Jle,PPJ1t>"
I
"J>e:>tee
2Je;d:
7j.d/~; 174
C'tJet/"'ses d
U;v;J3..- $,:7:
7r0l/17//1,ff
C'P<<fSI!?$
dlH/ a.!I.. .,er61?7
c/ty
. $/ck ,/eaJ/e
7h&~rap~
t?fu/,?men
I
('rmv-/cl/o/l
q--;;JI'I'6'sfs,
e-!e.
I
{lrlme. .
jJf1ell enfu),h
p"".framme
Pa"k /hff
n;ekr
v/ola-l-/ t>h
et -H/:Ies ft?/
. Of' eGJJ?d~~
ticKets ~
ref?e> J'I7f-
c?ou./7,4/
V;>>~.-e'h~
....
>):/-5
,.,..
and it is exactly as Councillor A. Vincent has said - this is being done, and we have stopped it. Councillor A.
Vincent stated that he is one hundred per cent behind the Licensing Board, and he wants the Board to cancel these
licenses if they are not going.to do it right.
In reply to Councillor MacGowan's query regarding passes for the golf course being almost half in
volume for 1975 as compared to 1974, and regarding who receives passes, Mr. Brownell explained that they are not
passes in the true sense - they are season memberships that are sold to persons who want to play golf for the
season, and each pass costs $150.00 - ninety-five of the people who play golf at the Rockwood Park golf course
pay a daily green fee, actually; in 1975 there were approximately 15 season passes, and this year they have
dropped considerably.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the month of November last,
be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the City of
Saint John has constructed a 30-inch storm sewer pipeline along and under the Canadian National Railways Com-
pany's right-of-way at a point described by the Railway as Mile 84.21, Sussex Subdivision, and that the pipeline
crosses the railway at Ashburn Road and serves the Rockwood Avenue area, and that permission for this underground
construction is granted by the said Company through a license document which should now be executed in triplicate
by the Mayor and the Common Clerk, returned to the said Company for signing by the Company officers, and accomp-
anied by the $50.00 annual fee, be received and filed and as recommended therein, authority be granted for the
signing of the said license document by the Mayor and Common Clerk on behalf of the City, and that the first
year's rental of $50.00 be paid.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the Police Department comparative report, for the periods July
to December, 1974 and 1975, be received and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that as the liaison officer with the Police Department, he felt there were
three or four areas that should be brought to the attention of Council that the Department has been making SOIDe
strides in, and that, certainly, the above report indicates a reduction in the number of fatalities as compared
to previous years; the reduction in the number of juvenile prosecutions, which may be indicative of the fact that
some of the programmes being conducted by the Police Department as a preventative measure are taking effect on
the juveniles in our city; the first hit and run unit and the results they are getting in responding to hit and
run accidents; and, certainly, the Department's Community Relations Officer, Mr. Epton, and the results that he
has been getting with his programmes throughout the city have to be given worthwhile mention; the fact, he
thinks, that we are one of the very few municipal police departments in our part of the country that has a
qualified, recognized polygraph operator - again, indicative of the strides that the Police Department is taking;
and, very significant to him, on reading the report, was the tremendous decrease in the amount of sick leave -
that has been basically cut in half from 1974 to 1975.
Chief Ferguson supplied the following information, during the ensuing discussion period, in reply to
queries from Council members:- there presently are 30 of the Police personnel attending the training courses at
the University of New Brunswick in Saint John - their progress is excellent - they are doing extremely well in
the courses they are taking, they are very interested - they attend them on their own time and when they are
working they attend them on the Police Department's time (City time) - also, regarding those who are attending
the courses away from the city, the results are really excellent - there is excellent reaction from him as to the
results of the training received by the Police personnel - he added that we have expanded the courses at the
University of New Brunswick in Saint John to six this year - they are good programmes, good instructors and good
candidates; on the question of sick leave having been cut down greatly and whether this can be attributed to the
Police Department members becoming more professional - does this mean they are getting more able to defend
themselves, or they are getting healthier - he stated he would like to have the answer, adding that it is some-
thing that is very difficult - to cut down sick leave in Police departments - he would say that our people are
getting better paid and they feel greater Obligation to COme to work, when, maybe in the past', some would want to
stay home with a head cold - he would say that our people are coming to work when they have head colds and head
aches and sore arms, and this is refreshing; on the question as to whether the polygraph equipment is being used
as much as we should be using it, he stated he would hope that it will be used more - it is a new thing in the
Department - he has done some research in Regina, which has one for the same population that we have, and that
city is going to train another man - he stated that the equipment works and obtains results, and he is hoping we
can soon bring it to show the Council how it does work - We have been extremely busy - but it really works; 'on
the question as to whether the evidence gathered from a polygraph can be admitted to court, he stated that it is
an aid in the investigation and if you are lying and the machine is telling you, we find that the people break
down and give the information in a statement, and this is good evidence - in .reply to the comment that the
results of the polygraph are not admissable in court, he stated that the side things are; on the question as to
whether the percentage, convictions, arrests, et cetera, have kept pace with the percentages of increases of
arrests, prosecutions for offences, driving charges, and the New Brunswick Liquor Control Act - or have impro-
ved -- he stated he contends the offences have been taking place but our people are getting top professional
training - they are becoming expert, and he likes to use the words "top professionals", and when they go out in
the field, highly trained, the individual pOliceman sees more that is going on and he does more work and he does
it easier - he finds great relaxation in working when he is well-trained, and he is doing a better job -- we have
had a very wonderful prevention programme and he is hoping maybe the next report it will payoff - there has been
reduction in the juvenile area - he is delighted about it and is hoping it continues - and regarding this pro-
gramme "shoplifting and stealing" that the merchants of this city paid for we have had tremendous response and
young people have said to him they are not going to steal because they could be sent to gaol -- it is serious, he
continued - crime is serious and it is on the increase throughout Canada - he is hoping we can turn the tables;
on the question as to whether the party who is accused refuse to submit to a polygraph test, he stated the person
can - it is just like giving a statement - but the tests work; on the question of parking meter violations, and
of the number of 19,920 tickets issued for the six-month period in 1975 how many were paid for, and the comment
made by Councillor A. Vincent that he is convinced that that figure could be improved, the Chief advised that
there are tickets that are cancelled for cause - a record is kept in the Department of every ticket that is
cancelled for cause, and the reason - there are only two people in the Department who have the authority to
cancel a ticket, and the record shows the person, the reason, the date and the time in this connection -- there
are some tickets outstanding of cases where the individual did not come forward to pay the fine after the ticket
was issued, or the Department did not go out to collect these fines. Councillor A. Vincent asked how large a
number of outstanding tickets there are. The Chief, in reply, pointed out there were great problems in this
regard during the recent mail strike, and the Department did not follow up on tickets because it was too long
after. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he was referring to the period preceding the mail strike. He stated
that he would like to have a confidential report for the Council on the number of fines that were collected from
276
~
('d,P/t~/ ,R'tdf?<
~dKeW(/od h"t:
/lrea sewer
~n;;J/~ J:~
Ce>, ~ -I-"d,
/,;2)7/ (Om~.
$un/'/sefJl7-
trac-t~/1.s /-td.
Cr,s("t'lrE /1ve.
G'a.f?/~/ ,f'n>J'ee
J), 1(, ~ F:
au st?P/a>%
....ff~//e$
?b()~;I8:;7r .
~wn~/(t~
4.T C1J//a.5k~
<;- /l S.> e>C,
Pave/' CJh?.hf.
S~rtf'd- Ap/17.
1I1//-j;,.I?d'- de,
$ewe/' .;.ys~
G#e/s /l.ssoC'.
/~L
..<'dlhL,Ieyl7i-;
~.5-/ ~/~~
?'h>C't"P,n qi<-
~ed~t?I"W /-6d.
;y, $. #~. t:1P
C'~';;t'7/.k/J7 4-- 4
,(.;M-e/e/'t?~ $s. .
C'tJ//. $eK/er
~~l"'rJred'~
/~
,..(q.llCaS&:-r 5.
~q~"J7,;(/'.,c-c-~ ,
PI/: // &J7~~
/lss (7C'.
the said tickets.
The Chief replied that he can check and report back.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager's
January 22nd, 1976, the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice
services regarding the following named capital project, be paid:-
letter dated
for engineering
1.
Lakewood Heights Area Phase II
Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
Construction of Sanitary Sewer
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 5 (final)
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate
(final) dated January
$ 96,686.25 1
88,542.50
Nil
85,886.22
Number 5,
22, 1976 $ 2,656.28
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that with regard to the recommendation in the City Manager's
letter dated January 22nd, 1976, regarding payment of the Crescent Avenue capital project progress cer-
tificate Number 3 of Sunrise Contractors Ltd. in the sum of $3,024.00, payment of this progress estimate
be laid on the table until the next meeting of Council because the Land Committee wants to meet with
Sunrise Contractors Ltd.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted
for payment of the fOllowing construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering
services in connection with projects that have been undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic
Expansion:-
.
1.
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
(a) Goodyear Paving Limited
Western Approaches
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 12
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for pa~nent, Progress Estimate Number 12,
dated December 29, 1975
$1,285,044.50
1,326,522.54
198,978.38
1,082.049.43
$ 20,594. T3
(b) A. J. Callaghan & Associates
Eastern Approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 44,
dated January 6, 1976
I
$ 144,068.48
$ 640 . 00
(c) The'Power Commission of the City of Saint John
Street lighting installation for Eastern Approaches
Invoice dated December 5, 1975
$
3,728.51
2.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Sewer System
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved $ 170,600.20 .
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 50,
dated January 13, 1976 $ 11,105.60
East Residential Landbank
(a) Proctor & Redfern Ltd.
Engineering Services for External Services
Payments previously approved $ 15,404.54
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 8,
dated December 12, 1975 $ 288.60
3.
(b) New Brunswick Housing Corporation
External services
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 11
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 11,
dated December 22, 1975
$ 118,142.00 1
118,034.70
2,000.00
112,792.55
$ 3,242.15
I
Champlain and Lakewood Heights Collector Sewer
Proctor & Redfern Ltd.
Engineering services for Champlain Heights System
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 31,
dated January 12, 1976
$ 119,692.14
$ 1,469.19
Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 2,
dated October 31, 1975
$
$
36,394.79
9,161. 96
.
~
,..
....),,,..,
_, 6
,I,
/-4; A. e/1 6. Hazen Creek Sewage Treatment Plant
.$etv. M jPh Godfrey Associates Ltd.
t9olt' -I".h~ Engineering Services
Payments previously approved $ 35,836.85
/lS$tJt:'. Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 35,
dated January 16, 1976 $ 1,302.38
:Bays/Le 7. Phase II of Bayside Drive Reconstruction and Extension
Callaghan Contracting Ltd.
2Jn f'?~ Total value of contract $ 247,404.00
~ed. Total work done, Estimate Number 12 274,425.60
1C'a//~~an Retention 5% 13,721. 28
Payments previously approved 231,649.79
aht!~h Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 12,
/-f~ dated December 1975 $ 29,054.53
{?;:;use~~
I ~ff/'Y)';;~~
.
StJa s
$~:-~Jr
lI1ar/~/)11e
$ptZ ../-t-/L
I ~I"'~e:ffe
$:/- ~,;;JV
f?ar,b~tf.e
t!t?/J~ 4/1?e.
t/e.f/'r;/-&-/o
au/?, A"IP;'/
. :lJum,-P
Jo~./?s Ph
$<>1-C-,
Clf!ferhl/Ph
( //f;U/t!?;-
..I.#ke)
I
I
. ..zU/azfhe/d
/-t-L
C%t'tt-ICk S
s;;,l1a4-~vd,
$f!7~e'ha?
~kI. <.-t7,,.(tl
~
Councillor M. Vincent asked how many more payments are to be made on the Courtenay Bay causeway work.
Mr. Barfoot replied that on Goodyear Paving, western approaches, there is still $198,000.00 as retention - he
would think that there would be basically two more payments, at least. Councillor M. Vincent asked how much
money the City has realized to date through the penalty clause that was originally drafted up in that contract.
Mr. Barfoot replied that, to his knowledge, the penalty clause provision has not as yet been finalized - there is
some that the City is claiming. Councillor M. Vincent, referring to the said $198,000.00 retention, asked when
might those payments be presented to Council for payment. Mr. Barfoot explained that, normally, there would be a
certain amount held back for one year after completion of the contract. In further answer to the question, Mr.
Gabriel advised that the amount of liquidated damages are based on 249 days at $100.00 per day which is a total
of $24,900.00; as to how many more progress payments, he would suspect it would be at least two - he would have
to check that out with the engineers; as to when he thinks the two remaining payments might be presented to
Council for payment, he stated he does not have that information. Councillor Hodges asked what progress is being
made to have the traffic lanes on both ends of the causeway increased to relieve the traffic congestion, and Mr.
Barfoot advised that we have not as yet taken up discussions again with the owners of the land - however, this
matter will be coming up with the capital budget which should be before Council within a month.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
the invoice in the amount of $6,350.35 from Maritime Sod Ltd. for sodding at Shamrock Park, be paid, this work
having been approved in the 1975 capital programme.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Deputy
Commissioner of Administration and Supply of the Engineering and Works Department, with reference to the re-
commendations .adopted by the Common Council on January 12th last for re-drafting of the Garbage Collection By-
Law, requesting the approval of Council for deletion of the words, "lined with a removable plastic bag" in the
definition of the term, "Garbage container", thus permitting the use of metal or fireproof containers without
liners - and explaining that the Department's original intention was to reduce or eliminate the need to handle
metal containers due to the high rate of injury incurred from this action - however, after much consideration the
Department has decided that this requirement will create more expense and inconvenience to the citizen than the
resultant savings may be worth, and it is now felt that the change to curb side will satisfactorily reduce the
handling of such containers and the requirement of the plastic liners may not be justified - and further advising
that the draft of the proposed by-law that has been prepared by the City Solicitor reflects this change -- be
received and filed and the said change in the definition of the term "Garbage container" be approved.
Councillor Kipping asked if there are regulations under the said proposed by-law and if there is to be
any change in them if there are regulations under this by-law; he added that what he is really interested in
about that is the hours of the Howe's Lake disposal area - he asked if that comes under separate regulations
because he noticed it is not in the proposed by-law, as such. Mr. Barfoot replied that the said disposal area is
under the control of the Commissioner of Engineering and Works who has to authorize controlled entry and he has
the authority to set the hours of that area. Councillor Kipping asked if the Commissioner does it according to a
stated policy or laid-down regulations under the authority of the by-law - how does he determine these hours.
Mr. Barfoot replied that it is common sense and custom, economy and use and a number of other matters. Coun-
cillor Kipping stated that if it is to be common sense and custom, he would suggest that it has been recommended
to him that it would be a very great convenience for a great many people in the city if the Howe's Lake disposal
area were open on Saturday afternoons. The Mayor noted that this is a point that Councillor Kipping can bring up
later, when the Council would be considering the proposed new Garbage By-Law.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the definition of "Garbage container" also determines that a non trans-
parent plastic bag shall be of a capacity not more than 3 cubic feet, a gauge of not less than 1.5 mil., and
shall not weigh more than 50 pounds with contents, and she asked if a plastic bag will hold that weight, and if
it is supposed to hold that weight, adding that it seems unrealistic, to her. Mr. Gabriel advised that the 1.5
mil. bag, under specifications, carries in excess of 50 pounds and the majority of the by-laws throughout other
cities use the 1.5 mil. but we set the 50-pound limit - this is assuming that people handle anything with care;
if it is designed to handle 60 pounds but is handled in a rough manner it is only going to take so much abuse; as
for the 50 pounds, it is a reasonable figure for the plastic bag.
Councillor M. Vincent asked for an explanation of the term "fireproof container", stating that his
reason for asking is because the definition says "metal or fireproof container"" and he would like to have that
term defined now before the new by-law is passed, as he feels there might be some problems in that regard; he
added that the metal or fireproof container is a limiting use. He agreed to discuss the question further, later
in the meeting, when the proposed new Garbage By-Law would be discussed.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following named invoices:-
the recommendation of the City
D. Hatfield, Ltd.
D. Hatfield, Ltd.
D. Hatfield, Ltd.
Chitticks Sand & Gravel
Stephen Construction Company Limited
$ 10,943.35
$ 7,164.65
$ 10,412.05
$ 3,489.35
$ 7,608.05
dated December 17, 1975
dated January 5, 1976
dated January 5, 1976
dated December 17, 1975
dated December 15, 1975
278
~
{'/-I!I.5?~c/~
Carb ~f e
~-~w-
~JPfe
a/ht-~ll?er
r;(e.f-?nl'~/t)n
Cu/?J,Sh:t'e
tJp/ll?~zf/ p)'J
2Ju/??'p' ~t7U"'$
(//oWRS '(~Ke)
S,;{I: <>1-f"br/7(}()h
~,.,J.;Jt?'.e /e#
"~.$/d'e KI4IQ~
~S4-
~/oh!f .5andf/
~..fPL
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting a
draft of the proposed new Garbage By-Law that reflects policy changes adopted by the Common Council at
the January 12th, 1976 meeting and that includes the change in the definition of "garbage container",:
as outlined in Section 1 of the said draft, relating to the deletion of the wording "lined with removable
plastic bag" in Section l(f) (1), and advising that apart from the said change the draft by-law contains
the policy as adopted by Council, and that it is now in order for Council to give first and second
reading -- be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Provide for the Collection of Garbage in The
Ci ty of Saint John", be read a first time.
Councillor Green felt that it should be definitely noted what kind of a garbage container would
be allowed to be used for garbage. He noted that many people use a plastic container with a cover which
will burn - however, he feels that it should be made known definitely whether they would be allowed to
use them. He added that now is the time to determine this question - let us not eliminate .it and then
find out that we are wrong. Mr. Gabriel pointed out that in the draft by-law the definition of "garbage
container" is the same definition now as in the previous by-law; the term "fireproof container" does not
exclude plastic or vinyl containers because, really, they are considered fireproof when they do not set
ablaze, they will melt, but he thinks the use of the term "fireproof" is basically seeing that cardboard
cartons and other inflammable containers are noted used for the purpose of carrying garbage - so, basically,
what he is saying is that the metal and the plastic and vinyl containers will be permitted under this by-
law - however, something that would burn, like cardboard, is not a garbage container. The Mayor ex-
pressed the view that the use of'neatly tied cardboard boxes containing garbage (which has been the
practice with many people throughout the city for some time) cannot be eliminated from the public because
they have a right to put the garbage in the container they have, and not everybody has a spot in which to
store a large plastic or metal container, but they can keep their garbage in small bags; he cannot see
any problem - they have been doing it for years and he does not think there have been too many fires in
the back of garbage trucks from such garbage. Mr. Gabriel replied that that is not a major problem - he
does not think the Department has had too many fires in the back of the trucks. He stressed that the
regulation in the matter of the garbage containers has been in effect prior to the Council's adoption of
the recommendation to change the by-law, so we are not changing the type of garbage containers that were
permitted in the past; however, the definition of "containers" in the by-law certainly does exclude
cardboard boxes and paper bags, and things of this nature. He added that the problem is magnified with
curb service because, basically, they are putting garbage out into the city streets; if the garbage is
placed out in cardboard or paper containers early in the day before the collection time and it rains
during the day the garbage is still out and this just makes the problem greater. He pointed out that
cardboard and paper materials are classified as garbage in themselves and can be removed. The Mayor
stated that he has received telephone calls from citizens who are worried because in their apartments
they are able to put garbage into a small cardboard box and put it out the day it is going to be col-
lected, and they have been doing this for years - and he stated he does not think we see too much garbage
lying on the streets; he felt that as long as people can continue this practice, he thinks they will be
happy. Mr. Gabriel advised that the Department basically is not out to make sweeping changes but to
change the type of service in location - from ground level or somewheres in the.back yard, to curb side _
he is telling people who call him that if they have. done it in the past - that is, if they have packaged
their garbage in that particular way in the past that they continue to do so, and if they have any
problems, call the Department; so, we have to try it out, and look at it, and see how it works. Noting
that in his remarks Mr. Gabriel had stated cardboard boxes would be removed as garbage if they were
properly stacked in a neat fashion, Councillor Green felt that the public should be advised of this fact;
also, he felt that the public should be made aware of the fact that they can make use of plastic
garbage containers. He referred to the problem that some elderly persons would experience in getting
their garbage to the curb, and recalled that it was mentioned in previous discussion by himself and by
other Councillors that by contacting the City Manager regarding the particular problem that the City
Manager may arrange some service to help these particular elderly citizens out. He stated he feels that
as long as the public knows that some of the elderly citizens are not going to get hurt they will receive
the new by-law quite happily.
Regarding the matter of the hours of the dump opening at Howe's Lake, Councillor Kipping
advised that several representations have been made to him about Saturday afternoon dumping, and that
with reference to the matter of the problem at the said dump in that people leave garbage outside the.
gates he feels approximately ninety-five per cent of it is left there on Saturday afternoons and Sundays;
he ponted out that most people clean up their premises or do their jobs Saturday morning and then perhaps
try to get to the dump before it closes at 1.00 p.m. and they are finding that they often do not get
there before the dump closes and rather than take the garbage back home most people leave it right there.
He stated.he thi4ks the dump should be open on Saturday afternoons and he wonders if the Department could
consider some means of keeping it open on Saturday afternoons without additional expense or problems.
He stated he is aware that there are problems with the dump, as well. He stated that he would like the
Department, if possible, and if the Council agrees, to have the Department consider a Saturday afternoon
opening, adding that it would be a very great convenience and that it is now a very great inconvenience
for a large segment of the population. In reply, Mr. Gabriel noted that when it comes to providing a
public service it is his opinion and probably a little bit of the Department's experience that when the
dump was open on a Saturday the same kind of a problem existed immediately after the dump closed, Saturday
night, Whereby latecomers piled garbage outside the dump gate; he stated he feels that if the dump at
Howe's Lake were open on Saturday afternoon we will be eventually faced with the situation of looking at
it for Sunday because there is garbage outside the gate and because they are people who have not been
able to get there on time. He stated that, however, if Council wishes the Department certainly will look
into it - but Council knows what costs are involved, if any. Councillor Kipping asked that a report on
it be submitted to Council - a recommendation, perhaps - stating that he thinks we should try it.
Speaking on the question of using cardboard boxes as garbage containers, Councillor Cave noted that the,
eastern sector of the city has had this garbage pick-up for about thirty years and on a wet day you just
do not put garbage out in a cardboard box - if the weather is good, you use a cardboard box - no problem.
He recalled that opening the dump on Saturday was tried in the former Parish of Simonds and it was found
that there were eleven people using it and the Councillors of the Parish had a man out there with a
bulldozer looking after eleven people, so it was not economically feasible, and this Saturday opening,was
cut out. He felt that a Saturday afternoon opening of the Howe's Lake dump would not be the cure for the
leaving of garbage at the dump gate.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
Councillor M. Vincent advocated that the Department inform the public that the cardboard bo~es,
et cetera are going to be collected, as was done before, and that the public be made aware of what .
materials will be, and will not be, accepted for garbage collection, and noted that probably this will
make it a little easier for the Departments who are dealing with the matter of garbage collection because
a more co-operative public will be gained, which will make it easier for everybody.
~
"..
279
.
bk/1lA1'e
:l3y- A C7Jf/
{!U/1,J$/ de
et7//t!?d/~
.1
.1
.
CZa/1j;~~e
('tlJ76;J/" de.
~~ ~-~
RI77(;/1~
I $t'I1/tJh I
. a/h~e.l1s
(Jants re
~d,rpa":ye
'pleA-- ujJ
G9,hjd1'e
C'Pmf'a/ hel"
.
Cupj$/ /ffe
e,,/ke-/7 tJl1
1
I
bhf1JAJg'e
.:lJy-kw
.
~
Noting that this by-law was being brought before the Council because of the curb side aspect of it,
Councillor Davis questioned clause l(i): "curb side" for the purpose of garbage collection shall mean that area
behind the curb or edge of travelled road within 5 feet of said curb or edge of travelled road. He stated that
he believes the street he lives on has a sidewalk 8 feet in width, and he asked if the said clause l(i) means
that he has to measure 5 feet back from the curb and place his garbage in the middle of the sidewalk. He felt
that this clause would be no problem if the distance of 5 feet was increased. Mr. Gabriel replied that it could
be 5 feet, 8 feet, or 10 feet, but what it means is that there is an area of land, not a location - it does not
say that you must put the container 5 i'eet behind the curb at that point - it says, "that area .... wi thin 5 feet"
behind the curb, so you can place it right at curb side without blocking the sidewalk; the general directive is:
do not block a sidewalk, do not block a driveway, and place it as near to the curb as possible; he assured the
Council that if the situation or the logical location is 7 feet away from the curb the garbage will be picked up
- there has to be some sort of a limitation and this seems to be the most average one the Department could find.
Councillor Davis pointed out that clause l(j) says that curb service shall mean that garbage must be placed at
curb side for purposes of collection - and that this means that the Department wants the garbage put right on the
curb, in other words. In making negative reply, Mr. Gabriel stated that the preceding sub-section in clause 1
defines curb side, so if he refers here to curb service in the by-law it means the type of service the Department
is giving - on the question of "where is the curb?", the curb is that area defined under "curb side". Councillor
Davis stated that he is looking at the matter from a general point of view, not personal, and that most sidewalks
are wider than 5 feet, and he is therefore asking why 6 feet is not used in the by-law definition, rather than 5
feet. He added that there is no~point in putting garbage on the curb on the street on which he lives because the
children and so much traffic there would cause it be on the street very quickly. Mr. Gabriel explained that the
basis of the 5 feet is that he looked at a number of by-laws and the majority of them had 5 feet in them and the
Department accepted 5 feet. Councillor Davis pointed out that Mr. Gabriel is saying 5 feet from the sidewalk
edge - this is not 5 i'eet from the curb. Mr. Gabriel replied that the curb side as defined in the draft by-law
is 5 feet from the curb - that area behind the curb to a length of 5 feet. Councillor Cave pointed out that the
winter time is the time problems develop - when the garbage collector has to crawl over a snowbank to get the
base line of a private property to collect garbage, that is the time we run into trouble, in the eastern sector
of the city, so the people were asked, therefore, to put their garbage on top of the snowpile.
Councillor Davis stated that the point he is making is that it is all very nice for us to say that the
container has to be fireproof or a plastic bag of 1.5 mil. hut you can put out cartons if you like and we are not
going to bother you; he stated he thinks that if we are not going to bother anyone, it should be in the by-law,
and he thinks that if he is going to be allowed to put his garbage can on his lawn so that children can walk by
without touching it, we should say so in the by-law -- there should not be any exceptions, he feels. Mr. Gabriel
replied that he does not think we are saying that - he does not think we are saying that we are permitting people
to use cardboard boxes as garbage containers; he stated that all he said was that cardboard boxes are classified
as garbage and will be removed as garhage, not as garbage containers; as far as the curb side, we are not saying
that you put the garbage container on the grass in front of your house - we are spelling it out that it is within
an area of 5 feet of the curb.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the City has gone into this new Garbage By-Law because it has to,
financially - it feels that this is going to be a saving. She stated that if it is going to be a saving, the Dog
By-Law has to be enforced; otherwise, this new Garbage By-Law might as well be thrown out - it is going to cost
ost to clean up. She stated that the other point is: before there is third reading of the new Garbage By-Law,
will the City Manager be coming in with some recommendation about the cards he suggested for senior citizens (for
use regarding assistance required when they are unable to place their garbage at the curb side). The Mayor
replied that this point will be discussed and examined.
Councillor Davis, returning to discussion of the term "garbage container", noted that Section 3 of the
by-law in sub-section (1) thereof says "Subject to sub-section (2), no person shall place garbage for collection
in any receptacle other than a garbage container", which means that the garbage has to be in a garbage container,
which is to be a metal or fireproof container with cover, or a non transparent plastic bag; he is saying that if
you want it the other way, we should spell ,it out, that way. Mr. Gabriel pointed out that all he is saying is
that cardboard containers are not the containers for garbage, although in themselves, they are garbage.
As a point of clarification, Mr. Rodgers stated that there is nothing in the by-law now, or has been,
to permit people to put garbage in cardboard boxes. The Mayor stated this is correct, but people have been doing
it for years.
Councillor A. Vincent referred to Section 6(b) which states that garbage for collection shall not be
placed at curb side before 11 p.m. on the day preceding collection, and empty receptacles as well as all material
which the collector rei'uses must be removed from curb side by the householder of the premises from which they
came before 8 p.m. on the same day that garbage is collected. He asked if this will not cause a hardship for
people on shift work. He stated he received some enquiries about this regulation. He stated he received con-
firmation from the City Manager that this regulation is a change from the previous by-law, and he asked for an
explanation as to why we are doing this. Mr. Gabriel advised that it is a change that is related to the curb
side service; basically, it is to guarantee that people do not put garbage out and leave it out at curb side for
too long a period of time. Councillor A. Vincent stated that tradesmen who work on twelve-hour shift work that
precludes them abiding by the.hours prescribed in this regulation, would like to put out their garbage an hour
before the collection time. He stated he wonders if that problem should not be looked at. Mr. Gabriel replied
that, basically, we are not saying they have to put their garbage out at 11 p.m. the night before. Councillor A.
Vincent felt it is not right that a person would be violating the by-law if he places his garbage out prior to 11
p.m. on the day preceding collection, in a circumstance such as going away on holiday and catching an air flight
preceding the said 11 p.m. time on the said day - even if such a circumstance occurred only Once a year. He
stated that it was for this reason that he was bringing this point to Mr. Gabriel's attention. Mr. Gabriel
pointed out that there are always going to be extenuating circumstances in any by-law, and they will have to be
looked at, as the problems come up.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Provide for the Collection of Garbage in The City
of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Provide for the Collection
of Garbage in The City of Saint John", be read a second time.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Provide for the Collection of Garbage in The City
of Saint John".
?IUh/~//?~ -W.<<:;
~~s~~
_f}l.f_~H/
~y Trade and
280
C7/1!l5o~2/1f"
/l /?J #' /? d /1?t?
-It? .,.~~~
/";7; ~-
/1
04!:/ So;j~/2(o
2iu/ L//?ff
~-A~W
.7J ul/ L/I'J ff
!lJg- A aW
e/fy s,J~;'CoI"
%r,fII1!1$e&t.
$y- ',/aJ-V
t11,f/J'"Kd {bm,".
/J1~rA-ef-
',(ea$<!'!
..7),,;J1"!? lit/, ~
,.(/o!/~.22 ;t:>!'e.
111<<1'101 ,#.,dA.
/Yom/hal-/ h/f~
/lflf?pll7t'meh-Cs
/1J;;;,.N'P/r {l;fi7hr.
Cb~h. (1RP"~ c,.f'/fi;
/l. t/il7cenr-
.2J/I7.:1o am/??
aN"? &!r~-'7,
Il1CleCowa~,
.7),1-1 Gare!/
l__
~
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting a
amendment to the Plumbing Trade By-Law that reflects the policy changes adopted by Common Council on
January 12th, 1976 in this regard, and advising that first and second reading is now in order if Council
so wishes, and that following third reading, the by-law will not become effective until approved by the
ieutenant-Governor in Council pursuant to the Municipalities Act, be received and filed:
.
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Plumbing Trade
and Master Plumbers", be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Plumbing Trade
and Master Plumbers".
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A
Trade and Master Plumbers", be read a second time.
By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Respecting the Plumbing
Read a second time the by-Law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Plumbing
Master Plumbers".
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting a
draft amendment to the Building By-Law incorporating policy changes to the by-law that were adopted on
January 12th last by the Common Council, and advising that first and second reading is now in order if
Council so wishes, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Construction,
Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John", be read a first time.
.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the City staff has had an opportunity to, or intends to, see 'if
the fees in regard to the above amendment are similar or comparable to other centres of comparable size to
Saint John. Mr. Barfoot replied that he did not have that information at this time. Councillor MacGowan
asked if that information could be given to Council before third reading of the above by-law amendment.
Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply to this request.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Construction,
Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould I
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law_.
Respecting the Construction, Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John",
be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Construct~on,
Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John".
Mr. Rodgers referred to the letter he submitted to Council at this meeting with a draft of an
amendment to the Parking Meter By-Law, which incorporates policy changes to that by-law that the Council
adopted on January 12th last. He stated that with regard to Section 2 of the draft, namely, a new subsection
(2) of Section 14, reading, "(2) (a) A person who violates a provision of this by-law may pay, at any time
before the issuance of a writ of summons, a voluntary penalty of Three ($3.00) Dollars and upon such
payment the person committing the violation is not liable to be prosecuted therefor.", he is recommending
that the said subsection (2) (a) of the amendment be deleted because there is no authority to have a ~
voluntary penalty of $3.00 - the limit is $2.00 and that section is presently in the by-law so there is no
need for that amendment; in addition, there is no authority for the (b) section of the said proposed
subsection (2) of Section 14; therefore all of Section 2 of the amendment would be deleted, and Section 1
is what is required for amendment of the said by-law.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week and
the amendment to the Parking Meter By-Law be presented in its proper legal draft form.
I
~On motion of Councillor Pye
~~
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Market Committee, advising that
at a recent meeting of the Committee, approval was given to the transfer of the lease of Stalls 6 and 7 of.'
the City Market (commonly referred to as the "Coffee Counter") presently held by Daryl W. Pierce and Lloyd
D. Pierce, to Muriel Northrup of 535 Ellerdale Street, Saint John East, at a rental of $149.00 per month
(the aforesaid space encompasses an area of 639 square feet, valued at $2.80 per square foot), be received
and filed and approval be granted to transfer the said lease as recommended, and that the Mayor and Common
Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary lease document on behalf of the City.
"
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendations contained in
the report of the Nominating Committee, the following appointments be made, namely:-
Abattoir Commission - two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Councillor Cave, Councillor Green, Councillor A. Vincent.
.
Bin 0 Committee - two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Councillor Green, Councillor MacGowan, Mr. D. H. Garey,
....1
PtUJ, V/S, A' t
,t!f; 11/'c.hDlMS4. upor
. :J),tfI. ~~.Jj.,
{1(t1(I?/II"fJpS; Pollution
GI7/t/ L {;iiTye
:Z>,fl1~$f/J;' C':
/1JeilC K'/)If#"I?,
~, #~;~~
71.lYJde. ,
F,hJ1Jr. <';>~A.
A?erT~, J, Aln
_ /I.1JDHle,./.R'(.
I~K~A6'J; {'""Am
If5jJj~Mjf';' Nominating Committee
L-V_M( Councillor A. Vincent
/9. V/J1~e.l?lf'-
~.s;~ -;r:y~.7?,
SPr<i,j ,,,,..23.
St-e en~t>~
Iv. .J/<<t3~/s,
K/y';;//s,~ 6?:.
~Y.;I~s, t9. -r Appeals
/l7~€'r>;Ydh. v'
1/l///S'6~.I? '~H-k
. ~fil'fP
7?J:SC!:.~M~.
~~~~~~ Board of Trustees, Civic Employees' Pension Plan - one-year term from January 1st, 1976
7('-"7//7/$O.:P. .
Gd,.,tiIfI Councillor Green, Councillor Davis.
{1"",,,. ~~"",
Jk>IV/S
IY- J:hiP?e/s,
/d1'S.J: J>~e
Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority - three-year term from January 1st, 1976
(A/,$./J1.;:l/J?, Dr. W. B. Main, Mrs. Beatrice Brown.
./!1/?S,Z3. .l3I"PH'.
7(.:/3. 'Pearson, Boxing &
;T.' /fe1'J7, "71.
~cA-5"J1, U/,.R:
~"",:S, G;
Ste~r.5,7?~* Community
. 6! :J),.il/"h
~..?1e;?!c~~
TO':1;. W',;"
Sh1it' , "?"S.1-; Market
J)l<.fJ1,ss/s,...L..L
{'"Nh. %r-r/~~
;r. ffl?WrcK, t?/,.s
;:; &riM, /11.
'7le '- M,.,. r Rockwood
cV' e",NlrJ. r.t.
1 (j:L e.iV'u, F.'b Q
mO>hS, &JUI. ~e
/I111S. k.'??e>m.s",.!f-
:lJ.1? J)o",eet;
/I'll's./::: 'PIke
~,., C"un.
I(/f/I'I "..~
CIlI<I1.~~<i)
/j.(///fC'tI dT'J?
.7)/sl,e~,/:,f. M
(;! () '.1j,../en.1I.
St'Ol./'6n/, ;T:J).
l1'larCjlle.e#1, ,c: !:
~!tt;p )(
COMI1, "Kt'.P'p!n~,
./1. V/hcel1t-, I
1(', f:. 51 I't!' </
I"; Y. C', )(
t't?w"", b?-l'ot!?11
S.7:llen. #t;$,
C'/i!f SP~~/r.
"..
/"'1"" {;;,mht.
I
''.2;ck /JI:t..fUI?
I
Sf"e~ .
a/tJ$/~
tPc,fLe""
Crt? ve ;:<;?./
. .5'..7: ,E4;b;f/~
/lssoC".
.....
2e1
'-
Advisory Committee - two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Councillor Davis, Messrs. Eldon Richardson and D. M. Hope,
Jr.
Control Committee -
Councillor Higgins,
J. C. MacKinnon and
two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Councillor Gould, Councillor Cave, Messrs. David Mabey,
Lawrence Hanley.
Recreation & Parks Advisory Board - two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Messrs. Ralph McLenaghan, Fred M. Tobias, Leo McAdam, John King, Arthur Pottle and
John Kern, Mrs. Helen Keleher, Councillor Higgins, Councillor Kipping, Councillor
Gould.
Transportation Committee - two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Messrs. F. S. Haycox; Lloyd R. Spragg, Harold B. Stephenson,
Kenneth Walls, W. G. Evans, Miss Geraldine McGowan, Mr. John
Wend all H. Huestis,
Alliston, Councillor Cave.
Committee - Water & Sewerage Rates - one-year
Mr. RalphJ. Stephen, Chairman, Mrs. Graeme
Mr. D. H. Garey, Secretary.
term from January 1st, 1976
Somerville, Mr. Richard Shiels,
Power
Commission of the City of Saint John - three-year term from February 15th, 1976
Mr. Norman Francis, Mrs. Joan Pearce.
Wrestling Commission -
Messrs. R. B. Pearson
George Stears, Robert
two-year term from January 1st, 1976
and John Kern, Inspector R. Jackson,
Clark and Gordon Drillon.
Messrs. Walter E. Harris,
Appeals Review Board - two-year term from January 1st, 1976.
Messrs. William McMackin, James Orr and Lloyd Goldsmith, Mrs. Peggy Duplessis,
Councillor Parfitt.
Committee - two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Mr. Kenneth Fenwick, Mrs. Frank H. Burton, Mr.
Mr. Francis Balemans, Councillor Pye.
Martin Beck, Mrs. Francis O'Leary,
Park Advisory Board - two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Mrs. K. Ramsay, Mr. B. R. Doucet, Mrs. Eileen Pike, Mayor Flewwelling, Councillor
Kipping.
Housing
Commission - two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Councillor MacGowan, Councillor A. Vincent, Mr. John R. Disher, Mr.
Miss Geraldine O'Brien, Mr. Harold Stafford, Mr. John D. MacCallum,
Haycox, Secretary.
Eric L. Teed,
Mr. F. S.
aint John Commerce and Industry Commission
Councillor Kipping, Councillor A.
- two-year term from January 1st, 1976
Vincent, Mr. Ralph F. Streb.
Saint John Port Development Commission - two-year term from January 1st" 1976
- Mr. K. V. Cox, Councillor Green.
Councillor Pye noted that he has not heard any report from the City Solicitor,
or through the medium of Council, in relation to the vote taken at the January 12th last
appointments to the Saint John General Hospital Board of Directors. He asked if that was
not. The Mayor replied that this matter will be discussed, later in the meeting.
either in the newspaper
Council meeting on
a valid vote, or was it
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor
Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that a meeting
of the Committee held on January 19th, 1976, the sale price of land on Meadowbank Avenue to Mr. Jack Nugent was
reviewed and the Committee's opinion is as follows:- the appraiser estimated that the 14 lots contained in the
proposed sub-division would sell at approximately $14,000.00 each for a total value of $196,000.00; the cost of
providing services including water and sewerage, streets, telephone, hydro and survey and engineering fees would
amount to $177,700.00 leaving a sum of $18,300.00 for profit and raw land cost - this latter sum is substantially
the same as in the previous appraisal and it was opinioned that the raw land figure of $5,100.00 had not changed
since the date of the last appraisal -- be received and filed and as recommended in the letter dated January
12th, 1976 to Council from the L~nd Committee, the City grant a new sale to Mr. Nugent of the said three acres,
more or less, of land located on both sides ,of Meadowbank Avenue in the vicinity of Bullock Street, on the same
terms as the sale to Mr. Nugent of this land under Council resolution of July 15th, 1974 subject to Mr. Nugent
starting a development within one year of Council's resolution or the land will automatically revert, to the City
for the sale price, which is $5,100.00.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that in June of
1971 the Committee recommended the sale of a portion of land along the Golden Grove Road bordering Exhibition
Park to the Saint John Exhibition Association for the sum of $1,000.00, the strip of land being approximately 900
feet in length by 8 feet in width and this recommendation was adopted by Common Council resolution of June 24th,
1971 and further advising that before conveyance can be completed, it would be necessary for the Council to close
this portion of the Golden Grove Road as the portion of land to be conveyed to the said Association is part of
the said Road - and recommending that the Council close off the said portion of road and that the City Solicitor's
Office be advised of same so conveyance can be completed -- be received and filed and authority be granted to
proceed to advertise the closure of the said portion of the Golden Grove Road for the purpose named.
')8')
"'" ....
..,
tJt?/d~~ CMf/e
Rd.
.lJ /-1- cA
.5'..7: hJ/bit-/flJ7
/l$5t?C'-
MI7~ ~t?mP1.
,(dl7,! exc/;o);7ff
A'flc4 ,{0h?/7 nL
ft/aier.dd Iv,
lIaN/a :lJ
$ft;Mel1$bJ'1
klftf/I'/Ie :zJlvli,
14/?ta :g~tt-erle.
A-t-d.
J}ra /ha.;1e
1?e$t:'/ndthff
~ mdloJ?
q<!?eUer
~$t?mehr
/1/7 C7~d/; .7.211
$~//......7~(."e.
,.(/-#/e
Councillor Davis, in the above matter, advised that this transaction was completed in 1972 and
the money was paid and the survey was done, and all that is required is the closing of that portion of the
road that is no longer a road.
.
Noting that .the said section of road is alongside the fence there, Councillor Cave stated he
would like to be assured that it would be permitted for City workmen to go on there and clean the ditch
that is there. Mr. Barfoot replied that at the time this was done, approximately four or five years ago,
the fence was moved over and the City did sodding work and curbed and filled the ditch in completely at
that area; before the fence was moved back, there used to be a big ditch there, but when the fence was
moved back and it was agreed that the land be sold to the Exhibition Association the ditch was filled in
and the balance of the land between the ditch and the street was landscaped and curbed, so there is no
ditch there now.
I
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that Mr.
Harold B. Stephenson offered to exchange 67 acres of watershed property for 30 acres of City-owned land
outside the watershed on Golden Grove Road, and that appraisals were completed on both parcels of land and
it was noted that this exchange would be beneficial to both the City of Saint John and Mr. Stephenson _
and recommending that the exchange of land between Mr. Stephenson (67 acres approximately of property
owned by him within the watershed boundaries) and the City of Saint John (30 acres approximately of
property outside the watershed on Golden Grove Road) take place providing that (1) each party bear the
costs of surveying the party's own parcel of land, and (2) a registered plan be included showing a 66-foot
right-of-way to the boundaries of. the property Mr. Stephenson wishes to exchange -- be received and filed
and the recommendation adopted.
I
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that,
further to Common Council resolution of December 19th, 1975 which provides for the purchase from Varta
Batteries Ltd. of 9,000 square feet of property on Fairville Boulevard and continuing along the City
right-of-way, the following is an addition which was omitted on the recommendation made by the Committee
to Council on December 19th, 1975, "that the City at its expense will provide Varta Batteries Ltd. with a
revised survey plan and also provide that surface water will not drain on to Varta's property", be re-
ceived and filed and the Council accept the said recommendation of the Land Committee, namely:- that the
City at the City's expense provide Varta Batteries Ltd. with a revised survey plan and will also provide
that surface water will not drain on to Varta's property.
.
In the above matter, Councillor Davis explained that the City is putting through a right-of-way
over Varta Batteries Ltd. land - the City purchased the land - and they simply want to be assured of the
grading of the street; the land lies a little low and the grading of the street and the drainage from it _
it is perfectly alright. ' Councillor MacGowan stated she is concerned about the notation in the Committee's
letter "sUrface water will not drain on to Varta's property", and she noted that other businesses in that
area have a problem with surface water and if the City has not been able to overcome it how is the City
going to say that these people are not going to have surface water. Councillor Davis, in reply, noted
that there is a new road going through so there will be new drainage. Councillor MacGowan asked when that
will be. Councillor Davis added that the road is being built for a development project that is going on
in there. Mr. Barfoot advised that he is not too familiar with the design of this, but he does not know
exactly where the water would drain to if it did not drain on to this property - he is not fully familiar
with the problems.
1
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until the City
Manager has an opportunity to bring in a report on the question of drainage of surface water, in view of
the fact that there are a lot of businesses in the Fairville Boulevard area that have had serious problems
with the rains and excess water.
.
Councillor MacGowan stated she does not know how the City can be committed at the City's expense
to say that Varta Batteries Ltd. are not going to have any surface water problems. Councillor Higgins
noted that if is the City that is putting the right-of-way through, and he would presume that if the City
puts a right-of-way alongside the property Varta wants a written guarantee that drainage off that road
does not go on to the company's property. He added that he doubts that the City owns a right-of-way,
adjacent to all properties along Fairville Boulevard. Councillor Kipping, in seconding the tabling
motion, stated he feels that the wording could be changed so that the City does not get locked into a
responsibility for any surface water that might drain on to that property in the future - if they have a
problem now and the City takes on the responsibility, he thinks that the wording should be something to
the effect that the water surface drainage problem will not be worsened by this construction - or some-
thing to that effect - but not a "blanket" like that is. Councillor Davis stated that, in view of the
City Manager's comments, he would suggest that the matter be tabled.
I
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillor Higgins voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that it
was recommended at the Committee's meeting of January 19th last that the following quoted resolution that
was adopted by Common Council on June 9th, 1975 in consequence of the Committee's recommendation of June
5th, 1975, be rescinded due to the fact that since the said recommendation (WhiCh was adopted by Coun~il
on June 9th last, as stated) was made to Council the plans for the sewer easement in question is no longer
required, the said resolution being, "Resolved that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land
Committee, the City of Saint John purchase from Elizabeth Jane Small and Joyce E. Little, joint owners of
. property located at 7 Myles Drive, a 20-foot easement involving 240 square feet of land area, for the sum
of $100.00, this easement being required to facilitate an existing storm sewer line and a proposed sanitary
sewer line as shown on the submitted map" -- be received and filed and the said resolution be rescinded.
I
.
~
"'"
2sa.
Plant? ~'
. C1m.rn.
1':<0/11 n:J
:E.!:I-~.;ml
~me/1,th/l?h
l?/e.4~h?-
Secur/&-q
~/zfehrl;
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated January 22nd, 1976, submitting the following
recommendations:- (1) that a federal medium security penal institution be permitted within the City of Saint
John; (2) that the site of the penal institution be on presently-owned City property west of Number 7 Highway in
the area of Green, Ferguson and Grassy Lakes, and (3) that the Zoning By-Law be amended by inserting an appropr-
iately placed new clause in subsection (2) of Section 176 to read: "a federal medium security penal institution".
The letter outlines the thinking of the Committee in making these recommendations.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns amending the Zoning By-Law by inserting
immediately after clause (c) in subsection (2) of Section 176 thereof a new clause (ca) to read as follows:-
"(ca) a federal medium security penal institution", be read a first time.
Councillor Green stated that he does not think that the City of Saint John should sell the above noted
piece of land in the said area to the Federal Government for a medium security penitentiary, adding that he feels
the City owns a piece of land there that can be of great benefit for housing, and that it is an area that is a
very beautiful entrance to the western sector of the city, and that he feels the City is certainly making a
mistake by selling that piece of land to the Federal Government. He stated he feels that he has to support the
residents of the Martinon area and others who are opposed to this - he feels that they are right and that there
are other areas within the boundaries of Saint John in which a medium security penitentiary could be built. He
expressed the view that it is a shame to blot that part of the city which has the potential to be a very beautiful
area and a very productive one in the light of housing. He stated he feels that the City is taking the wrong
course by selling that land and going along with the recommendation to amend the Zoning By-Law in this regard, as
well.
Councillor Parfitt pointed out that to develop the said land would be so costly this was one of the
reasons Mr. Beckett's land was turned down because of getting City services to it. She added that there would be
no expense to the Saint John taxpayers to provide 1.6 miles of road, water and sewerage and all that as it would
be looked after. She pointed out that the Martinon area is quite a distance from the proposed prison site, and
that she believes the only reason the prison site was dubbed "Martinon" by the residents was because it was off
the Martinon cut-off; she added that the site had no relation to Martinon and that it is much closer to the
built-up areas of the city that have the full tax rate whereas the other area is a rural zone with fifty per cent
of the local tax rate. She stated that she has studied the penal institution proposal and has done soul-searching,
and that she would like to have it called the "Saint John Medium Security Correctional Facility" and that the
Saint Johners will be taking a step of faith to help rehabilitate what we are seeing is not working; she thinks
that we should show people that we have compassion and are concerned with these young people who can be rehab-
ilitated, she is quite sure, with our help. She added that reform does not take place inside a prison - it is
outside.
Councillor Pye advised that aside from the many valid reasons expressing opposition to the prison in
the Martinon area by the residents of Martinon - and he sees from a recent submission, from the area of Musquash
and Prince of Wales - he has found while questioning people throughout the various sectors of the city that the
vast majority of law-abiding citizens are strongly opposed to the establishment of a prison in the Saint John
area - within the very boundaries of Saint John, much less the Martinon area. He stated that the only fair and
intelligent way that he sees to cope with this situation is to defer action on it until the June election of 1977
and then run it as a plebiscite. He proposed a motion that no action be taken until June 1977 and that it be
determined by a plebiscite. The Mayor replied that there is a motion on the floor.
.
'Deputy Mayor Higgins stated that in his many years' experience on Council this certainly has to be a
very traumatic experience because he thinks that every Councillor has gone through it - numerous telephone calls,
delegations, public meetings, public hearings, and what have you - he thinks that every Councillor here, and he
has nothing but respect for each and everyone of them, including the Mayor -, he thinks that every Councillor has
searched his soul, has done his homework, has listened to the pros and cons - from not a few - in some cases,
hundred and thousands of people - and he thinks it is time that this Council should be able to, and each person
according to his own conscience and wisdom, make a decision - he thinks that is where it should stand, that if
people vote for it, he respects them - if people vote against it, he still respects them. He stated he thinks
that this Council has to "put its money where its mouth is", and make a decision.
Councillor M. Vincent expressed the view that this matter is probably one of the major issues that has
come before this Council - perhaps in this last year, and stated he thinks that the matter that the Council is
presently voting on is not just another matter of re-zoning and a matter of gathering information and voting on
it in a straightforward way without looking into the matter as deeply as possible. He stated that if the Council
at this meeting sees to give this matter first and second reading and eventually third reading at a later meeting,
what Council may very well be doing is changing the environment of the City of Saint John and the classification
of the City of Saint John from what we once knew, and still know, as a port city into that of another classific- .
ation which may, or may not be, good or bad - he thinks that is a fact that will prevail as a result of decisions
that are made in the next couple of meetings. He stated that he has some expression of concern on the legality of
the manner in which the area was applied for re-zoning by people who do not own it - in the last five meetings of
this Council there have been two interpretations given raised by Councillors on whether it is mandatory for the
owner of a property to be the one that applies for re-zoning or not, and the record will show that this is, in
fact, true; Councillor Albert Vincent raised the question at two different meetings and received two different
answers - again, the record will prove that. He stated that the initial approach to the problem by the Federal
Government and the people who are directly involved in this project was, to say the very least, very poor; it was
different in that the normal sequence for re-zonings was not followed - a different approach was taken on this;
with all due respect, to His Worship the Mayor, a public statement by the Mayor probably put the Planning Advisory
Committee in a very awkward position when the Mayor came out and said publicly that the prison would be built -
Councillor M. Vincent thinks that this perhaps caused some problems to their people. He stated that there are a
couple of areas that are specific that he thinks the Council has to look at: it appears that the Federal Government
people think that the greater Martinon area is the best site for their project - he asked: but is it the best
site for the project in the City of Saint John? - he added: that is what this Council has to decide. He stated
that if the Council agrees that the project should go ahead, he asked: should it go ahead in the site that has
been chosen, because the Federal Government people want it there, Or should it go to another site in the City of
Saint John which we as yet may not even have looked at? He stated that in our hunger to obtain the blessings
(so-called) of the Federal Government, sometimes a lot of better possible alternatives are not discussed and have
not been looked at, and he thinks, in this case, that may be true. He added that a point to back it up is, that
Lower Sackville in Nova Scotia refused to allow the prison in their area. He asked: why did not Sackville grab
the so-called benefits? He stated that these are not his comments - these are comments of actual fact. He
stated that we have heard about jobs, job specialties, guards, laundry, cooks - all types of things, and he
asked: who is going to fill these jobs in the City of Saint John, and if they are filled from people outside who
are going to be credited with increasing the economy of the city, where are they going to live? He added that
they are probably going to live in the periphery of the city and have their tax base outside the City of Saint
John. He stated that he thinks these, again, are valid points. He stated that he contacted the Federal Penit-
entiary Service in Ottawa this morning and he is advised (he noted that Mr. Sheehan was present at this meeting
and that perhaps Mr. Sheehan might have different thoughts) and understands that their food, for example, which
284
..,
llfeli/ttm -
.seeul9/tf!l
f?t?n/ lemf/an
is ordered and which we believe to be going to increase the economy of Saint John, is perhaps much like
our City structure here, where it is done through a central agency, and merely what happens here to apy
of the food service people here would be a transfer of paper - no dollar and cent value perhaps, what-
soever; these, again, are facts, he noted. With regard to the opportunity for people to better themselves
in the City of Saint John: the warden - he asked: who is going to become the warden of the new institution _
is it going to be somebody from Saint John - is there going to be an opportunity there? He stated that
he was quite concerned in the next issue on the agenda, and he asked: why does the Board of Trade come
out so strongly in a resolution of January 8th - how many people were present on their council when they
made that resolution? He stated that he does not recall seeing anybody from the Board of Trade present
at the public hearing at Saint John High School when the Planning Advisory Committee heard the objections
from the people in the area - and yet they bring in a resolution emphasizing not only the support of the
penal institution but the exact location. He stated that he would have thought that the council of the
Saint John Board of Trade would have heard from the people in the area and their concerns before they
brought in such a strongly-worded resolution, and that he is quite surprised that that type of resolution
came forward from the Board of Trade. He asked: does the Common Council really want to go on record at
this meeting of voting on this project at this site - can the Council conscientiously go on record at
this meeting as having explored all the alternative sites and proposals - and, with all conviction, say
"yes"? He stated that he does not think so. He asked: is the wishes of a large group of people in an
area not sufficient enough base on which Council must be able to say that they have all the information?
He stated that he will ask the following questions: how many people on Council know the exact other
proposed sites? - he added: and you are going to vote on it; how many people on Council know the actual I
jobs that will be created by the establishment of a penal institution in the City of Saint John?; how
many people on Council know how much money the project is going to cost the City during and after development?, _
how many people on Council know how much extra money this project is going to cost our Police Department
and our Fire Department in terms of time, travel and dollars?; how many people on Council know how much
road service and maintenance, to and from the prison, that it is going to cost the taxpayers of the City
of Saint John after construction - what about the water, sewerage, snowploughing, et cetera, after
construction? He stated he thinks that if the Council deals with those questions - because he has
attended every meeting that he could possibly attend, and he does not have the answers to those questions,
and he does not think too many other people do. He stated that he realizes, from a humanitarian point of
view, and environmentally and socially, the Council has a responsibility to the people and to society; he
realizes the wishes and desires of the Social Services Council, the John Howard Societies, and a number
of others, are sincere, but he thinks that the wishes of a few people who are specializing in certain
areas is not the whole of what this Council has to decide on; this Council has to do what it feels is the
greatest good for the greatest number of people. He stated that he would like to ask a question of Mr.
Zides, namely:- in bringing in this recommendation from the Planning Advisory Committee, did all the
people on the said Advisory Committee vote on the matter before the Council, or just those present at the
Planning Advisory Committee public hearing at the High School? Councillor Davis stated it is his feeling
that that is not a valid question, at all. Councillor M. Vincent explained that he was trying to find
out if this was a complete Planning Advisory Committee report, or whether it was a report of a few. The
Mayor and Councillor Davis pointed out that it was a majority recommendation from the said Advisory
Committee. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he did not ask who voted which way - he was asking how many
people on the Planning Advisory Committee. The Mayor replied that it really does not matter - the
majority must have voted for the recommendation. Councillor M. Vincent stated it does matter. He stated
that he asks Mr. Zides: how many people on the Planning Advisory Committee (not by name) voted on the
report that the Council has before it at this meeting. Mr. Zides replied that seven of the nine Advisory
Committee members were present. Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Zides: were there people who voted on
the report before Council tonight who were not present at the public hearing at the High School that was
held by the Advisory Committee? In reply, Mr. Zides stated he believes one was not so present.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she, too, has been faced with a big problem, and that she
thinks that Councillor M. Vincent has opened up some more questions - that perhaps the Council does not
have the answers. She stated that she personally would have been very happy if the Planning Advisory
Committee had recommended another site, but the Committee has brought in this recommendation - and up
until now, she has not taken a stand for or against the prison in our area because she wanted to hear all
sides of the subject and be knowledgeable, and weigh the pros and cons before reaching a decision - and
it is a difficult decision to make - she hears the voice of many citizens opposing the prison in their
area - and as far as she can find, she finds three reasons for their opposition: for fear of the crimes
that might result in their own area as the result of such an institution; for fear of devaluation to
their properties - their life investments -; and the desire to retain a lovely recreational green belt in
their community. She stated that she can understand their concern - fear of the unknown is a real
bogeyman. She stated that it would be easy to say these people must have her support in fighting for
their rights because she tries to support public opinion, if at all possible - here, we have divided
public opinion. She sta~ed that Pilate listened to the voice of the people and agreed as they requested,
and calmly washed his hands of the whole affair, but he was not guiltless - he refused to accept his
responsibility. She stated she thinks that we are faced with a decision and we have a responsibility to
face up to it, and, tonight, we must make a choice: which will render the greatest benefit for the
greatest number of people? She stated that we live in a sick, selfish, permissive society - more than
fifty per cent of the offenders have committed their crime under the influence of liquor or drugs and
while they are confined they will be sober, so even if they did escape, they would be in a better mental
condition and more inclined to seek shelter than immediately getting involved again - and, also, escapees
from an area would tend to get as far away from their area of confinement as possible - in other words,
an escapee from Dorchester could very well attempt to get lost in the City of Saint John, but she would
think an escapee from Saint John would try to find shelter elsewhere. She stated that these are the ways
she has been trying to come up with the pros and cons as she has heard them. Noting that the Council has
had a great many extra presentations both for and against, she stated that she is very much concerned
with all the things the Council is hearing - and she noted she will be asked what this has to do with it,
too, but she recalls a story she heard about a mother saying to her son who was going to camp for the
first time: "Don't you dare go near the water until you learn to swim properly.", and she thinks we are
much like that - we are saying to these criminals - we do not want you as citizens until you have become
rehabilitated - and now, we have them at large in the community and until such time as we are willing to
provide the proper facilities and understanding for their rehabilitation they will continue to roam our
streets, when released, and continue to fill our courts - so, she thinks we have mentioned citizen
involvement - she thinks our community will be richer because of citizen involvement - not only the
criminal will have a chance to become rehabilitated but she thinks our people will become better adjusted
and be more aware of the problems facing our society, and perhaps we will be willing to work for pre-,
vention rather than rehabilitation later. She stated that, so, as such, she thinks she has to give her
support to the penal institution in this area.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Kipping,
Gould, Hodges, MacGowan, Higgins, Parfitt and A. Vincent voting "yea" and Councillors Pye, Green, M.
Vincent and Cave voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
.
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....1
r"
. ;<tJ/J;'I?:/
~~-,1o;w
e1hlendm~
/lle~/M,pr
SeeM~~,?,# .
~enlwh6
1
JPki/JI1. /Jdn'5
1 {?t?mm.
/J1,;Il'ijJlJne R
~w-d.son
lI1eL/Uhf -
. secu,,/-6/f
'peh/~/J-&-/,;
7e"r:':f
If? ()b/c>Aa
/I1tJJ//l? ,tQh1
'JJ~hn. t9d'yls.
C'IJhJm.
6tfo/ ,Jb;jc/
$.r ~ /7. /105
"o/,eoInt-/?/e.
. (!Pal? ~e
I
C/l~/7, '7}e
1l/aeh'ClI/
I,{CYke ~r
A1~ste~
/';;;kl? )
.fI /1/17 ff. .
~~~i()J7.
MJkr~
dre.i#
'fh,ctor<l-
'/?ed..,%l'/7 M .
.
Ct~~
~
28~
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", ~nsofar as it concerns amending the Zoning By-Law by inserting
immediately after clause (c) in subsection (2) of Section 176 thereof a new clause (ca) to read as follows:-
"(ca) a federal medium security penal institution", be read a second time.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Kipping, Gould,
Hodges, MacGowan, Higgins, Parfitt and A. Vincent voting "yea" and Councillors Pye, Green, M. Vincent and Cave
voting "nay".
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
January 22nd, 1976, containing the above noted recommendations regarding the permitting of a federal medium
security penal institution within the City of Saint John, on presently-owned City property west of Number 7
Highway in the area of Green, Ferguson and Grassy Lakes, and amending the Zoning By-Law in this connection, be
received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the submission from Marianne R. Davidson of Martinon out-
lining her objections to the construction of a Federal medium security prison for Saint John, and the letter from
the Saint John Board of Trade advising that at a meeting of the said Board held on January 8th last the Board
adopted a motion accepting the principle of the establishment of a medium security institution for the Saint John
area and is in agreement with the site as proposed at Ferguson Lake -- be received and filed.
Deputy Mayor Higgins noted that Councillors A. Vincent and Hodges will be away from the city for the
next meeting of Council which is the meeting he would presume third reading would be voted on regarding the
aforegoing discussed Zoning By-Law amendment. He stated it was his feeling that on a matter of this importance a
full Council should be present to vote on the question, and in concurring with this view, the Council members
agreed that third reading of the said Zoning By-Law amendment be placed on the agenda of the meeting of Common
Council on February 9th next.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the application from Terry Robichaud of 423 Milford
Road, Saint John West, for temporary placement of a mobile home on a lot on the Latimer Lake Road, until the
applicant's dwelling is completed on his lot of land, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a
report.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if Mr. Terry Robichaud should not get a building permit and give some
written undertaking that he will comply. Mr. Barfoot noted that this could be part of the recommendation of the
Planning Advisory Committee. In reply to the question, Mr. Zides stated he believes there are two ways of going
at this: one is to come back to Council with temporary permission, and the other one is to let the Building
Inspector handle it as a construction type accommodation, if that is possible. He stated that it would have to
be looked at, to see what the better way is to approach it, and go from there.
At this time, on the matter of the vote taken regarding appointments to the Board of Commissioners of
the Saint John General Hospital that took place on January 12th last at the Council meeting, the Mayor asked that
the City Solicitor explain the said vote. Mr. Rodgers was asked at this time by Councillor Pye whether or not
the vote determining the said Board of Commissioner appointments, which was a silent vote, is valid or not. Mr.
Rodgers stated that, on that question, the press called him; at time, he was studying the matter and he informed
the press he was studying it; upon further research, he came to the opinion that the action of Council was valid,
and therefore, being valid, there was nothing to report back to Council on.
Councillor Pye requested permission to add an item to the agenda concerning Mystery (Blackall) Lake,
adding that it is a very important matter.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named item, introduced by Councillor Pye, be
placed on the agenda of this meeting.
Councillor Pye advised that during the past twelve hours he received some very disturbing news con-
cerning Blackall Lake which is commonly known as Mystery Lake, in that it appears that for an entire week prior
to a few days ago trucks from a construction company dumped fill into this lake. He pointed out that this is
very serious because the City is trying to expand its water storage capacity ih places such as Mystery Lake which
was one of the three areas designated by the Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report as being suitable for additional water
storage. He recalled that the said report recommended that the dam at Mystery (or Blackall) Lake be modified and
that 1,500 feet of the Golden Grove Road be raised to give us an additional 140-acre feet of water, which was to
alleviate the flood pressure on Glen Falls; it would represent about a 14% type of relief. He stated that,
however, what he is concerned about is the fact that they are trying to fill in the portion of this lake which is
directly opposite to what was recommended to us - we are losing our storage instead of creating additional
ptorage. He stated he would like to ask Mr. Armstrong, the City Engineer, who, he understands, is aware of what
went on, about this matter. It was noted that Mr. Armstrong had withdrawnirom the meeting. Councillor Pye asked
if l~. Barfoot can answer the question why this filling was being done, and who permitted it. Mr. Barfoot replied
that he did not have the full information, and he would therefore have to look into the matter and report back.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that a complete report be made to Council at its next meeting in
he above noted matter.
In reply to the question as to what action is to be taken in the meantime regarding this problem, Mr.
Barfoot stated that he will have the filling operations halted. Councillor Pye advised that action has been
286
..,
;:/~'n~ qw~'
2k~d// .I~hfe
(or ~5k~
',(dke)
~u// 1ft'//1~
.ks~t!?C'1!t>r
LEG A L
.JJeF.Ilf/r'IC-P/-
-Iar.e
$ewt!'r /i'he
~n?01qt!"S
c>.Ta/m
llQbeJrt #.Iide~
taken. He explained that the Provincial Department was referred to and contacted and they, in turn, got
in touch with the construction company who has deferred action for the ,time being, at least.
Councillor A. Vincent asked when will the City Building Inspector be back. Mr. Zides replied
that the Building Inspector is recuperating and he is hoping to return to work as early as the middle part
of next week; perhaps even on February 2nd, if possible.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Consideration was given to a letter from Mr. Robert Waters, dated January 13th, 1976, expressing
his concern that an agreement that he signed with the City on January 13th, 1975 has not been lived up to
by the City, in regard to his claim for damages resulting from the construction of a sewer main that
affected his property on the Loch Lomond Road. The letter poses questions, as follows: why did the City
break the agreement of October 18th, 1971; why did the City break the agreement of January 13th, 1975 -
and notes that the said latter agreement expired on December 31st, 1975.
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Barfoot advised that since the January 19th last meeting of
Council when this,matter was discussed in legal session, we have been in touch with Mr. David Gilchrist,
an agricultural engineer from the Department of Agriculture of New Brunswick, and the latest status of the
matter of an assessment of Mr. Waters' property is that l~. Gilchrist has contacted Mr. Waters but has not
as yet visited him - Mr. Gilchrist, however, has produced an interim report which the City should have
within the next few days but Mr. Gilchrist said he would prefer to leave the finalization of the report
when he can discuss the site with Mr. Waters at a time when the ground is not covered with snow. Councillor
Green felt that, for the information of the Council members, Mr. Barfoot should give a complete background
on this Waters claim case. In reply, Mr. Barfoot gave the following summary of what has happened recently
in the matter: that after some delay caused by Mr. Waters refusing to accept the cheque that was agreed
to, he finally agreed to accept the cheque for payment for the easement on condition that the City sign an
agreement, which .the City did, leaving open until the end of 1975 (December 31st, 1975) an agreement
whereby the City would attempt to settle the amount of damages which Mr. Waters had claimed in addition to
the amount of $5,000.00, or whatever the figure was, which was agreed to as the price for the land; after
the agreement was signed, Mr. Waters put in a claim for approximately $31,000.00 but the City could not
find the substance of it, and the City Manager asked Mr. Waters for more information which he sent, and
the City Manager still could not get anywhere with it, and the City Manager asked Mr. Buck, who is exper-
ienced in the matters of compensation, to also look at it and Mr. Buck's opinion was that it was difficult
to find any substance for it, but the City can get an outside expert to look at it - this was in October,
1975; however, the outside experts did not complete their assessment of it before the snow covered the
ground and the expert from the Department of Agriculture would prefer to complete his report when he would
have a chance to walk the land with Mr. Waters without the snow being there; and so, we are left at this
time, then, without any agreement to pay Mr. Waters any damages but at the same time we are getting an
opinion as to what damages might possibly be paid if the City decides to pay them. He stated that the
City is under no legal obligation at the moment to negotiate with Mr. Waters or to pay him any damages,
but if this expert does come in after the snow is off the ground, with an opinion that the City should pay
an additional sum for damages, then he presumes the City could then decide to make an offer to Mr. Waters
for the settlement of the claim. He reminded the Council members that the said agreement of January 13th,
1975 was that if we could not agree upon the value of damages that we would agree to go to arbitration
prior to December 31st, 1975. Councillor MacGowan pointed out that, in fairness to Mr. Waters, it was not
his fault that the evaluation of damages was not completed prior to the end of 1975. Mr. Barfoot stated
that he would be pleased to contact Mr. Waters and tell him the status of the matter, if the Council
wishes.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named letter from Mr. Robert Waters be '
received and filed and the present course that is being followed in this matter be continued.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the City Manager report to Council that a very satisfactory
meeting was held regarding the Lancaster lagoon lift station with Simpson Construction and that the
/?~'~M, ~ J/I'~J.r representative of that company made it quite clear there was no conflict of labour interest between him
L~~rr '7. VI,,~~, and Councillor A. Vincent - in fact, we told him that he was a friend of Councillor A. Vincent. He asked
,<'e7),7~;.v~ztl?r if the document was signed today. Councillor A. Vincent added that at the said meeting we had it out with
/r?~ the said company representative and we had a good meeting, and he thinks that now the Mayor and Common
l'~tJ)7 II' Clerk should sign the agreement on behalf of the City. Mr. Barfoot reported that a meeting was held with
~C7i'I'&')? Simpson Construction, the contractor for the said lagoon lift station, with Mr. Charles Robichaud of the
firm of Crandall Associates, consulting engineers, and the City engineers, and the City Manager, this
~/~JPSb~, afternoon - Councillor A. Vincent was present and it was laid down to Simpson Construction the fact that
~~;,(~~C~/OJ7 we were not going to tolerate any extras - we asked him point-blank if there are any areas which he was
~~a(. not satisfied with in the contract documents as to being holes in the contract documents, areas where,
-t70I7zf;?~~ possible extras might be entertained - and he made negative reply, saying he was satisfied with the
H~rl!'t!'mt!"P documents. Mr. Barfoot added that it was also brought out that there was no personal axe to grind for
/j~ ~ ~~cdl1~~I';f Councillor A. Vincent as Simpson Construction already has a province-wide labour agreement with the
PV/~/' ~ ~~ organization which Councillor A. Vincent represents - in fact, they said they and Councillor A. Vincent
qf ~ 'were friends of long standing. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he wanted Crandall Associates' repre-
~~~~C7~&?~1' sentative to tell him that the information he heard - that the Irving pipeline is down deep enough, that
.7 7 the City could not get itself in a "box" - and he got the commitment from the consultants and everything
~~/I7~t7I;t ~i'. else that, no way, are they going to get extras. He stated that he just wanted to make it clear and he
~~' wanted to go on record that it was nothing personal - he just happened to know the fellow - he told him he
0/ / 'pir / he could not trust him, and that is why they are friends. He stated that he wished the Council to know that
everything is alright regarding this matter, and he thanked the City Manager and other staff who were
there, for their co-operation. Mr. Barfoot advised that everything is alright as far as we can foresee,
at this time; however, there may yet be unforeseens. Councillor Cave asked if there is anything in writing
to that effect. In reply, Mr. Barfoot pointed out that we have a contract which is about to be entered
into. In reply to Councillor Cave's comment that he feels it should be obtained from them in writing, he
confirmed that it will be in writing and that will be signed.
(?Ph?.mit'Ue /rj",
e.?~I7. /I/. {I'/Ilr!i!'J.r1!
';Pc>!tae .2Ie;nf,
fr/el/CilJxJe
C'IJ/er 0-1" 7b,t;l!e
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, during which Councillors Parfitt and A. Vincent
withdrew from the meeting, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed the Chair in legal session of Council,
at 9.55 o'clock p.m.
matter.
with the
Councillor M. Vincent, as liaison of Council to the Police Department, reported on the following
He stated that as the result of being Chairman of the Protection Committee he had a conversation
Chief of Police in regard to a problem the Chief has on a grievance from the Grievance Committee
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,..
287
~rl6?~d~ of the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. that was submitted to Council
~,~~I/~e- concerning policewomen working in the Drug Squad, which grievance the Council upheld in Committee of the Whole on
. "llf'I7S ',Pro6er: January 12th last. He stated that the City Manager is aware of the 'said problem. He stated that as he under-
-c-Ive /l:>Stx!. stands it, the problem involves the need to retain Policewoman E. Chisholm in the Drug Squad during the course of
~/.7~;le 017 an investigation, and that this is an important matter. He stated that the Police Chief asked that he bring this
~n'1,~~~d~matter to the Council, and with the assistance of the City Manager, see if the Council would authorize the City
C- ~L':/ / Manager to go to the Police Union and see if they can buy some time on the said grievance which the Council
^, I7/S//t>//n upheld - that is, defer implementation of the upholding of the grievance for the necessary period of time.
C~/d o-f During ensuing discussion, the Common Clerk advised that the said Union Grievance Committee has not been given
-~lIce written notification of the Council's decision at the January 12th Committee of the Whole to uphold the said
grievance, but the Committee had been given verbal notification by him.
1
The Council members agreed that the said Grievance Committee now be given written notification of the
resolutions adopted in Committee of the Whole on January 12th last regarding the said grievance.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the City Manager approach the Chief of Police and the ex-
~ZC~ ~~ ecutive of the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. and use his discretion in
IC?~ ~ ~/I' endeavouring to have the Union agree to Policewoman E. Chisholm remaining on the Drug Squad for a further period
~~~;I ~~I of time, and that the City Manager report back to Council in the matter.
,K: C'~/.s);olm On motion
.:lJr~ Sfu.Fi
. Po/; ~e:7J/
.
U/I'nasrt:lt/".
~/~~)1 The Mayor stated that the Council members joined with him at this time in pralslng the staff of the
/? City of Saint John on their efforts in the disaster of February 2nd (a violent windstorm of hurricane force
(//jv/~ gales): the Police, Firemen, outside workers, inside staff; also, ,all those people who came to the City's as-
t'r.7~I'~Jf~~ sistance from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, from the armed forces at Camp Gagetown, the volunteer radio
1>oll~l'h'pel operators from the radio clubs - and all citizens who suffered for some time without making any great complaint
~0tY.f.~ as they realized the problem the City was facing and which the City is still facing. He stated that the City
11i'. t::ftl,. wishes to tha~k all the citizens for the effort they made in keeping off the telephones and allowing the City to
~ ' ~_ get along with the job to the best of its ability. He noted that the sincerity of those who worked is still
~ "7j9 d~ eing carried out on the City's streets at this time - the telephone men and the power men are still out working
O~~o~es trying to bring power back into the City of Saint John to restore normal lighting. He noted that this is dif-
~ . .~ ficult for the people in the Glen Falls area to realize that it cannot come back normal because they have had
rJ~/O C'/< other citizens suffering as they have done in the past. He stated he wanted to thank the Glen Falls area people
~/.r~e)?~- for the way they conducted themselves in keeping us from being in trouble at City Hall with problems.
-C/017
I b?kn ;:d:I1'/S
7i?lepketlt?4-
f?plber ,1'J7e-
men
.
I
$zf/7l"eC
c/bs/)?~
.7'h;"d S-c-,
$ht>J?6- ~
5'/10/(/ ,,:;;f,
lr....
The meeting adjourned.
~
co~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Wednesday, the fourth day of
February, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Kipping, MacGowan, A. Vincent
and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, J. Gabriel, Deputy
Commissioner of Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works
Department, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development,
C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, D. French, Director of
Personnel and Training, and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
The Common Clerk advised that
Street, also known or formerly known as
written objections had been received in
proposed street closing.
the necessary
Short Street,
this regard.
advertising was completed for the proposed closing of Third
also known or formerly known as Snow Street, and that no
No person was present to offer objection to the said
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Res-
pecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 187
of the Municipalities Act, R.S.N.B. 1973" with respect to the closing of the following highway:-
Third Street - All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the City of Saint John,
in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, being bounded and described as follows:-
Beginning at a point having New Brunswick Grid Co-ordinate Values north 557338.18 east 1115711.94,
said point being at the intersection of the western side of Third Street, also known or formerly known as Short
28&
~
St"t?d C"/oS/h.
~/ra 5~.
S~tJrt- sz!:
~11e-W Sr.
/"/$/e ~ay,l?e
~/e11 k/h-
F/opd Cbl'l/n? -
/1!eYr.:5h o,eeK
-/!/OOd/hj'
~..r.$.fero/ ,4,k
t:C~1n
/PIKelV""d /Its
d'r.;;lih~e
:&l/1~nff
me-raft) /'II Uh?
II? G}.ePler a#
N//S ~
;if?o T4",.=~ /l~e.
.;iJrea
Street, also known or formerly known as Snow Street, at its intersection with the northern side of
Rothesay Avenue; going thence by an azimuth referred to the N. B. Grid three hundred and eight (308)
degrees forty-eight (48) minutes forty (1,0) seconds a distance of two hundred and twenty~five and five
tenths (225.5) feet; thence an azimuth of thirty-eight (38) degrees fifty-six (56) minutes twenty (20)
seconds a distance of fifty (50) feet; thence an azimuth of one hundred and twenty-eight (128) degrees
forty-eight (48) minutes forty (40) seconds a distance of two hundred and twenty-five and five tenths
(225.5) feet to the northern side of Rothesay Avenue; thence an azimuth of two hundred and eighteen (218)
degrees fifty-six (56) minutes twenty (20) seconds a distance of fifty (50) feet to the place of beginning,
containing an area of 11,275 square feet and being a portion of the Street extending northwardly from
Rothesay Avenue a distance of two hundred and twenty-five and five tenths (225.5) feet, as shown on the
subdivision plan, City of Saint John prepared by Murdoch-Lingley Ltd. dated November 7, 1975 and signed
by Carl Laubman, N.B.L.S. which plan has been approved by the Development Officer for the City of Saint
John on November 27, 1975 by the Director of Surveys, E. R. Jamieson, November 27, 1975 and filed in the
Office of the Registrar of Deeds in and for the County of Saint John, November 28, 1975 as Number 198 --
be read a first time.
.
1
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Stopping Up
and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 187 of the Munici-
palities Act, R.S.N.B., 1973".
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of
Section 187 of the Municipalities Act, R.S.N.B., 1973" with respect to the closing of the following
highway:-
Third Street
Saint John,
follows:-
All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the City of
in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, being bounded and described as
Beginning at a point having New Brunswick Grid Co-ordinate Values north 557338.18 east
1115711.94, said point being at the intersection of the western side of Third Street, also known or
formerly known as Short Street, also known or formerly known as Snow Street, at its intersection with the
northern side of Rothesay Avenue; going thence by an azimuth referred to the N. B. Grid three hundred and
eight (308) degrees forty-eight (48) minutes forty (40) seconds a distance of two hundred and twenty-five
and five tenths (225.5) feet; thence an azimuth of thirty-eight (38) degrees fifty-six (56) minutes
twenty (20) seconds a distance of fifty (50) feet; thence an azimuth of one hundred and twenty-eight
(128) degrees forty-eight (48) minutes forty (40) seconds a distance of two hundred and twenty-five and
five tenths (225.5) feet to the northern side of Rothesay Avenue; thence an azimuth of two hundred and
eighteen (218) degrees fifty-six (56) minutes twenty (20) seconds a distance of fifty (50) feet to the
place of beginning, containing an area of 11,275 square feet and being a portion of the Street extending
northwardly from Rothesay Avenue a distance of two hundred and twenty-five and five tenths (225.5) feet,
as shown on the subdivision plan, City of Saint John prepared by Murdoch-Lingley Ltd. dated November 7,
1975 and signed by Carl Laubman, N.B.L.S. which plan has been approved by the Development Officer for the
City of Saint John on November 27, 1975 by the Director of Surveys, E. R. Jamieson, November 27, 1975 and
filed in the Office of the Registrar of Deeds in and for the County of Saint John, November 28, 1975 as
Number 198 -- be read a second time.
.
I
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law-to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Stopping Up
and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 187 of the Munici-
palities Act, R.S.N.B., 1973".
It was noted that a large delegation of residents from the Glen Falls area was present with
regard to the flooding conditions experienced by them during the rains of the week of January 26th last
and during the recent rains of February 2nd.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the delegation from Glen Falls be heard at this
time with a speaker appointed by the delegation.
.
Mrs. Elsie Wayne, Chairman of the Glen Falls Flood Committee, was spokesman for the above noted
delegation and read a prepared brief in which the Glen Falls area residents ask that their plight in the
wake of the new disaster in Saint John that occurred on February 2nd, be not forgotten and that when the
City seeks Federal and Provincial help for them that the City seek for corrective measures for the
eastern section of ,the city in the Marsh Creek flooding area. The brief advises of the great concern of
these residents that the dam at Mystery Lake is not strong enough to hold the build-up of water and that
it will let go with resulting destruction and loss of life in the Glen Falls area. The brief states that
at the meeting of the Glen Falls area residents, held on January 31st last they were informed that a
portion of Lakewood Heights drained into their already inadequate system, and they ask the City Manager
if this is correct. The brief points out that the Glen Falls situation now has become a province-wide
disastrous problem in that, when there is rainfall that floods the main eastern section of the city, the
main eastern Provincial highway (the Mackay Highway) is shut off, due to the flooding on Rothesay Avenue,
to incoming and outgoing traffic, due to poor drainage and flooding. The brief asks if the City Manager
has obtained the final report of Proctor & Redfern Ltd. with regard to the problem, and advises that Mr.
Dube has stated his report would be on his desk Monday - and asks if the City has contacted the Provincial
authorities about what they are going to do in the way of corrective measures. Mrs. Wayne advised that
not only was she speaking on behalf of the people of the Glen Falls area but on behalf of the business
concerns on Rothesay Avenue who also experience the flooding problems in heavy rainfalls. Continuing her
presentation, Mrs. Wayne read the following resolution which was adopted at the said meeting held on
January 31st:- "That the City implement immediately a freeze on all back-filling and developing in the
Greater Glen Falls and Rothesay Avenue area which encompasses all lands contributing to the run-off (both
sewerage and storm drainage systems) this to include all parcels of land already re-zoned for development
and mobile homes until such time as the City and the Provincial Government have reached a formal agree-
ment and positive action has been budgeted for and taken to correct the flooding, drainage and sewerage
problems of Glen Falls and Rothesay Avenue.". The brief states that it is hoped that this decision can
be reached this evening by this Council so that the said residents will not be forced to follow unpleasant
avenues. The brief states that, once more, the delegation petitions, pleads and begs for the Council's
unanimous support in the wake of this fourth disaster in a thirteen-month period, and further states that
the Council must realize that all the facts these residents have brought before the Council have been
correct where Nature has proven to the Council four times that it is so. The brief states that the
Council knows that the Fire Department in this city keeps pumps on hand in case of fire and asked if the
Council would not have thought, by now, that the City would have had some pumps on hand on January 29th
I
I
.
~
"...
~69
. /I1al'sh
C}eek
-f~e'~/I?.1
~sz(ery
A.;lk-e km
~J? /:;;//s
I /'lptJ.rt
~h7h?/~
I
,Iea.Kelv,rKL
/-Its.
ctr.;}/n~:Je
· f/$Ie
1f/o.!ll1e
I
/l!!/5Iery
..(.;iKe dDlm
.
I
I
.
~
last for the situation at the Marsh bridge and the causeway, just in case, to see if they were needed - but the
City has done nothing. The brief points out and reminds the Council that there is no time left for any of these
residents in Glen Falls if Mystery Lake lets go - there is no coming before the Council, then - and states that
it is entirely in the Council's hands to bring this situation before the proper Provincial authorities to see
that it receives top priority at all levels of government so that it will be corrected, immediately. Noting that
the City has just experienced and cOrne through a terrible disaster, Mrs. Wayne advised that these residents and
business concerns beg the Council to correct their problem so that they will not have to go through another
disaster, if not tonight, next week or next month, and that they ask the Council to cor,ect the problem of the
Marsh Creek and give them back their homes and businesses, and let them live like human beings.
Mrs. Wayne advised that she obtained information from the city of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, On how
they correct the flooding of the creek that runs through that city. At this time she loaned this data to the
Common Clerk for the purpose of making copies for the Council members, with the request that it be returned to
her. She asked that the Council members read and study this data.
Mrs. Wayne stated that she would like to direct a couple of questions at this time to the City Manager.
The Mayor replied that the Council made notes during her presentation and that the aim of this hearing was to
hear the presentation but not to ask questions of Council. The Mayor stated that several people have spoken to
him and he is aware that in the Glen Falls area there are some senior citizens who have resided there a good
number of years and have watched the change of the Marsh Creek and Glen Falls area water due to building, and he
suggested that Mrs. Wayne and her group obtain from these senior citizens a statement or a report in this regard
because he feels such information would be very helpful. Mrs. Wayne signified the willingness of the Glen Falls
Flood Committee to follow out this suggestion. She stated that at the January 31st meeting it was brought up
that there was a section of Lakewood Heights that was draining into this inadequate system, and she asked that
this be checked out by the City Manager - she added the comment that, most assuredly, we do not need Lakewood
Heights draining into this system, as well, or any part of Lakewood Heights. She noted that questions were asked
in the brief, and she asked when these residents can get an answer to some of their questions. The Mayor replied
that he feels the City Manager can prepare written answers, or perhaps the best way to deal with this matter is
for a small committee from the residents arrange a meeting with City representatives to present their questions
and the questions would be discussed in that manner. Mrs. Wayne added that the residents are most concerned with
the above quoted resolution adopted by the residents on January 31st with regard to the backfilling and the
developing in the area.
At this time, Mrs. Wayne gave to the Common Clerk a copy of the brief that she had presenV~~ this
meeting, and the Mayor noted that copies of this brief will be supplied to the Council members.
Councillor Green asked if the City Manager has any report on the suggestion made by Councillor Green a
few months ago with regard to the use of high pressure pumps and an estimate of cost on such pumps, and what the
engineer has to say about such suggestion. Mr. Barfoot replied that that is one of the alternatives which the
engineering study is looking at as far as the flood control measures portion of their study - that is one of the
stages that has not as yet been completed - however, the study is under way. Councillor Green asked when the
said report will be ready. Mr. Barfoot stated that his understanding is that the timing of the report has been
delayed because of the postal strike, and other things, and this report will not be ready for another month. The
Mayor advised Mrs. Wayne that a meeting will be held within the next few days with the committee from the Glen
Falls area residents, and that Mrs. Wayne will be notified of the meeting.
In reply to Councillor MacGowan's question as to whether the City has a report on Mystery Lake, Mr.
MacKinnon advised that the portion of Mystery Lake that he believes was referred to as far as the dumping, or
that Councillor MacGowan was referring to, is the upper portion of this lake, and that when he received a call
from Mrs. Wayne several weeks ago that there was some dumping going on and a contractor doing some building in
the area had his sub-contractors dumping on some land there - the Department subsequently sent one of the City
men out and he talked to the contractor and, as Mr. MacKinnon has the information, there was no subsequent
dumping although he believes it may have gone on for a few days - certainly, it is the City's intent that they
should not be dumping there because it will decrease the storage capacity at the top of Mystery Lake. He stated
that, as he has seen it, it is not part of the lake itself but it is part of the detention area of the lake, and
the City has talked to the contractor as well as Mr. Barnes of the Department of Fisheries and Environment _ he
has not got any word back from Mr. Barnes, but there is no dumping in that portion of the lake _ he is not sure
as to liability, as to who owns the property and what authority we have that the dumping as to stop. He stated
that with regard to the dam, the Department is very cognizant of too high an amount of water being stored behind
the dam; in the previous flood the water did press the dam and we had to take out one of the stop logs because we
felt that if it went around the end of the dam and started to tear out some of the earth portions of it that we
would be in danger of losing the whole dam and flooding that whole lower area, so we did reduce the volume; after
that, we put in sand bags across part of it in order to build it up and those sand bags were frozen in place and
in the last storm at midnight when the Fire Chief, Councillor M. Vincent and he checked the dam those sand bags
were frozen quite solidly in place and at that point were holding the water, although the water was coming over
the top of that, but it did not appear that the dam itself was in danger - but the dam was not intended to store
the amount of water that at times it holds - the water should only come up to the top and go through the opening
of the dam and not completely over the top; it has to be watched very carefully - during the last storm, we had
Water and Sewerage men there the whole night viewing it and making sure that if there was any danger of the water
elevation going up they were to release the necessary stop logs in order to get the volume of water down; the
water that would be thus released would go to the Glen Falls area. Councillor MacGowan asked if Mystery Lake
will be the priority, to make sure that it is not going to overflow, because Mrs. Wayne made some serious state-
ments in her presentation. In reply to Councillor MacGowan's question as to whether there is any danger, and
what is going to happen if there is a thaw, Mr. MacKinnon stated that as the flood water starts to recede and if
we get the right tides, for example, we will release more stop logs and get the elevation down behind the dam,
but it is not a good situation - we should have more height on the dam, but at the same time, to get more height
we have to build more retention area at the back of it - we are hoping that the engineering report that is being
prepared by Pro~tor & Redfern will show all the areas and the cost of controlling the flooding, and it would
appear that that is one of the areas. He stated that in the preliminary report prepared some time ago for
Council, that was one of the areas that they suggested that we could store the water during a flood and release
it afterwards, but it requires a fair amount of work - it is not just a matter of building up the dam higher, you
have to do a lot of work at the back portion of it, in the area of Mr. Williston's property and of Mr. Cathline's
property, because it will flood - he believes if we take it up another few feet that you will be in over the
roadway at the intersection of Golden Grove and Baxter Roads - so, there is a fair amount of work to go into the
report prior to just raising the elevation of the dam - but it is a very serious situation and the Department is
very cognizant of raising and lowering the elevation of the dam - if the dam does go, he does not know how tragic
it is - he cannot forecast it, but he certainly would not want to be in the area if the dam does go, with the
vast volume of water coming down. Councillor MacGowan asked if there is even a slight possibility of the dam
going before the City gets a report. Mr. MacKinnon replied that he does not think so, and added that he would
have to say the dam is not going to go - if the elevation of the water is up any higher than it is, we could
release it with stop logs - we are cognizant of the fact that the water going around of the dam would tear out
the earth embankment - however, if the water level goes up higher and if we do not watch it, then it is in danger
of going - however, we are watching it. Councillor MacGowan asked if there should be Federal Government funds for
that. Mr. MacKinnon replied that he hopes so, and that he thinks the whole scope of the report that the Proctor
& Redfern people are going to prepare is going to indicate the vast amount of money that is going to be required,
290
~
t!7/~1? ~//s
~/ad C,hlM/
/lP/7d creeK
-/%bL/~
;?t~$Ie)<5I ,(.;;A-e
(l!~m
,/ a,Kewoo~ $:;
d';.a/h&1.fe
1J1't7P, {;?cvc-.
//fed /I?:J
/J1~s~r!l /.;;1-e
d.;;n7
;?/aytJr
II/~dhly ,.e
and as soon as the report is received he thinks the City will move at that time to get Provincial and
Federal support in order to provide what is required; at the present time, there are a number of things
that can be done that are of large significance, and it requires the said report and the money to do
them. Councillor MacGowan suggested that the City perhaps should have the Federal and Provincial people
come down here and look at that so that when they get the report they will know what we are talking
about. In reply, Mr. MacKinnon pointed out that the report is financed jointly by the Province and the
City and the Province is, aware of the conditions. Councillor MacGowan then suggested that it would be
advantageous to apprise the Federal people in this matter, now, bearing in mind how long it takes to go
through all the "red tape". Mr. MacKinnon concurred in this view, and stated that he thinks that when
the report is done, should the engineering report show a solution that does not include that but shows
another method of handling flood control, then that would be the means of handling it rather than doing
work at Mystery Lake. The Mayor interjected at this time, pointing out to Councillor MacGowan that the
answer is that Council, rather than the Commissioner, has to make this decision and the decision will be
made when the Council knows what has to be done and what it will cost.
Councillor M. Vincent recalled that the motion of Council for the City Manager to attempt to
arrange a meeting between the City and the Province was passed the last time the problem of flooding
occurred in the Glen Falls area, even though it was felt that the Council should wait until the report
from Proctor & Redfern was completed. He stated that he now understands that the report may not be ready
until sometime earlier than March 15th, and he asked if that is correct. Mr. MacKinnon replied that
there is one report that is coming in ~ there are several portions of the report coming in - one was a
draft report that has already been submitted - another one is being done on the cost benefit analysis
which will be prepared and completed on February 13th - on February 20th they are intending to have a
meeting with the City and the Province on the cost benefit analysis - it was intended that the draft
report be completed by March 15th, that is, the total report with all the bits and pieces of it - but
there has been some delay on it because of the storm drainage information that was required from the
Federal Government - they had to develop all this from their own charts (from all rainfall and river data
that was available) and there was some delay in getting that so that the consultants were preparing other
portions of it, and that is why the March 15th deadline is now before us. Councillor M. Vincent noted
that the Mayor had suggested that a group of the Glen Falls residents meet at a smaller meeting with the
Mayor in the interim until the report is ready and see what steps can be done. The Mayor stated that
this would include any Councillors who would wish to attend, as well; he added that if the Chairman of
the Glen Falls Flood Committee could gather the information from the older residents of the area, as
already referred to by him, he thinks we would then be more knowledgeable and then, when the report comes
in, we would then have also our knowledge to add to the report in determining what we feel we can do out
there with the guidance of our engineers.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the City staff made any tests as to the soundness of the Mystery
Lake dam. Mr. MacKinnon made negative reply. Councillor A. Vincent noted that there is a firm in
Halifax that can X-ray this structure and stated he believes the City should proceed to have this done
and then assure a small committee because there is quite a fear among the people in the Glen Falls area
that this dam might let go. Mr. MacKinnon stated that the Department did not do a testing of the dam,
but it did do an examination of it - the staff looked at the front portion of the concrete structure and
that portion of the concrete wings that extend into the earth embankment - it was the earth embankment
that we were more concerned with rather than the concrete structure - if the water get too high and
washes out beyond the wing walls then it will create a different turbulence there and it was our feeling
that once that happened it would tear out the concrete structure - however, we are trying to keep the
water down to such an elevation that it would stay behind the concrete wall. He added that the Depart-
ment will check into the matter of the X-raying of the structure.
Councillor Cave noted that the money that the City is spending regarding the Marsh Creek
flooding problem is small in amount and it is not the answer. He pointed out that, hopefully, when the
City gets the report in question the City will ask the Provincial and Federal Governments for aid and do
something that is going to do some good; there is a lot of money to be spent in this area regarding the
problem and the City is going to have to get it from the Provincial and Federal authorities, and until
the said report is received we will not have the guidance that is required to proceed to correct the
problem.
The Mayor thanked Mrs. Wayne for the report she had provided regarding the flooding control
problem, and stated that he will be calling her early to arrange a meeting with, say, five or six of the
Glen Falls people. Mrs. Wayne agreed to such a meeting, and to obtaining the information from the senior
residents of the Glen Falls area, as had been suggested by the Mayor earlier in this meeting.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report of the Fire Department for the months of
rlovember and December, 1975, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report for November last of the Works Branch of
the Engineering and Works Department, and including capital works up to and including the month of
November, be received and filed.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
Noting that the above report refers to the fact that two traffic light heads had to be straightened
having been hit by high loads, Councillor MacGowan felt that there should be a check kept on the height
~~~ ~ of loads in vehicles and that high loads should not be permitted on streets where damage could occur or
~~~~ 01"7 on residential streets, such as Manawagonish Road, because damage is caused by them to the trees along
,L . ~ + such streets. She asked if there is any inspection made of the type of loads. Mr. Barfoot noted that
P'~I.7/~ ~~ ~ the Police Chief has commented that this is the regular routine check for overweights, et cetera. .
/jf'pA/'P/-/-/on or Councillor MacGowan stated that it was suggested that if we want to get these vehicles off the residential
/t'l~;d ve/7/eks area, where we have requested them to stay off, that this would be a good way - to check the height of
o ~')1 the loads, and the trucks would find that it would be more advantageous to use Fairville Boulevard rather
tJh de;ill than face a delay through the checking of the height of loads. She suggested that perhaps the Chief of
t>~l'eezt5~VI'~. Police could take that point into consideration. Councillor Green pointed out that the original intent
Af OJ7i~~ in the building of Fairville Boulevard was that it be a truck route and that it would get the trucks off
''1',;/I7.dlW,;I..f' ..-0 d) the Manawagonish Road. He stated that he knows that many of the pulp trucks, some of which are carrying
".. large loads, are using Manawagonish Road and many of these loads are hitting the trees along this street
CiJ/e-f' (r~"Po/;~ and are breaking off good-sized branches; in addition to this, he feels it is a serious situation that so
many big trucks are using Manawagonish Road and there is no reason they should not be using Fairville
7rtt;ek ,.qUo,!e Boulevard and then come up around (even though he knows it is a little shorter to reach the mill by using
Manawagonish Road); in addition, he noted that these heavy vehicles are going to beat Manawagonish Road
~/',"~/I'~ ~J'vd_ to nothing, again; he stated he feels that the City should look into this problem and see what can be
I
>;.;..-
.
~
"""
.291
7;.aok
. I"l?u&-es
7,:'am .~
Ey- ..4;;v
1
I
.
I
<
Ii/fJtl'S
U. e/7ed
. re FetJ,. ;:z
dorm
e/11er4el1~5
m I!!.;;7f; u re So
L/s:iJsfey.
~/-tt(.;d-/()h
I C!Jp/~~/
1'.f~/4c.r
6eseed-/lv.
c5'dll? seNter
$ulII'/$e
c:,d'l""qdo/'.
A-td.
I
.-ins <(..J'b/hC(?
.
C'/6!f/ll..f7r.
.5h~1<1 ,.o~K
'P~rlr
{!/uU"'~se
....
done to have these vehicles use Fairville Boulevard. Councillor Kipping stated that he understands that there
are trucks routes laid down, and he thinks that Manawagonish Road is not one of them, so that it is a matter of
enforcement, really, of the truck routes. He stated that he has been having some'calls about not only Mana-
wagonish Road but also about some other truck routes, recently, in the North End of the city and he guesses they
are being violated pretty badly.
At this time, there was a City-wide power failure and the meeting was unable to continue. The Mayor
advised that the remaining items on the agenda of this meeting will be dealt with at a meeting of Council to be
held at 4.00 o'clock p.m. on February 9th next.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~
CO~k.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the ninth day of
February, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C.
MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief
Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Adminis-
tration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, B. Belyea, Budget
Officer, C.Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, J. Brownell, of
the Recreation and Parks Department, P. Clark, Fire Chief, J. Melanson
Division Chief, Fire Prevention and Investigation of the Fire Department,
E. Ferguson, Chief of Police, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
and R. Millett, Personnel Officer
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Doctor D. L. Kennedy, Interim Pastor
of Main Street Baptist Church.,
The Mayor at this time read. a prepared statement as a final report from the Mayor's Office regarding
emergency measures that were undertaken during the violent and destructive storm of February 2nd, 1976 and during
the subsequent period of lack of power throughout various sections of the City of Saint John; regarding the
maintenance of order and protection from outbreaks of fire; regarding the voluntary efforts received by the City
relating to the foregoing named time of emergency; and regarding the declaring by the Mayor of a disaster situation
in the City of Saint John to the Province of New Brunswick.
(Councillor Hodges entered the meeting)
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter dated January 22nd, 1976 from
the City Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificate and ap-
proved invoice for engineering services in connection with the following named capital project:-
2.
Crescent Avenue
Sunrise Contractors Ltd.
8-inch sanitary sewer
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated January 22, 1976
$ 25,200.00
25,200.00
756.00
21,420.00
$ 3,024.00
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Finance, authority be granted for payment of the 1976 automobile fleet insurance coverage premium in the amount
of $57,002.00 covering the period January 1st, 1976 to January 1st, 1977.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, further to his recom-
mendations of December 23rd, 1975 and January 5th, 1976 and to the Council's review of plans of the proposed new
clubhouse at Shamrock Park, advising that the proposed architectural services agreement between the City and
292
.,
.$ h.ilfrl rock
~/u,6hb".5e
/In:Aikdul'bll
$t!';.v/~.s~,.
fl?.lJ, %:NI!fol--
,4 s..s oC'.
4I>J/7fr~"!-/' 0>>
(7krd!l~ 3/.'
R. D. Purdy & Associates has been amended by the insertion of the following clause in Article VIII of the
said agreement, "Article IV (a) of this Agreement is amended insofar as any sums awarded by arbitration
set up according to Article IX of this Agreement shall not be considered as part of the cost of the work
on which the Architect's fee is based.", and recommending that the said client-architect agreement as
ended (which agreement will replace the client-architect agreement signed by the City on March 11th,
1975 with Purdy and Simson, Architects, for architectural services for new clubhouse facilities at Sham-
rock Park, the said firm having been dissolved and the above named new firm having been formed) be ex-
ecuted by the Mayor and Common Clerk on behalf of the City, be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
Consideration was given to the letter, dated January 30th, 1976, from the City Manager outlining
the proposed City programme reductions that have been necessary in cutting the 1976 operating budget that
was adopted by Common Council on December 31st, 1975 and in revising the estimate for non tax revenue for
the year 1976 to make the 1976 budget acceptable to the Department of Municipal Affairs of the Province of
New Brunswick and to conform with the legislation. The letter notes that in response to a request for
suggestions as to where further economies might be made in the City operation, which request was made
before the further cut-backs were made in the budget (as described in the letter), the four civic Unions
in a joint submission proposed a large number of areas where costs might be saved or revenues increased,
and that many of these suggestions are incorporated in the proposed further cut-backs - and that others,
with respect to better operating procedures, are being followed up. The letter advises that the budget
adopted on December 31st, 1975 would have required an Inner Zone tax rate of 1.455; that the proposed
expenditure reductions, which are partly offset by reductions in revenue in the areas of commercial
garbage and recreational programmes, will result in some lowering of the tax rate; that if the budget is
approved, then the tax rate is estimated to be 1.3859 in the Inner Tax Zone, a reduction of approximately
seven cents. The letter recommends that the 1976 Current Operating Budget be adopted, as presented.
~ Attached to the letter were comparisons of budget programmes, 1974-1976, of non tax revenue and of ex~
{Jr-/y 1,/~.I7~er penditure.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Res~/nd/.I?.2'
17? ~/IN7 re
/?76 ~~~~er
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the resolutions adopted at the Council meeting of
December 31st, 1975 approving the 1976 operating budget of the City of Saint John and the estimate of non
tax revenue for 1976, be rescinded.
Councillor A. Vincent, in questioning the rescinding of the above named Council resolutions,
made the comment that the City has now made additional expenditures in payroll due to the February 2nd
last storm and other 1976 storms than our total budget shows. The Mayor replied that the City recovers
that expenditure through the Government assistance people - we are keeping a record of all the expenses
the City incurred with regard to the February 2nd storm.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
.
1
I
.
Councillor Higgins stated that before considering the new budget as submitted, he would like to
know when the Council sets up a figure and a proposed tax rate, and what have you, whether or not there is
leeway within the various services provided - in other words, there are many things that have from week to I
week changed priority, and what have you - he would like to receive assurance that if maybe within a few
weeks from now he finds something that is more of a priority than what the Council considered a priority
when preparing this budget, that there will be some kind of leeway within the services as shown. In
r~ply, Mr. Barfoot noted that this year's budget has less leeway than in previous years and if we change
priorities from now on it means cutting something else out in order to implement what has now become a
first priority - there is very little leeway in order to do this because most of the budget now consists
of programmes which have already been committed for the year, some of which has already been spent;
however if an emergency comes up, this means that something else which we considered to be top priority
before has to be dropped in favour of that which amounts to an emergency. Councillor Higgins stated that
the point he was making was that there could be, after meeting with .delegations and what have you, a
proven priority that might change the priorities within any particular section of the budget. Councillor
MacGowan made the suggestion that possibly the letters on this Council agenda, from School District Number
20 Board of Trustees and from Saint John Council No. 937 of the Knights of Columbus, requesting reinstatement
of manned school crosswalk patrols, should be discussed before the Council passes the budget that is now .
before it. Councillor Davis felt that it does not make any difference - the City is budgeting to the
limit and the Province will not let the City budget for any more than the proposed budget figure for 1976
and there is nothing the City can do about it - so there would be internal auditing with regard to the
point made by Councillor Higgins. Councillor Gould made the suggestion that the proposed 1976 operating
budget be tabled for a week until the Council can settle the question of the number of fire fighters in
the Fire Department, and that type of question, that is causing concern among the citizens.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the proposed 1976 operating budget be laid on the
table for one week on the grounds that the Council members need some time to study it.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors A. Vincent, Green, M. Vincent and
Gould voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan and Parfitt
voting "nay".
During ensuing discussion with Councillor MacGowan, the Mayor pointed out that the budget figure
is set and the tax rate is set - these are the figures that the Provincial Government wants - the internal
operation as to how the budget is spent is up to the Council. Councillor MacGowan asked whether the budget
is flexible. The Mayor replied that it is flexible in that you take from one item if you want to add to
another - it has to be flexible, in that respect. Noting that this is not what the City is usually told
regarding budgets, Councillor MacGowan asked for the City Manager's comments. Mr. Barfoot pointed out
that the budget is a programme for carrying out the City's operations and the City has a limit this year
on the amount of money it is being allowed to spend and this limit has been set by the Province and has
een negotiated between the parties and has now been set as a figure which is the total operating budget
figure; if the Council in its wisdom desires to change the priorities after the adoption of the budget it
eans that the Council will have to rob monies from one part of the budget and put it in another part.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
1'1'7b :ftudyd
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the amount of $25,388,167 be adopted as the estimate
equired for the operation of the City of Saint John for the year 1976 as follows:-
I
I
.
....1
r'"
99")
Je,J . 'lJ,
./1'7t
~udjfet-
I
I
.
1
.
I
I
.
....
General Government Services
Protective Services
Transportation Services
Environmental Health Services
Environmental Development Services
Recreation and Cultural Services
Fiscal Services
$ 1,511,088
9,816,749
6,301,200
761,600
1,486,488
2,275,200
3,235,842
$25,388,167
- a more detailed breakdown of the above estimate is attached and forms a part of these minutes.
Councillor MacGowan asked for Mr. Park's comments as to how flexible the above budget is. Mr. Park
advised that the total spending that the City is permitted to indulge in this year has been laid down by the
Province by legislation and the estimate that has been put in used up that amount precisely so that if some
expenditure comes along during the year that is considered essential it can only be undertaken by dropping
something else that has been passed - that would be substitution. Councillor MacGowan stated that in approving
this budget we should have to feel that this is the amount of money that they have to spend and that it is not
necessarily going to be from them that we should be making the cuts; she can think of certain cut-backs but she
cannot go along with six weeks of lifeguards at the beach because our summer is more than six weeks long and that
we should have lifeguards there the whole two months until the aquatics programme is through; until those pro-
blems are solved, she will have to vote against the motion, unless she is sure that we can do something about it.
Councillor Green advised of his strong opposition to the above budget and outlined the embarrassing
position in which the City has been placed through the Provincial Government imposing a limit on the budget
figure, and in the City having negotiated new working agreements with the civic Unions without knowing the grant
amounts that would be forthcoming to the City from the Province and not knowing that the budget limitation would
be imposed. He stated it is his feeling that there is a subtle, concentrated effort on behalf of the civil
servants of the Provincial Government to take over the control of cities, towns and villages, and if this City
does not stand up and make itself known perhaps it will be too late. He felt that the Provincial members of
government do not realize what is going on, and that it is very easy to build up an "empire". He cited important
aspects of operation that have accrued to the Provincial Government from municipal governments over the years
since 1966 in the fields of health, gaols" schools and education, et cetera, and the benefits that are accruing
to the Province in revenues from fines collected by the City Police Department under the Motor Vehicle Act,
pointing out that this is what happens when the municipal governments lose control over such matters. He felt
that the Council was making a mistake in cutting the budget of the Port Development Commission, even though the
City is under a severe economic strain. He felt that it was not right that the City should have to submit to the
budget limit imposed by the Provincial Government.
Councillor Kipping asked if the City takes in more revenue than it is budgeting for and than it is
estimating for, will this make any difference to the flexibility in the budget that seems to be bothering some
Councillors. He felt that a specific case would be where initial transfers from Federal or territorial govern-
ments or their agencies, Province of New Brunswick Economic Development shows $90,000.00 for 1975's budget and
nil for 1976 whereas, certainly, we would be gaining additional monies in 1976. The Mayor noted that the question
is: if the City gets more revenues than it had anticipated in its figures could the City use those revenues to
make the budget more flexible. Mr. Park replied that, theoretically, additional revenue that comes in over and
above what has been budgeted for this year in 1976 is available for spending but it is against the spirit of the
legislation which has imposed the spending limit for 1976 by reference to the 1975 level plus fourteen per cent.
Councillor Kipping asked what, then, could the City do with additional revenue. Mr. Park replied that what would
actually result in a surplus for 1976 would be carried forward as a set-off against future budgets. Councillor
Kipping noted that certain items in the 1976 proposed budget do not show revenue for 1976, and we know in some
cases regarding these items we are going to gain revenue: the payment for Economic Development, for example, is
one - if we do establish the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission legally, finally, we will be gaining
monies there. Mr. Barfoot,i,replied",that__this is one of the budgets that only shows net operating costs to the
City of the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission of the City's participation, and the money rece~ved
for Economic Development cannot be counted as revenue. .
Councillor Davis stated he feels that the Council should make clear the fact that the City has been
talking with the Minister of Municipal Affairs for a great number of months; the City knew last year what the
grant would be this year and the City knows this year what the grant will be next year - it is not problem - the
grant formula is quite different than it was two years ago - the City knew that it would be the same as last year
and it fought very hard to have the vote factor changed which is the only change that can be made according to
legislation so that the City can get a higher grant; the City was promised at that time that this would be done,
but that was reneged. He stated he thinks that it should be made clear that what he said before is absolutely
true: no matter what we do there is no way that we can get any more money from the Province; no matter what we do
we cannot make any headway with the Province and Saint John is in exactly the same position as all other munici-
palities in New Brunswick, and they are in the same position that Saint John is in. He pointed out, that if the
City of Saint John is so desperate that it has to, in a twenty-five and a half million dollar budget, knock off
$16,000.00 for school crossing guards, and $3,000.00 for lifeguards, and a few thousand dollars here, the City
must be desperate because we are in one hundredth of one per cent of the total budget - so, we are stymied. He
stated he feels, as he said months ago, that our problem will only be solved by taking certain drastic actions,
and the Council is not in favour of that - but there is no way that the City can get any more money out of the
Province, no matter how much the City tries.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that the problem he is concerned about at this time regarding the budget
is the matter of flexibility of the budget. He stated he is not clear on the question that if the budget is
passed at this meeting that the departments and the programmes that have to function under the budget will not
become flexible. He noted that such things as cut-backs in budget figures for cross-walk school guards were
discussed at this meeting, and other items, and prior to this meeting the Council discussed the ten men on the
Fire Department who were cut in the budget and votes were taken by the Council as to what was going to be cut
from the budget and what was not going to be cut; and the Council then talked about establishing priorities
between the Fire, Police and Works Departments but the Council did not establish any priorities - it was a policy
of this Council from staff that all budgets in all departments had to be cut - the Council did not establish
priorities - it just cut and cut the budget, attempting to reach the level the Province told the City it had to
reach, and the City did not take time to decide whether, in fact, in reaching that level we could sensibly afford
to cut departments to the point where, as in the case of the Fire Department there is a cut of ten men. He
stated that he is in possession of a letter from an authorized representative of the Fire Department which tells
him that it is his duty to inform the Council that the manpower of the Fire Department is at a dangerously low
level - so much so, that the Fire Department cannot function. He stated that he is asked to vote at this time on
the budget and he was told by a responsible person that one of our priority civic departments cannot function if
we cut ten men off the Department. He stated he would ask how could he, right at this Council table, vote in
favour of that budget. He therefore felt that that key area of flexibility, if we are going to be giving that
latitude if the budget is approved to be assured that if these cuts are going to be changed, he will support the
motion - but he is not going to support the motion until he has heard directly from the majority of this Council
and from the City Manager that the areas where we cut without establishing priorities can be put back in again.
Mr. Barfoot replied that the budget figures which were before the Council at this time were there as a result of
294
~
/ "'/b
.23t(~et-
f/./pj? 1.;1)< l'W~t
/176
"P1't>v,
t/netJl1d/t-i I1)?tii /
6?/'GlI1-t- /17~
"
197' It4r~
r 7.!i)( If.,;n1es
current Council policy on programmes which have been presented to Council.
that to say there is certain flexibility in this budget now, is not true.
the Council, having adopted the budget, were to decide afterward to direct
gramme whereby $50,000.00 for the Fire Department would be put back in, he
with a programme and present the Council with a number of alternatives.
Councillor M. Vincent felt
Mr. Barfoot commented that, if
him to bring back in a pro-
will do this and come back in
Councillor A. Vincent asked the following question: if we were able to raise the money from the
Federal Department of Justice, would we be permitted to spend it? Mr. Park stated that it is a little
difficult to answer that question without knowing exactly where the nature of the money that would come
from the Department of Justice is, but if there were no "strings" attached to it and no conditions imposed
perhaps the answer is "yes, we would be permitted to spent it". Councillor A. Vincent stated that no doubt
the City Manager, the Chief of Police and the Fire Chief are considering the cost of the Federal penit-
entiary. He added that while he is supporting the said penitentiary, for one minute he is not hoodwinked
that it is because they want it near a city for the inmates - it is because they want to use our police
protection for any escapees, and so on. He stated that he understands other cities in the West have a
grant from the Federal Department of Justice, and that he would hope that the City of Saint John would
pick up a couple of hundred thousand dollars for local pOlice services - and he asked if this is so, could
we not apply this to additional Fire and Police. He stated he in no way is opposed to the prison, but he
thinks that the main thing is that the said Federal Department is locating these prisons in areas of
growth centre or in a city, not only because of training - and that is important - but also because, if
there is an escapee, we have a local, efficient Police Department as in the case of the Saint John Police
Department. He stated that his question is: is the Chief of Police negotiating in this regard. Mr.
Barfoot replied that the Chief has as yet not negotiated regarding such an operation, but this is one of
the areas we can certainly look into as far as negotiating additional amounts from the Federal Government
is concerned. Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels the City should receive compensation if the Saint
John Police Department is called upon by the Federal prison authorities to render assistance, and his
point is that he thinks the City can receive some extra revenue in this regard. Councillor A. Vincent
asked the following question: if there are Police and Fire protection services rendered, could the City
spend revenue derived therefrom as it sees fit, to provide Police and Fire protection services in the city
proper? Mr. Park replied that he is sure that if the Federal Department of Justice gives the City funds to
be used for additional protective purposes that would probably use it in that way they will in effect be
buying such services from the City and the City would use the money in the way they intend it to be used
when they give it to the City.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she understood, when the Council was talking about the firemen,
that we were going to meet with the fire underwriters because we were considering what ten firemen off the
City's force would do to the fire insurance rates in the city. She felt that the Council had approved
that it would meet with the underwriters before settling this budget. The Mayor noted that once the
Council deals with the budget figure that is now before it, which figure is the amount set by the Pro-
vincial Government, how the Council works after passing that budget is up to the Council, and any other
means by which the City can obtain money, the Council will use it.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent, Green, M. Vincent ,and
MacGowan voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the amount of $1,735,100.00 be adopted as the estimate
for non tax revenue for the year 1976, a more detailed breakdown of this estimate is attached and forms a
part of these minutes.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the Provincial Unconditional Grant of $10,778,558
(computed as 58.89% of the 1976 Standard Expenditure of $18,302,867) be incorporated in the 1976 budget.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent, Green and MacGowan
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the estimate required to be raised by levy on real
property and business assessment liable to taxation under the Assessment Act within the City for the year
1976, be adopted in the amount of $12,874,509:
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the rates at which the amounts comprlslng the above estimates
are to be levied be fixed at $1.3859 for the inner area and $.6930 for the outer area on each $100 valuation
of all such real property and business assessment liable to taxation within the City, which rates shall be
applied to taxable property in the Provincial taxing unit area, described as follows:
CITY OF SAINT JOHN
TAX BASES FOR LOCAL SERVICE RATES
1976
OUTER TAXING UNITS
G 03
G 04
G 06
Gll
G 18
G 19
G 20
G 44
INNER TAXING UNITS
TOTAL - $
TOTAL - $
$
63,987,740
896,987,055
960,974,795
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
JI"'"
295
.
!!~/?1.1/ 17.1
I~Le4-
/J!e;der
P/U/1?PeI'S
~-~w
I
bldJf'Ja.1'e
~-..(.;?w
I
.
I
.
I
I ~~.5.;i~ .
~uJ/t:C//1~
~-..(,,",w
7J,4hlf. ,4~V/S
(}P#?/P?
. au,," 4-
(/1/7eehz:'-
2l/4> 'pI
o/d~s.
.....
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors M. Vincent, MacGowan, A. Vincent and
Green voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting
the Plumbing Trade and Master Plumbers", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Plumbing Trade and Master Plumbers",
was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Provide for the Collection
of Garbage in The City of Saint John", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
thereto.
Councillor MacGowan advised that in the Council minutes of January 26th last there was mention made
about cards for senior citizens (for use by them when they require assistance in having their garbage picked up
other than at the curb side), and before the third reading of the above named Garbage By-Law the Council was
supposed to examine it and see what we could do. The Mayor replied that this is still being reviewed by the City
staff regarding people who make requests and checking them out as to the requirement; this is done by the Works
Department. Councillor MacGowan noted that if there are any persons seeking such assistance, they should com-
municate with the Works Department in this regard. Councillor Parfitt expressed the view that in some cases it
does not seem reasonable to apply the provision in Section 6 (b), "Garbage for collection shall not be placed at
curb side before 11 p.m. on the day preceding collection,. ..", and noted that the garbage men were down Orange
Street last Wednesday at 8.10 a.m., and that she had noted this afternoon there were dozens and dozens of bags of
garbage out in the South End - Wednesday is the collection day; she asked if there could be any way of telling
the people over the news media, or something, each day what their collection day is, or the day the garbage truck
can come because of a breakdown. Mr. Barfoot advised that the change in garbage collection schedules has been
advertised twice in the newspaper - there will continue to be people who will continue to place their garbage out
on the wrong day and it will take a week or two to get all these problems corrected; as for the people who have
problems with putting the garbage out, the problem of these individual cases could be handled by being referred
to the Works Department. He added that the matter of leaving out of garbage on the night preceding the col-
lection day is something that the Department will have to watch, and if there is a real problem developing here
it will probably involve by-law changes - we had to put something into effect now, which has worked in other
places - it will probably work in this city after a while but if there are real problems here it would require
further changes in the by-law. Councillor Kipping stated he does not think we can make too many small, specific
exemptions from general regulations regarding this by-law, but he got no satisfactory answer on the one he
mentioned at the January 26th Council meeting: about the dump being kept open on Saturday afternoons. He stated
that it has been represented to him very strongly by private citizens, not by commercial firms, and he would like
to get some kind of assurance, if that is possible now, or else he will bring it up at some future time. He
stated that the assurance he is seeking is that we might make at least a trial effort to keep the dump open on
Saturday afternoons. The Mayor noted that he had suggested at one time that maybe the Department could consider
building an inner fence where the citizens could pile their garbage but they did not want to go all the way in
with it. Councillor Kipping agreed that there are several means by which it might be done although he knows we
have tried one thing and it has not worked, but we will have to try something else, he believes. He added that,
at the moment, it is a major inconvenience to the general citizenry and he believes we should try once again to
see if we can make it a convenience. Mr. Barfoot replied that there are three problems here, one of which is
there are no funds budgeted for the over-time necessary to keep a staff on extra time. Councillor Kipping
suggested that staff might not be necessary, and that a supervisor could lock it up and it could be left un-
attended for Saturday afternoons, and he noted that people get in and set fires whenever they want to, anyway,
whether a supervisor is there or not on Saturday afternoons - this has happened a great many times - he thinks
that the dump could be left unattended, locked up by a supervisor at the end of the day, and that would be it.
Mr. Barfoot replied that he does not think we could extend the garbage services at the present time in this
regard. Councillor Kipping stated that he will bring the subject up again at another time. Councillor A. Vincent
asked for information regarding the statement made by Councillor Kipping that fires are started at the dump
regardless of whether the supervisor is there or not. Mr. MacKinnon explained that the supervisor that is there
is an equipment operator - there are two equipment operators there whose purpose is to spread the dump cover
material and to see that debris is covered up as the garbage comes in; the supervisor, in turn, goes out to check
periodically - he is not there as a supervisor for the entire day - the two operators, of course, are on the
equipment for the major part of the day and he has seen fires started while the equipment operators were down on
the dump site. Councillor A. Vincent stated that what he wants Mr. MacKinnon to tell the Council is that we do
not have a supervisor at the dump. Mr. MacKinnon replied that we do not have a supervisor at the dump. Coun-
cillor A. Vincent stated that the inference he got from Councillor Kipping's remarks Was that we had a supervisor
at the dump from Monday to Friday, eight hours a day, and it is his desire that the record be clear that there is
no supervisor at the dump - he drives in and out of there. The Mayor agreed that this point has been clarified
by Councillor A. Vincent. Councillor A. Vincent explained that in doing so, his reason was that he would not
want a supervisor to be blamed for something he did not do.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Provide for the Collection of Garbage in The City of Saint John", was
read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
Consideration was given at this time to the following letters:-. (1) from the City Solicitor regarding
the proposed amendment to the Building By-Law, which advises that Section l3(c) of the Community Planning Act
states, "The policy and duties of an Advisory Committee are to give its views to the Council on any by-law
proposed to be enacted hereunder, whether or not such views have been requested in accordance with Section 66.",
and that Section 66(1) of the Community Planning Act states, "A Council shall request in writing before enacting
a by-law hereunder, the written views of the Advisory Committee.", and further advises that the Building By-Law
presently before Council is being enacted under the authority of the said Act and, therefore, the City Solicitor
is recommending that before Council gives third reading to the said by-law, the views of the Planning Advisory
Committee be requested; (2) from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated February 5th, 1976, advising that the
Committee has reviewed the proposed amendment to the Building By-Law which would increase the permit fee structure
in the light of building permit fees elsewhere and the needs of the City in the revenue section of the City's
1976 operating budget, and that the Committee recommends that the proposed amendment be enacted.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that due to the storm that occurred on February 2nd last, and the condition
of some of the buildings around town, he would propose a motion that this proposed amendment to the Building By-
Law be tabled, and he explained that his reason for proposing tabling is because he thinks that some other
amendments to this by-law should be brought in, forthwith, in the Building Code. The Mayor stated that this can
be discussed after dealing with the above noted letters.
296
~
eo/ St7~';'#t7.
774111-1. /ld'I//s.
Ct7.m.-.
~<</'/d/qg
2i'y- ~PV
2)/1o/'/d'.,;;f-ea
b/Lf.$.
e 0/.5P~ 'c/rpr
7>.?rk/h .ff.
~e~"'2J!/-~
(1/ pi ~h-t OI.)'I",Y
~17.;1/t-~ '.
/l1uh/c~! 7f/es"
'/lc.r-
MChoNe/ E:
.:gu-rjess
'1l>7r.k/~ me-/er
%-es
e/t;r 1J'l3r.
POl rlri~4 I??
?ClrH
'/?;Ir4- /)?~ /?/~
~~-;;(.,;;>w
S..7:~rk/n..9
CO;?7h'1.
t/p- -&f>H/11
,P'1rA-/h..9 s~~e
7YCilhH. /l;(."",s-
C1.!n_.
.7~~~ .&;.u::t'..,t;e
tf/P~//e "t?~e
Jl;JYn?eds / ~
//e<< o-f! f"Kb/ti::
'pu~;?ose.5 ~hd
2Jr.I}/,~A.ael
1(e";17f/n5
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
.
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the City Solicitor be
received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee be received and filed and the recommendation be noted.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that third reading of the proposed amendment to the Building
By-Law be laid on the table for one week and the Council meet with the Legal Department in legal session
to describe the condition of some of our buildings that are not covered under the present Building By-Law.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Davis, MacGowan, Higgins, Gould
and Hodges voting "nay".
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting a new
draft of a proposed amendment to the Parking Meter By-Law, with reference to the policy changes to this
by-law that were adopted on January 12th, 1976 by the Common Council, advising that this draft amendment
contains some of those policy changes and that first and second reading is in order if Council so wishes;
and further advising that the policy changes wherein the voluntary penalty be made $3.00 before the
issuance of a Writ of Summons and $8.00 if the Writ of Summons has been issued is not valid in that there
is no authority in the Municipalities Act for those provisions -- be received and filed.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Michael E. Burgess of 25 Holly
Street, in reference to the proposed increase in parking meter fees to 25 cents per hour, advising (1)
that parking meters were installed in this city as a means of parking control and that it is completely
against the purpose of the meters to use them to raise additional revenue, and (2) that since the Commissioner
of Finance of the City has decided to expense rather than capitalize the expenditure of $61,341.00 for new
mechanisms, the following should be considered: the City Manager and staff have stated that the cost of
the meters can be recovered in seven months - this statement demonstrates the short sighted planning which
has gotten us into this budget mess - it should be obvious that if the meters were installed immediately
and if they paid for themselves over seven months, the remaining five months would yield approximately
$43,800.00 - if the meters are left at the present rate they would yield approximately $42,000.00 - the I
difference of $1,800.00 is hardly sufficient when faced with a $700,000.00 budget cut - if, however, there
is a delay of several months in installing the meters or if interest charges are included, the result is a
loss in revenue for this year - this will add to the budget needs rather than help the situation - from
the above it is evident that an increase in fees is rather unwise -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, further to the
tabling on January 12th last by the Common Council of the recommendation to purchase parking meter parts,
so that increased parking meter rates, if adopted, could go into effect, advising that the staff members
have wrestled with the problem of how to provide for this expenditure without exceeding the expenditure
limitations imposed upon the City, and that although there are various stratagems that could be used to
avoid the appearance of an expenditure, they have come to the conclusion that such a move would not be in
keeping with the spirit of the legislation; and, therefore, recommending that the purchase of meter parts
and the revision of the Parking Meter By-Law not be proceeded with at this time, and that in the meantime,
further dialogue be held with the Parking Commission and the business community as to means of improving
the utilization of parking in the uptown area of the city -- be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
with reference to the application from Mrs. Joan E. Godfrey for renewal of permission to retain her mobile
home on her property on the northern side of the Old Black River Road, about 500 feet past Grandview
Industrial Park, next to her stepson's dwelling, advising that staff inspections disclose that the situation
is still much the same as when the Council first permitted this mobile home on August 10th, 1970 on
compassionate grounds and renewed the permit in 1971 through 1975 because the conditions which led to its
granting in 1970 were still applicable - except that a small unpainted wooden vestibule has been attached
to the mobile home and there is no record of a building permit having been obtained for this -- and
recommending that the Council extend its permission for the year 1976 conditional to a building permit
being obtained for the vestibule which must also be painted to match the colours of the mobile home -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
1
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the
following sums of money be accepted in lieu of land for public purposes with respect to the following
named sub-divisions (in both cases the figure is 8% of the value of proposed lots estimated by the Pro-
perty Management Branch of the Department of Community Planning and Development, and the monies are to be
deposited in the City's trust fund for the acquisition and development of land for public purposes):-
1. from Dr. Michael Keating (Pine Realty) - c-44, the sum of $520.00 (this property is situated north of
the corner of Prospect and Pine Streets - the proposal is to divide it into two lots - the original
property contains a 4-unit apartment building; the Planning Advisory Committee has granted the necessary
permission for the sub-division and the erection of a new 4-unit apartment building on the new lot; the
Real Estate Department estimated the market value of the new lot to be $6,500.00 and Council is therefore
being asked to accept the said payment in lieu of land for public purposes);
.
___-0,:./
~
~
,....
297
.
~7h7e-r
/4h?mt:JhL
aUh.4.
1//17 e en-c-
~(?"//e
h/lme .,;pr
lObe //1//e
//case
'k.ff4
_ amHl.
'?etf/~/()11 re
I /l1e~i1dJeR
(/1It?Ph/4h.-c
,&bJJ-07(' ~ 11'y
/N#/ 'c
~jf-AaW
.
epUh_
;1/Ci1C&PW'"
I
.
, 7r~rf'/c
,
$~gh
1 M/'~,&e #v.
$' pt?t?,c
!'/mrl s/,ff1J
I
{'"un,
Kt?I'/I1!J
. t/17/'pn 5-6
,;? -WOlq
rrOl.t=F/o ~
E?rK;~
T~"",
~".,J'>t,
lr....
2. from Elmer Hammond - S-34, the sum of $248.00 (this property is situated on the westerly side of the Church-
land Road and extends to Adams Lake; a one-acre lot is being severed from this property for a daughter to build a
home on; the market value appraisal estimated by the Property Management Branch is $3,100.00 - on that basis, the
amount of ~248.00 is payable to the City in lieu of land for public purposes.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he wonders if the Planning Department could bring in a report to Council
on the moving by new residents of a metal mobile home on to the City-owned land at the site formerly called the
One Mile House, Rothesay Avenue. He noted that a man is living in this mobile home which is a disgrace to the
community, and that this mobile home was pulled to the site by bicycle, several weeks ago. He felt that some
action should be taken in this matter, and that the Planning Department should at least get a building permit fee
out of this mobile home placement. He stated that he would like to have a report for the next Council meeting on
this matter. The Mayor noted that Mr. Zides will submit the requested report.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee in reply to
the petition received by Common Council on December 8th, 1975 from residents of Alexandra Street regarding over-
night parking on this street, submitting the following recommendations and the reason therefor:- that the Traffic
By-Law be amended (a) by deleting from Schedule "H" - Alternate Side Parking, Alexandra Street from Douglas
Avenue to easterly end, and (b) by adding to Schedule "J" - No Overnight Parking, Alexandra Street from Douglas
Avenue to easterly end -- and that the amendments to the by-law not be unduly delayed so that the necessary
change in signing may be completed in time to correct a situation that is worsened by prevailing snow and ice
conditions -- and advising that representatives of the Police and Works Departments, including the Traffic
Engineering Section, were present at the Committee's meeting of January 20th last when the said recommendations
were adopted and unanimously agreed with the Committee's recommendations -- be received and filed and the recom-
mendations adopted.
Read a letter from Councillor MacGowan, advising that at the request of several concerned citizens, she
discussed with City staff the possibility of erecting a "Slow - Children" sign on Millidge Avenue by Daniel
Avenue and Park Lawn Court, and that as there is some urgency to this matter due to the 40 m.p.h. speed limit on
Millidge Avenue, she would request that the Council instruct staff to have such a sign erected for the safety of
the children in the area. Councillor MacGowan stated that there has been a lot of problem there with the children -
there are a great many children - for about three months she has been trying to get a sign up there saying
"Slow - Children", or something that will slow the traffic down in speed. She stated that she spoke to Mr.
Barfoot about it and he said that possibly the speed limit should be reduced on a temporary basis; in any case,
she would request that the Council to see that instructions be given to staff that a sign be prepared and put
there immediately - there are too many little children crossing there and such a sign is needed. Mr. Barfoot
advised that on checking the Traffic By-Law he finds that a 30 m.p.h. speed limit is in effect now in that area.
Councillor MacGowan noted that a "Slow - Children" sign would be most appropriate regarding this crossing pro-
blem. Mr. Barfoot noted that it would be a speed change sign that would be required. Councillor MacGowan noted
that it would also caution "Slow - Children", and she asked if that sign could go in immediately. During ensuing
discussion, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the speed limit from Somerset Street to Daniel Avenue is 40 m.p.h., and
the speed limit from Daniel Avenue to the end of Millidge Avenue is 30 m.p.h. - possibly, the sign for reduction
of the speed may not be installed, and it Was his suggestion that we should instal the reduction of the speed
limit sign rather than the "Slow - Children" playing, or crossing, or what have you - that sign has to go up, in
any case, in order to comply with the by-law; regarding the other signs, it is a very awkward time to instal signs
because in most cases we have to put in the poles and the ground is frozen, and what we are doing is trying to
instal all the signs that have come down because of the recent storm. Councillor Kipping recalled that there was
a request at a Home and School Association meeting about two months - or at least, a suggestion was made at the
said meeting, in the area, that they would request a reduction in speed from the University Avenue intersection
to Daniel Avenue, from 40 m.p.h. to 30 m.p.h. - actually, they wanted to reduce it to 20 m.p.h. and he recom-
mended against it - he happened to be at the meeting - because he knows that the City does not like three or four
speed limits on the same stretch of street. He asked if that request has come in yet from the said Association.
Mr. MacKinnon made negative reply. Councillor Kipping noted that it was supposed to be on its way. He added
that what the Association is suggesting might solve at least part of the trouble, although "Slow - Children"
signs would also help. Mr. MacKinnon advised that it was indicated at one time by another parent about the
reduction of the speed along there because people were crossing at University Avenue - however, that is the only
crossing that they make - once they cross there there are no children crossing from University Avenue down to
Daniel Avenue - there is no developed land on that side at Daniel Avenue and at University Avenue - these are
intersections. Councillor Kipping pointed out that the problem is that traffic is still going at 40 m.p.h. when
it reaches Daniel Avenue. Councillor MacGowan added that it is also at that speed at Park Lawn Court, even
though that is a 30 m.p.h. zone. Noting that that is a speed problem, Mr. MacKinnon commented that if traffic is
not going to reduce speed with the 30 m.p.h. sign there it is not going to reduce speed with a "Slow" sign.
Councillor MacGowan felt that if motorists are aware that there are children there the speed limit is not exceeded.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the City staff be asked to have a "Slow - Children" sign
erected on Millidge Avenue by Daniel Avenue and Park Lawn Court for the safety of the children in the area, as
requested by Councillor MacGowan on behalf of the citizens.
Councillor Higgins noted that the Commissioner of Engineering and Works has stated that a 30 m.p.h.
sign is going to be put in instead of a 40 m.p.h. sign, and he stated that when that sign is put in and if there
is still what we consider a potential danger, he would make a recommendation regarding the suggested sign; but,
he would like to see the 30 m.ph. sign put in first and try it. He stated he does not like the thought of in the
case of the receipt by this Council of every request for a sign, or slow, or children crossing, and the Council
order the Works Commissioner to do it.
nnayll.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Higgins, Davis and A. Vincent voting
Read a letter from Councillor Kipping, stating he thinks it would be useful and timely for Council to
discuss the following subjects:- (1) making Union Street two-way both ways; (2) the desirability and possibility
of including non-residents and transient workers as contributors to city revenue allotted for expansion and
maintenance of general public facilities.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Traffic and Safety Committee be re~uested to advise the
Common Council at the earliest possible time on the possibility of making Union Street traffic two-way for its
entire length, and that the Committee be asked to include in its recommendation to Council on this matter whether
or not parking should be permitted on either side of Union Street. "
99C'
~ .0
~
;Pp// tfax
e/t-!f 4&'r.
t?/<< h/C"/e:&/e
/.70 zL
aU./7. !Preen
"s;:T ft/e sr
$Ub-"P!'S-C-
o-rTlee
lit .I';lJ7~ei"S, /I/.
;P,jr !1/.;1.s-kr
?astf-Hl.;j sft r
GeI7Q;I;l/
Sc4t.?t11 ~~;<tI
Crl$S-H/01IA-
5~ol ~Udr"S"
Kn&Ats p~
Cp~mlu.s
CrpSS-IV01//r
5cjPt?/ guard.S
Sd'/Pt?/ ~~rtI
,
1711/;/sft>r #'~
"Prpl/./lPs;p- U
<i1pp'/l7tee -/,I"'Oh1
{,.'O/?J/7/ol7 aunel
/Jt#17l1 n61-cin.JaM
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that as a first step, the City Manager be asked to
investigate the possibility of the City being able to impose a head tax, or a poll tax, and advise Council
as to the appropriateness of such a policy.
.
Councillor Kipping explained that he was bringing this matter up because it seems that the City
is missing a very real and perhaps deserved source of revenue, and possibly we could have the Municipalities
Act changed to permit this to be done - therefore, why not look into it in this time of very great res-
triction and need - all that he is asking is that the matter be looked into as to the possibility of being
able to have it done: He added that the City Manager could explore the possibility through the Cities of
New Brunswick Association and any other avenue that is open to us.
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Hodges, Davis and A. Vincent
voting "nay".
Read a letter from Councillor Green advising that he has been petitioned by many residents of
West Saint John to see if the Council can give them some support in having the sub-Post Office re-opened,
that was closed on Ludlow Street. Councillor Green noted that these residents now do not have any post
office service closer than the post office on Church Avenue, and that this is a serious situation, also
considering the need of seamen on ships in port to have a post office in an area of West Saint John of
closer proximity to the dock area.
I
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the Common Council forward letters to Mr. Michael
Landers, Member of Parliament, and to Mr. W. F. Griffith, Saint John Post Master, to see if the present
situation wherein there is no sub-Post Office in West Saint John since the closing of the sub-Post Office
on Ludlow Street cannot be recitifed, and that they be asked for their reply in this regard:
AND FURTHER that a copy of the letter that is being sent to the said Post Master be forwarded to
the Postmaster General of Canada.
.
Councillor Hodges advised that the question of a sub-post office in West Saint John has been
taken up by him,with the postal authorities; apparently there has been a problem in this regard, and the
postal authorities did indicate that perhaps they should return to the method employed before when the
Post Office had its own people at a sub-post office. He added that it is imperative now that there be
some sort of a sub-post office in West Saint John for the convenience of both the citizens arid of seamen
at the docks in the port of Saint John on the West Side.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of School Trustees of School
District Number 20, advising that at a meeting held on January 28th last, the Board received with alarm a
letter from the Canadian Corps of Commissionaires advising that, effective February 2nd, 1976, the number
of manned school crosswalks will be reduced from 24 to 10 and noting that this reduction, at the direction
of the Police Department, presumably is the result of budget constraints imposed upon the City; and
advising that while the members of the Board appreciate the problems facing the Common Council in pro-
viding City services within a restricted budget, they are of the unanimous opinion that the safety of
human life must be at the top of the list in establishing priorities, and that the crosswalks on which
Commissionaires are employed are those locations which, after investigation, have been determined by the
Police Department as dangerous to the safety of school children and the Trustees expressed regret that
this matter was not discussed with the Board prior to the decision being made; and expressing the extreme
concern of the said Board regarding the said reduction of Commissionaires on school crosswalks and asking
for reinstatement of this service; and stating that the Board would also appreciate an opportunity for a
small delegation to meet with representatives of the City to discuss this important subject -- be received
and filed and a meeting be arranged between a small delegation from the Board and a representation of
Council to be appointed by the Mayor.
I
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Knights of Columbus, Saint John
Council No. 937, relative to the decision that has been made to reduce school patrols in this city by
approximately sixty-five per cent, advising that the officers and members of the Knights of Columbus take
exception to this decision in the strongest possible terms and respectfully request that the Council
rescind any instructions that have gone out in this regard; and advising that the officers and members
fully appreciate that in the current economic environment there is a need to economize, to curb extra-
vagances, but they fail to see how the Council could consider little children an extravagance, and that
life is the first and most basic right guaranteed by the Canadian Bill of Rights, and the protection of
each and every individual must not only be the first concern, but the duty, of responsible elected of-
ficials, and to economize at the expense of innocent children runs counter to everything we stand for as
Canadians; and noting that the ultimate objective of the anti-inflation programme is to conserve our
resources, and that our most precious and most important resources are human resources and, of these, our
greatest potential lies in the citizens of the future; and advising that the said officers and members
find it incomprehensible, and totally unacceptable, that Council would even consider jeopardizing the
lives of our most innocent citizens by denying them protection with the removal of school patrols; and
advising that in these difficult times priorities need be established prudently - that children command a
high priority - and the said officers and members are confident that they speak for the majority of the
electorate in requesting the immediate reinstatement of all school patrols -- be received and filed and
taken into consideration when the meeting is held between the small delegation from the Board of School
Trustees of School District Number 20 and a representation of Common Council on this subject.
1
I
Councillor A. Vincent suggested that the above named Knights of Columbus Council be asked to
send a representative to the meeting that is to be held between representations from the said Board of
School Trustees Board and the Common Council. The Mayor agreed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
.
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Minister of Health for New
Brunswick advising that by a Regulation which was recently enacted under the Mental Health Act, a Board of
Trustees has been established for the Saint John Provincial Hospital in Saint John, N. B., and enclosing a
~
,..
299
.
I
(lOUI;1, /l.
I t/t>>eent-
· ~111~
,,( ef/re.;Ju
-t-,? tif-c-
. e4/d pr
Pt'It'ce
CQu /1. .IJ,
II/need
.
I
?eJ7~~/
~eeer'J~,
:l)emp //t-/ f)
I/PfJ-I/()
1?e7Okt6nd
~u/.$
7;.~eA-/!?tf
.7Je/?'7p/fi/
C'p, ,{-I-a.
~fu/P/l?Q/
reh-&--.dR
.7J.~-PH&/&
. ~-t-L
Cap;:t-a /
prr:j tf!~1f.s
~
copy of the said Regulation which details both the terms of reference and the composition of the said Board of
Trustees, and noting that one of the members of the said Board is to be appointed from the Common Council of the
City of Saint John, and asking that the Common Council suggest from amongst the members of the Council three
persons, both suitable and willing, from which the Minister can make the appointment, be referred to the Nomin-
ating Committee.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that there is a very urgent matter before the City, namely, the press
release on our Police Department on Friday, February6th, 1976, and that a large delegation was present at this
Council meeting representing 8,000 workers at Coleson Cove and Point Lepreau, and that the delegation has a
spokesman, and while we have approximately 175 people out of work at Point Lepreau due to some misunderstanding,
and we have a peak of 1,500 people working at Coleson Cove, he would move the following motion.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the President of the Building Trades be heard at this time
to make a statement.
Councillor A. Vincent added that after the above named statement is made we could arrange for a small
meeting with the Chief of Police because we need his assistance in a misunderstanding that Councillor A. Vinc.ent
thinks came out of a press release on February 6th, 1976.
Councillor Kipping stated that if the Council is going to hear a statement from one side, he believes
it would be only fair that the Council hear a statement from the other side. He stated that, actually, he is
leery about the whole thing and is inclined to think the Council should not get into it in this forum - he does
not think this is the place for it, but if we do approve, as a Council, to hear a group appearing - a statement
from one side - we should have a statement, and he is wondering if there is a statement ready, from the other
side of the question - certainly, there are two sides of the question. Councillor Davis asked what the press
release is all about, and what is the problem. Councillor A. Vincent, reading from the said news release,
advised that its caption read, "Coleson Cove theft going on for years: Police Chiefs". He advised that he
certainly did not ask these people to come to the Council meeting - he certainly did not invite the other side to
come - if the other side was here, he would make the same motion. He added that he met with the Chief of Police
this morning and he (Councillor A. Vincent) is satisfied that some of the article that is in the local newspaper
is quite not true because the theft of plywood was at Point Lepreau, not Coleson Cove.
The Council members agreed that, if the above motion is carried, that the delegation spokesman be
heard, but that there be no debate on the subject. Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
January 26th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Counc.illor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on February
4th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Chief of
Rehabilitation Services of the Urban Redevelopment Office, advising that tenders for demolition of the building
located at 108-110 Rockland Road were opened at a tender opening committee meeting on February 5th last, and that
it is recommended that the bid of Paul's Trucking & Demolition Co. Ltd. in the amount of $2,650.00 (the lower of
two bids received) be accepted providing that proof of the necessary insurance coverage can be provided, and
.urther advising that this building was deteriorated to the point where rehabilitation would not be feasible __
be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the invoice from D. Hatfield Ltd. in the amount of $5,678.40, .dated January 19th, 1976, for rental of
equipment to the Works Department.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, authority be given for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices
for engineering services, in connection with the following named capital projects:-
300
~
l. Somerset Community Centre
New Brunswick Housing Corporation .
Total value of contract $ 42,500.00
Total work done, Estimate Number 1 30,335.94
Retention Nil
Payments previously approved Nil
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated January 28, 1976 $ 30,335.94
5~#1rt?6k ~ 2. Shamrock Park Building
R. D. Purdy Associates
PJu/d/n.:/ Engineering Services I
7? .2), 7krdy Payments previously approved $ 1,995.00
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 2,
/}S.sOC. dated November 6, 1975 $ 15,555.00
On motion of Councillor Higgins
;<'PI7/Pf :P'jf-~
q)??e~~md/7~
,1Jed> '~#1
secur/-t'f
pel7/'kn~/4111
C/f!f $p~C/2f~
$ujd/w"s/pJ7
$y-/aw
ClIff Sf//I'cI-tp.
tJt'mP1~O' /-1 'f
:JJIsaSier
~ff-,(.#W
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns amending the Zoning By-Law by
inserting immediately after clause (c) in subsection (2) of Section 176 thereof a new clause (ca) to read
s follows:- "(ca) a federal medium security penal institution", be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
On the question, Councillor M. Vincent stated that he would like to make comments in the above
matter: following the last meeting, one of the Councillors was on a television programme when he said
contrary to what had been said at the meeting to some of the points Councillor M. Vincent made to the
development; he stated that he would not want to make an issue of the point, but Councillor Kipping had
mentioned that the answer to many of the questions on television that Councillor M. Vincent had raised had
already been answered. He stated that he would like to run down, very quickly, a one~entence question,
and that he is pointing to the three pieces of land that we were discussing for the location of a penal
institution in the City of Saint John. He stated that the question that he was raising at the last
meeting was: who owns the other pieces of land? where is the exact location of the other pieces of land?
how large are the other pieces of land? is the land more easily protected from a fire-police standpoint?
are the sites less objected to from the residents' standpoint? will the Federal Government people locate
on either of the other two sites in the Ferguson Lake area if this is denied? He recalled that at the
January 26th Council meeting he talked about the stand of the Saint John Board of Trade in this matter,
and stated that he was criticized publicly and that he also received a letter from the General Manager of
the Board for making depreciatory remarks, and that in the letter, Mr. Alderman stated that the Board had
looked intp both sides of the problem in somewhat detail and talked with everybody. He added that he
talked today with Mr. and Mrs. Doiron, who were the spokesmen for the people of the area in question, and
they had never been approached by the Board of Trade, and that is the reason for his remarks. He stated
that the points that he made at the January 26th Council meeting were not looked into completely, in his
opinion, and he does not believe that the Council gave a complete comparison to the other two sites that
it did to the site that is being chosen. He stated that he feels that what we did is draft a prison for
the Federal Government and then we never bothered to take an in-depth study to determine if the site was
as meaningful to us as it is to them. He stated that he thinks that Mr. Landers, in the article that was
in the newspaper recently, revealed through that article some information on the type of inmates that he
had been able to determine from Federal Government in Ottawa that may be housed in this institution were
far different than the ones we were told about. He stated that he wished to make the point that those
were the points he was talking about at the January 26th Council meeting.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green and M. Vincent voting "nay".
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
lbereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting an
amendment to the Subdivision By-Law incorporating policy changes to this by-law that were adopted several
weeks ago by the Common Council, and advising that first and second readings are now in order if the
Council so wishes, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision of
Land Within The City of Saint John", be read a first time.
I
.
I
.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision 1
of Land Within The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to
Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The City of Saint John", be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision
of Land Within The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, advising that
the Provincial Emergency Measures Organization through the Provincial Department of Justice have prepared
a model by-law for municipalities with respect to Emergency Measures, and that New Brunswick Regulations
70-75(2) (1) reads, "All municipalities, whose population is more than two thousand, are hereby directed
pursuant to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Emergency Measures Act, to formulate plans, in conjunction
with the co-ordinator of the Emergency Measures Organization District concerned, to provide for the
functioning'of municipal government and the necessary services, in the event of a disaster."; and sub-
mitting for enactment by Council a by-law entitled, "A By-Law To Formulate Plans In The Event Of A Com-
munity Disaster" which will, among other things, provide for the appointment of a Committee of Council
together with the Mayor to be known as the Community Disaster Committee, and advising that, generally, the
by-law establishes the terms of reference of the Committee and its relationship to the Council, and '
pointing out that once the by-law is enacted, one o~ the first duties of the Committee will be to appoint
I
.
~
JI""
.
t?()m,M~l7i-t
.7J/s.;Jsi"er
I ~!I-/~U/
I
P~nn,/l//Ih
ep/?7,.1?;1.
.l7'nn/e~
/7e// .-fr~
/l5se~!!j.
OY6?/'. 0b"K
Atjd/"~ +
U/ejJhOpe
111?If's ()I'I
!l1orp/SPh
"Rd. edel1
s/t?n
I~d#d Com
11 PJ1.;I.~
/110. 19. ous-e
v/!J:; eJ@d,
i//,pJ1er'Zi!f
~oeA ,/b/71bh
~ter,$jd
$iffer h/4
a;i-ed t$g.
$'0<//(1,/
.ll1ell/}?sle ,..
. J)p/ve K)(-f:
S4?uf-h Eh
l/and , /
.Nsst?,mbq
Il)f-113
:Brit-oun
,e tL~OI{it..J. '
7/iu s
I
(J,i;e$~
Nli
.
....
aOl
, '.
a Municipal Emergency Measures Co-ordinator and then meet with the appropriate staff to formulate a Community
Disaster Plan; and recommending that first and second readings be given at this time be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Formulate Plans in the Event of a Community Disaster",
be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Formulate Plans in the Event of a Community Disaster"
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Formulate Plans in the
Event of a Community Disaster", be read a second time.
Councillor Kipping made note, as a reminder to the City staff, that the staff might keep an eye cast as
to whether what the Council is doing in regard to the above by-law might affect compensation from other levels of
government, because in this by-law there is authority for the City to buy things at its expense. He felt that
this aspect had better be watched, because the City may end up buying everything at its expense, and some com-
munities cannot afford that over any period of time - we want to be sure we did not cut off other avenues of
assistance. The Mayor noted that once the Emergency Measures Organization is called and that Organization comes
then it makes the declaration which brings in the Federal and Provincial monies.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Formulate Plans in the Event of a Community
Disasterfl.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising
that the sub-division of the property of Annie Bagnell (deceased) on the southerly side of Douglas Lake (with the
'corresponding extensions to the Morrison Road) has taken place in the past on a one, two or three lots at a time
bases, and that the lastest extension which has received tentative approval consists of 11 lots, a 2.2 acre
parcel of land for public purposes and a 780-foot extension to the Morrison Road terminating at the Walters
property line, and that this will be the last division of the Annie Bagnell Estate land in this area because of
the proposed Airport expressway alignment and the possibility that the City may purchase the balance of the
Estate's property (presently under negotiation), and further advising that the Estate is requesting permission to
have the hydro and telephone lines placed on poles as in the past, and that the Power Commission of the City of
Saint John and the New Brunswick Telephone Company Limited have no objection to continuing this distribution
system; and recommending that the said existing overhead distribution for hydro and telephone lines on Morrison
Road be continued and that the Common Council assent to this -- be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
On motion of Councillor Davis
l Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
the City purchase Mr. Ronald Morehouse's property, located on the Whalen Road within the watershed and considered
one of the prime properties that the City wishes to acquire, for the sum of $19,000.00, with the City to bear
legal and other costs.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, whose letter of
February 9th, 1976 advises that in May of 1975 the Common Council approved a recommendation from the Committee to
acquire 12,697 square feet of land from the Silver Falls United Church for the sum of $5,100.00 and that arrange-
ments have been made for a surveyor to submit a sub-division plan for this property and that the City will bear
he cost of the survey provided the survey does not exceed $200.00 in cost, and that the City is not required to
pay to the said Church interest on the said $5,100.00 which has not as yet been paid to the Church -- the City
bear the cost of survey for the said 12,697 square feet of property on McAllister Drive Extension that the City
is acquiring from the Silver Falls United Church proviaed the surveying costs do not exceed $200.00 and that the
City is not required to pay interest on the sum of $5,100.00 which represents payment for the purchase of the
12,697 square feet.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that when the
Common Council gave approval in principle to the South End development project the Council instructed the Com-
mittee to acquire the properties necessary for the implementation of the first phase of the plan, and the first
phase includes the assembly of land and properties for new housing in the Britain Street area, and this property
will form part of a land assembly programme and will be kept in management until the rest of the properties have
been acquired (the property in question being 109-113 Britain Street) - and recommending the acquisition by the
City of 109-113 Britain Street (a three-family dwelling on a lot measuring 40 feet by 100 feet) which is assessed
at ~12,200.00, for the sum of $8,000.00, from Edgar L. Titus, and that, if necessary, the City bear the cost of a
survey of this property -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Davis explained that the above named property is part of that very bad half-block on Britain
Street between Charlotte and Sydney Streets that the City is trying to acquire for the South End development of
the new residential area. He stated that if a survey of this property is necessary, the cost of same to the City
would be a minimum cost, he believes, because we hope to acquire more properties in that particular section of
street and the survey would entail just a straight line down the back of the properties.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Cities of New Brunswick, advising that a
meeting of this organization will be held in Moncton, N. B. on Saturday, February 28th next, and asking for
advice as to any items that the City of Saint John wishes to have placed on the agenda for that meeting, be
received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent asked what does the City of Saint John have to do, to withdraw from the Cities of
New Brunswick, adding that this organization is of no help to the City of Saint John, in his opinion, and that
the organization has proven this on more than one occasion lately. He stated he would like to see the City of
Saint John withdraw from this organization. The Mayor pointed out that by being a member of the Cities of New
302
1?,;1~A J 5~
~r, A~sA~ t7.
;tea
PliilIJn, /lI'Ll/is.
('p",,#?
:lJel7ta/ o-,C// C
-;Zpn/hf ;B:J-
tfJ/J7m. lII~o/e
C.iilJaut/~J? tfd
timers hocKey
-co~/W~ mt?nt-'
LEGAL
C'lly $p//'cl-tfpr
l(es~/I7"/J?~
l17of/pl7
/ka-ca..alr /IJ
-I1'.f"-I- f7u/I?? stJ
tip!?, ~ult-7(.
/I1onte {j./do
t9u/;-tL; v.:
amm. Whole
c,~.Y So~c/tfpr
T~ 77t~s~~
e,e-!1ll/;r;l7aj'er
Cbmm.Ko/I<.9.4
If/Pl'/f$
ph K'L s-t-.
(/lppd/1f5. d)
p.!'ern I ::Ie.$"
C5Jt-aA .6~S/)7
~
'f-
Brunswick, Saint John now knows what is going on in the other member cities and they are prepared to
support us in our requests because, certainly, they support Saint John (inualso helps them; likewise, if
those cities get support in something, Saint John hears about it and Saint John can use the same leverage.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels that the Cities of New Brunswick did not help Saint John out much in
its budget.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Ralph J. Stephen, solicitor for
Dr. Leesha G. Zed, who operates a dental office at 101 Carleton Street, and who has occupied this office
for some twenty years, advising that the remainder of the ground floor of this building is occupied by Dr.
Frederick H. George, who has occupied his space for about twenty years, and further advising that it now
appears that Dr. Zed wishes to make some renovations and a slight extension to his present office but the
zoning of the present building is residential, and that it has been learned from Mr. Murray Zides that
instead of seeking re-zoning, his client should ask for the present Zoning By-Law to be amended so that
any building that is within 250 to 300 feet of a business zone and being used in a non-conforming manner
uch as the present building that renovations and minor extension be allowed -- be referred to the Planning
Advisory Committee for a report to Common Council.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillor A. Vincent asked why the
agenda of this Council meeting, regarding the
1976, is being dealt with in Committee of the
discussed pertaining to the item that may, or
why the item has been listed for Committee of
item listed on the Committee of the Whole section of the
Canadian Oldtimers Tournament in Lethbridge, Alberta in
Whole. The Mayor replied that there may be some things
may not, be detrimental to the group as a whole, and that is
the Whole - to protect them.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
.
The Mayor withdrew from the Council chamber and Deputy Mayor Higgins assumed the Chair at this
time. Councillor A. Vincent withdrewfrom the meeting.
Read a letter from the City Solicitor, relative to Common Council resolution of November lOth,
1975 which adopted a recommendation of the City Manager to pay $4,500.00 to Heat Craft Limited as the
negotiated settlement for a lift pump station, which payment was subject to documentation satisfactory to
the City Solicitor, and also relative to the letter received by Council before the transaction was finalized
from Mr. William Meltzer, Solicitor on behalf of one of the creditors of 360 Development Limited which
requested that payment not be made to Heat Craft Limited - recalling that on December 1st, 1975, the
Council adopted a resolution in legal session delaying payment until the City Solicitor completed a study
into Mr. Meltzer's request, and advising that the City Solicitor is now satisfied that Mr. Meltzer was not
familiar with all the facts surrounding this matter, and that in view of the foregoing, the City Solicitor
is recommending that Council rescind.its legal session resolution of December 1st, 1975, and thereby clear I'
the way for finalization of this matter between the City and Heat Craft Limited.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the above recommendation of
the City Solicitor, Common Council resolution of December 1st, 1975, that was adopted in Legal Session
with regard to delay in payment of monies to Heat Craft Ltd. in the amount of $4,500.00 as a negotiated
settlement for a lift pump station on the Gault Road in a sub-division that was being developed by 360
Development Limited, be rescinded and that the City pay Heat Craft Ltd. in this regard following the
finalization of the investigation that has been made by the City Solicitor.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, the Committee arose and the Deputy Mayor resumed
the Chair in Legal Session of Common Council at 8.15 o'clock p.m. when there were present the Mayor and
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt and M. Vincent, and Messrs. N. Barfoot,
City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the
City Manager, and J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works.
.
Read a communication, dated January 19th, 1976, from T. R. Titus Bakery, 15 Prince Edward
Street, relative to flooding of the bakery's premises at the said address, asking why the mound was built
in the middle of the road and, at the same time, the Irving's parking lot was raised, and at whose expense
this was done, because the City equipment was there at the time and did the paving.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above matter be referred to the City Manager for
esponse in conjunction with the City Solicitor, and that the Commissioner of Works be instructed to have
his Department do all that it can to keep the catch basin open in the vicinity of the said bakery at 15
Prince Edward Street.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
I
Common Clerk.
.
~
,....
3G1a
t1,UI?,4
I/Inc(!}fr
'Pf/1. C~/e.(
~rtl'%~/
, . (1;k;"~ ove
. Sf-rlke
.s.X C/v/e
-Kh;flfop;S'
t/h!on /(0./1 The Mayor referred to a newspaper article and stated he was speaking on behalf of the City of Moncton
C'I'~U ;?1~f'. in so doing, in noting that General Dextrase, Chief of Defence Staff of the armed forces of Canada, said on
/ February lOth last that he will be sympathetic to the economic situation in the Moncton area when he makes an
assessment of Canadian force bases across the country. The Mayor explained that some of these bases are to be
t?/:~1jf p~ closed out and that he is concerned that Camp Gagetown, which is the largest base in Canada - in fact, the
;?,1~ztP)? largest in the British Commonwealth - has been reduced to more or less a school and a training area, while
L7 ~ Valcartier Camp is continuing to expand to be the largest military camp in Canada personnel. He felt that the
/7i"I??~ City of Saint John certainly backs Moncton in that city's desire to retain that depot there where they employ so
~)1~eS many people, after having had the loss of the T. Eaton Company.
:J3~ se{e/o$-
I /1 u,1<S
c...;U?7 ?
. tJd.3W6Wh
OI"t!J5S-W.;;;/ff:
Study
IlMer, rd.)?
17ufon'/oOI Ie
,L}SSpe.
.
I
I
C/?UI7. /l
llih~ent
IJI, 13.kkdn
. %wer t'OInA
J>~;J7t-
Aef'red~
C/;.'ilf1les
.I!fJ1~h
,F-,C// c/ e I7C
ff
I t:>/lI7S-cr<<.d/o
IYtJrkers
I
.
.....
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the sixteenth day of
February, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administra-
tion and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, of the Community Planning and
Development Department, B. Gale, Plumbing Inspector, G. Baird, Commissioner
of Economic Development, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
P. Clark, Fire Chief, and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police
The Reverend Doctor D. S. Calkin, Pastor of Waterloo Street Baptist Church, offered a prayer which
opened the meeting.
The Mayor complimented Councillor A. Vincent for his work in getting together the Chief of
Deputy Police Chief Ross, and he also complimented the Chief and Deputy Chief, in having gone to the
that made it possible, along with other meetings held by Councillor A. Vincent, to get the people at
oleson Cove back to work. He thanked Councillor A. Vincent in this regard.
Police and
meetings
Lepreau and
The Mayor stated that, at this time, he wished to point out that the City cannot tolerate illegal
strikes. He stated that, due to the recent walk-out of the Saint John Civic Employees' Union, Local 18, C.U.P.E.,
,he. has asked the City Manager to inform the Council at this meeting, or next week, of what action, if any, is
contemplated against the said Union and its members.
On the subject of cross-walks, the Mayor advised of receipt this date of a letter from the American
Automobile Association in Saint John which states that they are interested in cross-walks, and that since cross-
walks were installed in 1921 in the United States of America and in 1932 in Canada they have never had a death on
a cross-walk while there was a senior citizen looking after crossing of children going to school - and that they
are prepared at no cost to the City to bring in an expert who would study the City's cross-walks and tell us the
important ones.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he appreciated the remarks made by the Mayor, and stated that
without the efforts of Police Chief Ferguson and Deputy Police Chief Ross explaining to the security of the New
Brunswick Electric Power Commission and to the thirteen Building Trades involved, he is sure that Point Lepreau
would not be opened at this time because some people were under false illusions. Referring to an article written
by journalist Charles Lynch that appeared in the Telegraph-Journal of February 7th, 1976, copies of which had
been distributed at this time to the Council members, Councillor A. Vincent stated he understands that Mr. Lynch
will be in Saint John on February 27th next, and that he would like to challenge Mr. Lynch through the Common
Council to produce his proof that a Quebec worker can work three times harder than a New Brunswicker or, par-
ticularly, a Saint Johner. He stated that he talked with Mr. Lynch on a long distance telephone call within the
past few minutes and Mr. Lynch was surprised that he (Councillor A. Vincent) would challenge him (they are old
friends). Councillor A. Vincent stated that he does not think Mr. Lynch's article is fair where he says that we
in New Brunswick are three times lower in productivity - he thinks that Mr. Lynch is a liar and that he rep-
resents Quebec and that he is a betrayal to his native city, having been born in this city. Councillor A.
Vincent expressed the view that this is the most awful article that has ever appeared in a local newspaper in New
Brunswick in the last hundred years. He added that Mr. Lynch told him where he got the information, which means,
if true, that "somebodyls hair is going to be curled". Councillor Gould expressed the view that this is a matter
to be discussed outside a Council meeting and not for the Council to get involved with that matter - he thinks it
is more properly the people involved toward whom the accusation was made, and that it was not made against the
Council members. Councillor A. Vincent replied that it was made against us in this area, and if he is sitting in
a boardroom in New York or London, England, making a decision to bring a large plant here, he is certainly not
going to come here if he is told that a worker in Quebec can do three times as much work - in other words, Mr.
Lynch is saying that any carpenter, bricklayer, or electrician in Quebec can work two hours and fifteen minutes
compared to our eight-hour day -- he will call him a liar wherever he is. Councillor Davis stated that he
sympathizes with what Councillor A. Vincent is saying, adding that he thinks this is a syndicated column that
probably appeared in a great many newspapers across Canada. With regard to the statements made by Mr. Lynch,
Councillor Davis feels that we should ask for proof, and he does not think that a debate is necessary. He noted
that the article states that "the cement foundation has been put in for the reactor building at Point Lepreau,
and the awful fact is that the cost was more than three times that for identical work at the Quebec site. In
other words, New Brunswick workers were only one-third as productive as their Quebec counterparts, and the New
Brunswick Electric Power Commission wants to know why.". Councillor Davis noted that this refers to a cement
foundation. Councillor A. Vincent asked why Mr. Lynch does not say that it has been on a cost-plus job and that
is the reason the project costs so much, instead of blaming it on our labour. Councillor Davis stated he thinks
it is very valid that we should ask for an explanation and that we should ask for a column retracting whatever
statement is wrong. The foregoing discussion was the result of Councillor A. Vincent's proposed motion" that
Councillor Green was prepared to second, that we challenge Mr. Charles Lynch to a public television debate.
During further discussion, Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels that we should ask the Assistant of the Saint
John Construction Association and the Building Trades to produce our productivity record, adding that he thinks
that we can show that on the tower building that is being constructed for the New Brunswick Telephone Company,
Limited that we are second to none on civic trades North America productivity, and he thinks that we can subpoena
Mr. Rod McAlpine, the said Telephone Company, Trizec Corporation, and the Bank of Nova Scotia - which he believes
are reliahle corporate citizens - to testify to this effect. He added that he thinks we should do it.
aa4
CnD/ples /~)?eA
.E#i'cieney
ff C~hS-t'rkt!-
-t/~n If/~rffel's
7>t?ll7r ~ ~re,;)~
Cr/U/1,,4 r//nee,
//JtJ'b; /e ,10M e,
(}Ile ~/e /Io<<.s
.J)J/~"e/d .4-';
ehlWt:ds $dl1h.
1?r.il ye
.7Je;rter an-
dra~f/ClJ7 ,(7fd':
tf/rJJrtj& ?~;<
Cij?II071 /u~e;~
;f/;l~~r
51. b-eN'ge
,56, /l J? a/let/J 5
5-t, $t~~en
Sit 5$ex
/lj/'16't'P1ed re
I"eff/t//l<ill d~~
17J~nf-~ 'pMhl1t/t-/
d Il7duslrg '7'-
t!t?I7JI716'me
S.T htl1dy ff~/O
:J${/ell7~~ .
(W/.y()J-'~1f /7e.
~Nn? CI'Ey ()p.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that Mr. Charles Lynch be requested to supply proof of his
statements made in the article which appeared in the Telegraph-Journal of February 7th, 1976 regarding
efficiency in the construction of the nuclear power station at Point Lepreau, New Brunswick.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that at the meeting of February 9th last he asked for a report
regarding the new mobile home that is located on Rothesay Avenue (the former One Mile House site), and
stated that he now has pictures of that structure and there is a man living in it. At this time, he filed
with the Council the said pictures. He stated that he would still like to have this report, with refer-
nce to the said building, measuring four feet by six feet, that is situate on City-owned land. The Mayor
replied that this matter will be brought up.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following invoices, namely:-
D. Hatfield, Ltd.
D. Hatfield, Ltd.
Chitticks Sand & Gravel
Dexter Construction Limited
dated January 5, 1976
dated January 19, 1976
dated January 16, 1976
dated February 5, 1976
$ 3,675.90
$ 2,025.00
$ 2,948.40
$ 4,266.38
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's question as to what the 15-yard dump truck was used for in
the ,Sanitation Department, and what the 6-yard dump truck was used for in the Water Department, Mr.
Barfoot stated that he will report on this matter, next week.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report for December of the Works Branch of the
Engineering and Works Department, including capital works up to and including the month of December, be
received and filed.
Read a letter from the City Manager, dated February 13th, 1976, further to the consideration
given by the Common Council on November 3rd and lOth, 1975 to the proposed Agreement with respect to
regional development and the promotion of industry and commerce (a copy of which was submitted with his
letter) and to the letter from Mr. Patrick D. Darrah, Chairman of the proposed Saint John Fundy Region
Development Commission, to the November lOth, 1975 Council meeting in which Mr. Darrah amended the
proposed Terms of Reference so that only administrative powers were included -- and further to the City
Manager's recommendation at that time that a final decision on entering into the said Agreement be
delayed, pending the outcome of the changes that were then taking place with respect to the future of
the New Brunswick Development Corporation and New Brunswick Multiplex Corporation -- advising that it .
now appears that the form of the provincial organization for economic development is becoming clear and
that the time has come for Saint John to go ahead with its participation in the Saint John Fundy Region
Development Commission, while at the same time, it should continue to press for a continuing recognition
of the special needs of Saint John in the industrial promotion field, as the Regional Industrial Centre
and further advising that the role of the Region Development Commission is to develop parks, assemble
economic data, work for local infrastructure, which do all these things which provide an environment
inducive to the promotion of orderly economic development, and that, therefore, the Council should
participate in the Region Commission in these aspects and join with the other municipalities who have
already passed resolutions to enter into an Agreement to participate. The letter states that there is
one further area, however, where Saint John should request that the Agreement be modified - that is, in
the area of representation, and that the proposed membership should be changed so that Saint John, which
has to provide approximately 88% of the municipalities' share of the budget of the Commission based on
population, should appoint a majority of the membership of the Commission. The letter recommends that
subject to the matter of representation being satisfactorily resolved, the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute the proposed Agreement for participating in the Saint John Fundy Region Develop-
ment Commission, as amended.
The Mayor reported that he contacted the Mayors of St. George and St. Andrews and the Deputy
Mayor of St. Stephen and the Mayor of Sussex, and they all agreed to the proposal of the City of Saint
John, of the City of Saint John having the two extra people on the above named Commission representing
Saint John.
Councillor Cave stated that before a vote is taken at this meeting in regard to this matter,
he would want to see the Terms of Reference, and the numbers of people who would be on the Commission
from each participating municipality. The Mayor replied that by contacting the' Mayors of the four towns
he was able to get permission from them to put two more members from Saint John on that Commission
which, therefore, gives Saint John a majority. Councillor Green asked for assurance that the said
Agreement will not be signed until this verbal agreement that has been given by the said four towns to
the Mayor is in writing, regarding representation on the said Commission from each of the municipalities
involved. The Mayor replied that he can get it in writing, very quickly. Councillor MacGowan expressed
her hesitation about voting on anything until it has been actually approved officially - she felt that
although the said four towns have given the Mayor verbal agreement, that is not very binding, she would
think. Mr. Rodgers advised that the safest way, if the Council wishes this, is to authorize the Mayor
and Common Clerk to execute the Agreement subject to the Common Council of the City of Saint John having
majority representation on the Commission. The Mayor stated that in giving their verbal agreement as
above noted, the Mayors of the four towns said they realize Saint John did not have the desire to, in
any way, out-vote for the purpose of selfish reasons, and on the telephone, they approve; we are pre-
pared to get that in writing, but he believes the Council has to have faith in their comments, too.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to
xecute on behalf of the City of Saint John the Agreement between the City of Saint John, the Towns of
St. Stephen, St. Andrews, St. George and Sussex, and the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission
with regard to regional development and the promotion of industry and commerce, subject to the Common
Council of the City of Saint John having majority representation on the said Commission.
~
.
I
I
.
\1
.
I
I
.
.....
,...
;305
.
I
h;.,e
Sf .iltiPJ1
(1Je(,(/ )
I(/h~ $t.
1(pCC01
eJl7druc -
TIN) '/-Id.
I
aJ7traC!t-
.
I
S-tl'ea-
C'/t;~;J7!J
Third $1-.
($)0% Sf.
$I7PW.5I:
.
I
(!P/7/ /H It'#!f,
7J/6aS-fer
~- ,4,w
all OJ?
-idl/k ~e
p.1"e)
I
.
.....
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter, dated February 13th, 1976, from the City Manager
further to Common Council resolution of October 6th, 1975 which approved the construction of a new fire station
on the King Street East site by Rocca Construction Ltd. with the foundation to be of a capacity to enable the
construction of apartment units or office space over the fire station at some future date, and the City staff to
enter into further negotiations concerning design, costs and financial arrangements, advising that since that
time, the Fire Chief and Mr. D. Buck have been negotiating with the chosen developer with respect to design and
costs and that, unfortunately, because of foundation problems, the cost of constructing the building to carry a
future high rise apartment building or office tower about the fire station was uneconomic, and that, however, the
building, as now designed, is a handsome two-storey brick structure which harmonizes well with the surrounding
area, and the balance of the City-owned land will be available for residential or office construction; and
advising that the price of $578,579.00 which has been negotiated with the developer, Rocca Construction Ltd., is
a fair price and includes all fees, permits and insurances, and is within the original cost estimates of the
project two years ago; and advising that with regard to whether the fire station should be proceeded with in this
time of spending restraints, one factor to be considered is that when the new station is completed, two old
stations will be closed out - there will be no increase in manpower and there will be substantial savings in the
cost of heating and maintaining the new building compared to the old buildings - moreover, until the new station
is built, the new equipment purchased by the City cannot operate in an efficient manner - to delay the construction
of the fire station will not have the effect of saving operating costs (the new aerialscope is temporarily housed
at Number 4 fire station on Courtenay Avenue, Saint John East); and further advising that in order to construct
the new fire station, part of Number 1 fire station on King Street East will have to be demolished, and that it
had been planned previously that only the rear ten feet of this station would be torn down and the balance of the
station kept in use, but the Fire Chief is at present investigating an alternative method of handling the Company
which operates from this station and a further recommendation will be forthcoming -- and recommending that the
City of Saint John enter into a firm contract with Rocca Construction Ltd. to build the fire station, as per the
agreed plans and specifications, at a contract price of $578,579.00 -- be received and filed and the recommend-
ation adopted, and the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the said contract document on behalf of
the City.
Noting that Mr. Patrick Rocca was present at the meeting, Councillor A. Vincent asked if the cons-
truction work on the above named fire station is going to be done by the Rocca company, adding that he is not
happy with one arena that was built for the City by the Rocca company and that it is his information that the
construction of the arena was farmed out. Mr. Rocca confirmed that Rocca Construction Ltd. will be the general
contractor, and that the brick work on the said new fire station will be done by either Rocca Construction Ltd.
or by Maritime Bricklayers.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting
the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 187 of the
Municipalities Act, R.S.N.B., 1973" with respect to the closing of the following highway:-
Third Street - All that certain lot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the City of Saint John,
in the County of Saint John and Province of New Brunswick, being bounded and described as follows:-
Beginning at a point having New Brunswick Grid Co-ordinate Values north 557338.18 east 1115711.94,
said point being at the intersection of the western side of Third Street, also known or formerly known as Short
Street, also known or formerly known as Snow Street, at its'intersection with the northern side of Rothesay
Avenue; going thence by an azimuth referred to the N. B. Grid three hundred and eight (308) degrees forty-eight
(48) minutes forty (40) seconds a distance of two hundred and twenty-five and five tenths (225.5) feet; thence an
azimuth of thirty-eight (38) degrees fifty-six (56) minutes twenty (20) seconds a distance of fifty (50) feet;
thence an azimuth of one hundred and twenty-eight (128) degrees forty-eight (48) minutes forty (40) seconds a
distance of two hundred and twenty-five and five tenths (225.5) feet to the northern side of Rothesay Avenue;
thence an azimuth of two hundred and eighteen (218) degrees fifty-six (56) minutes twenty (20) seconds a distance
of fifty (50) feet to the place of beginning, containing a~ area of 11,275 square feet and being a portion of the
Street extending northwardly from Rothesay Avenue a distance of two hundred and twenty-five and five tenths
(225.5) feet, as shown on the subdivision plan, City of S~int John prepared by Murdoch-Lingley Ltd. dated Novem-
ber 7, 1975 and signed by Carl Laubman, N.B.L.S. which pl~n has been approved by the Development Officer for the
City of Saint John on November 27, 1975 by the Director of Surveys, E. R. Jamieson, November 27, 1975, and filed
in the Office of the Registrar of Deeds in and for the County of Saint John, November 28, 1975 as Number 198 __
be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in
The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 187 of the Municipalities Act, R.S.N.B., 1973", was
read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Formulate Plans in the
Event of a Community Disaster", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Formulate Plans in the Event of a Community Disaster", was read in
its entirety at this time.
Councillor Davis stated that he does not think that the above named by-law is a good by-law, at all,
and that there are too many things that apply to small cities and do not apply to Saint John - the business about
aying the personnel is covered by Union agreements, and the business of having a committee consisting of the
ayor and three Councillors is not necessary, he does not think, and there is confusion in having such a com-
ittee. He recalled that at the Council meeting of February 9th last, when first and second readings were given
to this by-law, there was discussion on the point that there could be two groups working (as committees), one
orking without knowledge of the other. Stating that he does not think it is necessary, he advised that it is
his opinion that the whole thing should be reviewed again, and he added that he does not think particularly that
here the proposed by-law says that we can enter into agreements with the Government of the Dominion of Canada,
that that is possible - he does not think there is any way that we can by-pass the Province. He stated that he
does not like this whole Act, and he cannot vote for it; he added that he does not think it is necessary _ he
hinks we can get by without it. The Mayor pointed out that the City does have a committee already, consisting
of the people who would be involved, namely, the Fire Chief, the Police Chief, and the Commissioner of Engine-
ering and Works - that is the committee that functions. Councillor Davis indicated that such committee is
etter, and is the one - that is the committee. Councillor Gould stated that he, too, is not satisfied with that
hree Councillors arrangement in the proposed by-law regarding a committee. He stated that he had felt that
306
~
tbmMun/---f;t
.:t)/~ster
2Jg-- ,1c;w
~lfff St'lIc/io
$ttb~/'y/s/on
3J1-'/c;w
e/ -f.!:l ..so hi?/ i1
c:1,;;uu:(e ,(,;lJ1lke.
er OIl 11"$.
O/11~,! z;,ves-c
1111016-S A't-d.
In 9'~/ry
question was going to be resolved, from the meeting of February 9th of Council. He felt that probably the
best thing to do at this time would be to table the matter and either have the Council look at it as a
whole or have the Mayor appoint a committee to look at it and bring it in, if we deem it is necessary.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table, until the
City Solicitor has an opportunity to review the points raised concerning the above named proposed by-law_
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
to Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The City of Saint John", be read a third time and enacted and
the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Councillor A. Vincent asked why the above amendment does not include amending the sub-division
cost-sharing, adding that he asked for same six months ago, and several times in the meantime. Mr.
Barfoot recalled that when the questions came up in January he believes we said we would be reporting back
to Council within two months regarding this matter. He added that the report will be submitted in March.
I
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The
City of Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
Read a letter from the City Solicitor, dated February 13th, 1976, in reply to Common Council
resolution of January 19th last which asked Mr. Donald M. Gillis, Q. C., the City's General Counsel, and
the City Solicitor, to bring in a recommendation regarding what action, if any, should be taken with
respect to the evidence concerning the Court settlement regarding Claude Lanthier et al (Plaintiff) and
Omega Investments Limited (Defendant) and the City of Saint John as the Third Party as it relates to
falsified accounts, advising that he has received Mr. Gillis' opinion, and it is submitted for Council's
information, and that he concurs with the remarks of Mr. Gillis and the suggestions put forward in Mr.
Gillis' letter, dated February 2nd, 1976, as to the action which ought to be taken. The City Solicitor's
letter states that if Council wishes to pursue this matter in the manner outlined, the following res-
olution ought to be adopted by the Council, "WHEREAS, upon receiving the legal opinion of Mr. Donald M.
Gillis, Q. C., dated February 2,1976, relating to certain false amounts presented for payment to the City
with regard to the development of Millidgeville Estates, so-called, in 1972 and 1973, and upon receiving
the concurring opinion of the City Solicitor, BE IT RESOLVED, that the correspondence received from the
City Solicitor and Legal Counsel, Mr. Donald M. Gillis, Q. C. in this regard, be forwarded to the ap-
propriate Provincial Officials for whatever action they deem necessary.". The City Solicitor's letter
advises that as Mr. Gillis' suggestion could possibly involve the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in this
matter, the City Solicitor has discussed this recommendation with the Chief of Police, Eric Ferguson, and
he is familiar with the recommendation before Council. At this time, Councillor Kipping proposed a
motion, that was seconded by Councillor Cave, that the resolution set forth in the City Solicitor's letter
be adopted. The Mayor asked if we can demand such a thing, rather than asking or suggesting it to the
appropriate Provincial Officials. In reply, Mr. Rodgers advised that we cannot demand because it is in
their jurisdiction to make the decision. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he was going to originally
move that the matter be tabled until legal session because he cannot see any connection whatsoever between
the recommendations of the City Solicitor, Mr. Rodgers, and the content of Mr. Gillis' letter. He therefore
asked for an explanation on the content of Mr. Gillis' letter and the resolution proposed by Mr. Rodgers.
Mr. Rodgers pointed out that Mr. Gillis' letter talks about a request should be made to the Lieutenant-
Governor-in-Council for an inquiry, and further states that if such a request is refused, an alternative
approach should be made to the Minister of Justice to arrange to have a complete and thorough investigation
of the entire transaction carried out by what is commonly referred to as the Fraud Squad of the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police. He pointed out that in his proposed resolution, he said that if the Council
wishes to pursue this matter in the manner outlined, the resolution ought to be adopted by the Council, as
set forth in his letter to Council. He noted that the resolution is really, "BE IT RESOLVED that the
correspondence received from the City Solicitor and Legal Counsel, Mr. Donald M. Gillis Q.C., in this
regard, be forwarded to the appropriate Provincial Officials for whatever action they deem necessary." in
that the correspondence that the Council has received under the City Solicitor's signature and the cor-
respondence received, that is attached to it, from Mr. Gillis, be forwarded to the appropriate Provincial
Officials for whatever action they deem necessary, and they will decide whether an inquiry is warranted,
whether the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Fraud Squad is to investigate it, or whether no action is to be
taken whatsoever. He stated that, to him, ties both letters together, unless he is missing something.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that his point was that in the fourth paragraph of the said letter from Mr.
Gillis it states that "It is my opinion, therefore, that this matter does pertain to the conduct of public
business and a request should be made to the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council for an inquiry under the
Inquiries Act, Ch. 1-11, R.S.N.B. 1973 on the grounds that the issue does concern the conduct of the
public business and also includes a matter of public interest." - so, we are being advised by Mr. Gillis
that we should take a course of action to make a request to conduct an inquiry under the said Act. He
noted that in the second paragraph in the proposed resolution submitted by Mr. Rodgers, he is suggesting
that the correspondence "in this regard, be forwarded to the appropriate Provincial Officials for whatever
action they deem necessary", and he stated that he is suggesting that we are not following Mr. Gillis'
recommendation if we forward it to the Provincial authorities for whatever action they deem necessary,
when in the above noted paragraph of Mr. Gillis' letter he says it is a matter of conduct of public
business and the direct statement is made that a request should be made. He stated that he interprets, in
this case, that the request should be made by we, the City of Saint John. Mr_ Rodgers pointed out that
Mr. Gillis' report goes on to say, "If such a request for an inquiry is refus~d..." and stated that he,
(the City Solicitor) is saying that rather than go to Fredericton, have one request refused, and come back
to the Common Council again, that the correspondence be forwarded to Fredericton and they will make the
decision - and by forwarding it to Fredericton, the Common Council is requesting it.
.
I
.
I
I
During discussion with Councillor Kipping regarding the forwarding of the correspondence in
question to the appropriate Provincial Officials, Mr. Rodgers explained that "the appropriate Provincial
Officials" would be the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council and the Minister of Justice, in both instances
(referred to in Mr. Gillis' letter), at the same time. Councillor Gould asked if there are any other
legal options open to the City besides the two set forth in Mr. Gillis' letter. Mr. Rodgers replied that
there are not, not that he is aware of. The Mayor asked if there is enough information on these two
pages, or is there a lot of other documents. Mr. Rodgers replied that there is enough information for
them to come back and ask for more. With the consent of Councillor Cave, Councillor Kipping withdrew his
original motion in this matter. Councillor A. Vincent stated he wished the record to show that he neither
moved nor seconded the motion of Common Council that the bill be paid regarding the development of Millidgeville
.
~
,...
.
Claude
,(al'1t-h/er
1.;// vs. a,~,i;l
J;'w~sfh14.
,.( -cd.
..L.n9'u/rjl
.7n"u/';-/es
/lc't-
I ,(-fj-tJ!.oi/. -/17
~Pu..,c//
/1'1/1 ~'d.f!ej//
/"$'tCl#es
.
eI)Mm/~e
ff If/;{ f?/e
~~h1d~r
IIl.am':tr:
CI~~~Jf!/!ftr
H/?%.I7S
7)//1, Weer.?-
:P..;u.J$
fIa~17 7Jt?
Pf11f/t!1~t!1~
VI t!. i!!S uat
(S~~
J3u4.1~/t
.
1
I
TePJ'1!;'
,/?pJf(:!h;;;;u
/ft;J/le
. i"hle
.....
301,
Estates, so called.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he does not have enough information on the legal intent of what Mr.
Rodgers has explained to him in replying to his questions, and that he would like ,to move that the matter be
tabled to legal session this evening so that the Council might have a chance to ask more questions on what the
legal implications are on the proposals that Mr. Rodgers is suggesting. Mr. Rodgers replied that, on that point,
certainly, the Council is free to do that; however, he has attached Mr. Gillis' opinion and he has also cited for
Council the recommendation that the Council recently passed. Councillor MacGowan felt that the third paragraph
of Mr. Gillis' letter ("I am of the opinion that the City has very likely been defrauded of a substantial sum of
money -- the amount of which I would not care to speculate. I do not think it would have been possible in the
civil action brought against the City to obtain the entire evidence concerning the irregularities because of
rules of relevancy to the issues before the Court and also due to the fact that persons involved were not parties
o the proceedings and who in all probability would not have been called to testify.") explained to Councillor M.
Vincent why.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that a request be made to the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council for
an inquiry under the Inquiries Act, Ch. I-ll, R.S.N.B. 1973 on the grounds that the issue relating to certain
false amounts presented for payment to the City with regard to the development of Millidgeville Estates, so
called, in 1972 and 1973, does concern the conduct of the public business and also includes a matter of public
Onterest.
Councillor A. Vincent, referring to the foregoing matter, asked who is going to file the affidavits,
and who is making the complaint. Mr. Rodgers stated that he does not see any affidavits coming into this matter
until the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council decides. Councillor A. Vincent asked: when the report is in the affirm-
ative from the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council, who is going to produce what he wants. Mr. Rodgers replied that
that is something that is in the control of the Province. Councillor A. Vincent commented that he is sure that
the Province is not going to supply the affidavits. The Mayor noted that we will get an answer to that question.
Read a report from the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, February 9th, 1976, when there were
Mayor Flewwelling, Deputy Mayor Higgins, and Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendations, namely:-
present
Parfitt
1. That Deputy Mayor Higgins and Mr. C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, be authorized to
attend the 1976 National Oldtimers Hockey Tournament that is being held February 13th to 15th in Lethbridge,
Alberta, in the interests of promotion of the 1977 Tournament that is to be held in Saint John and of gathering
essential information pertaining to the Tournament operations.
2. That the matter of allocation of money by the City of Saint John toward the funding of the Human
Development Services Study (also known as the Social Planning Study for the Saint John area) be laid on the table
until the 1977 budget because the City is in the unfortunate position of being unable to fund its portion of the
cost of the said Study, and if some way the Study can be accepted without the City's funding the City would be
only too happy to have the said Study continue without City funding.
16th February, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) T. J. Higgins,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that section 1 of the above report be adopted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that section 2 of the above report be adopted:
AND FURTHER that the report be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent, referring to section 2 of the said report, asked what we are talking about, in
amount of cost. The Mayor replied that there was a request for $10,000.00 from the City for the year 1976 and
the City does not have the funds in this regard. Councillor A. Vincent asked if, by tabling the matter, will it
cost the City more money next year. Councillor Hodges, in reply, stated that we do not know whether it will or
not. The Mayor added that he thinks they are going to hold off, for lack of money, too. Councillor Kipping
observed that the project may be lost, in its entirety, as a result of this delay; that is the problem. Coun-
cillor A. Vincent stated that this was the point he was trying to bring out: it is going to cost us a lot of
money if the project is lost in its entirety, in his computations. Councillor Kipping agreed.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, in regard to
the application made by Mr. Terry Robichaud for the temporary placement of a mobile home on a lot (L.R.I.S. No.
333856) on the Latimer Lake Road, which lot has been purchased by him and on which he plans to build a new home
commencing some time in 1976, and in regard to his desire to live in the mobile home until his dwelling is
completed, advising that the Committee recommends that the Council give temporary permission for the proposed
mobile home for a period not exceeding one year, and that this permission be subject to, (1) the normal approval
by the Department of Health of the required on-site sewage disposal system, and (2) a permit being obtained from
the office of the Building Inspector for the placement of the mobile home and, when appropriate, the proposed
dwelling -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
308
~
~d~h.TS~je,
.(t"t!'~k &: Zed
J) el7~1 pH/~e
:ppe::~()I'; o-t:f',i:!
;(M //1.1 :ftjl-
11///l"red qt..
1//I7<!e/iC /Jk
II/flJ/ k /'b/?/e
~ql1, /!, t1'ntf'eJ?
C/'!f /1&r.
!J1oj/!e ,1oJ?le;
Ol1e~1e 1ft/?5
(a-;iJ, tt~IU")
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, with
regard to the request made by Mr. Ralph J. Stephen, solicitor for Dr. Leesha G. Zed, for a change in
zoning regulations which would permit an extension to the building at 101 Carleton Street for the reason
that this building is located in a residential zone, in which it is not legally possible to have the
offices of both a doctor and a dentist in one building, advising that this is very close to the edge of
the area zoned for business and the Committee is sympathetic to the slight extension which Dr. Zed is
proposing, and that the Committee recommends that Section 68, subsection (2), of the Zoning By-Law be
amended by, (a) inserting a new clause (oa) after clause (0) to read, "subject to subsection (4), a
professional or business office", and (b) inserting a new subsection (4) to read as follows, "(4) A use
mentioned in clause (oa) of subsection (2) may not be located in excess of 300 feet from a 'B-3' or 200
feet from a 'B-2' zone" -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted, and that authority be
granted to proceed with the necessary advertising.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that Messrs. Wilfred and Vincent McCarthy live on property below the bridge at Mispec River and
their dwelling was severely damaged in the recent storm and in looking for immediate accommodation they
have applied to the Committee for the establishment of a mobile home on their land, and that the ap-
lication was signed by most of the neighbours stating that they had no objections on the understanding
that the mobile home was to be kept in good order and, in setting it up, the City's requirements are to
be followed, and advising further that the Committee did not wish at the time to approve the location of
the mobile home on a permanent basis but felt that it could be located there for at least a temporary
period - and recommending, therefore, that the Council grant permission to Messrs. McCarthy to locate a
mobile home on their property at Mispec for a period not exceeding one year, and that a building permit
must be obtained by the said applicants prior to the placement of the mobile home on the property -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that he now have the report he had asked for from the Planning
Department about that metal mobile home that was delivered and parked on the City-owned property, he
understands, at the former One Mile House, Rothesay Avenue. He noted that he has now produced photo-
graphs to prove that this structure is there, and he added that the man is living in it, and that he
asked for the permit number, or what, because we are making a mockery of the whole thing. The Mayor
replied that he believes that the City Manager has a report and has suggested that possibly the Council
should take the matter up in Committee of the Whole, but he is prepared to accept it, anyway. Councillor
A. Vincent stated that he had asked for this information in open session. The Mayor agreed that it will
be dealt with in open session.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named subject be placed on the agenda of
this meeting at this time.
Mr. Barfoot reported that he received a very full report on this matter from Mr. Zides, dated
February 13th, and because of the complications of this Mr. Zides requested that he discuss it in private
session - however, he (Mr. Barfoot) was willing to give the Council the "bones" of the information here.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he wants to know if it is true that there is a man living in a metal
home that is pulled in on City property without being approved by the Planning Department or any building
permit. Councillor Davis asked if there is a chance of legal liability or action in this matter. Making
negative reply, Mr. Barfoot stated that he does not believe so. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he
knows he can be sued, but he is prepared to "put his money where his mouth is", in seeking this infor-
mation. Mr. Barfoot advised that the metal dwelling is approximately three foot, nine inches by five foot
three inches and stands six feet high, covered with metal siding; the whole outfit is attached to a small
platform on what looks to be a wheelbarrow wheels; there is a small stove inside with a pipe going out
through the roof; there is also a small bench which he believes the occupant sits on to sleep; this
structure was located on the mentioned site in November having been removed from the old Dog 'N Suds
property OIl Rothesay Avenue at the rear of the lot - it was made to be removed from that property at the
request of the Building Department of the City; the property on which it sits belongs to the Province of
New Brunswick; while moving this shed by towing it with a sidewalk bicycle down McLean Street and on to
Rothesay Avenue one of the wheels on the shed came off and he ended up at the location in question where
he has been located ever since - he is staying there at night time, et cetera - it seems there is a lot
of smoke in the structure - it is a Mr. Cook; this man definitely does not have a building permit from
the Planning Department for this; the Department of Health and also the Police Department have been to
look at this structure; the Province should be notified to vacate, and the comment of Mr. Zides is that
he has spoken to the Province of New Brunswick about asking this man to remove himself from their property.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if anyone can move a mobile home in on land that is owned by the Province and
the City has no control, but has to ask them to do it (that is, remove it). He stated that that is not
the way he understands our laws work. Councillor Hodges asked what action Mr. Rodgers would advise be
taken. The Mayor noted that Mr. Rodgers says he does not want to get involved. Mr. Rodgers advised that
he believes that Mr. Zides in his letter to the City Manager has said that there is no building permit
issued, and stated that he assumes that Mr. Zides when he is saying that indicates that a building permit
is required, and if that is the case he assumes that the matter will be turned over to the Legal Depart-
ment, then there would be possibly prosecution. He added that the question of prosecution would have to
be examined. Councillor A. Vincent asked if it is not correct that the City staff, including the Police
Department, chased this man off of more than one property on Rothesay Avenue in the last six months, now;
and he asked what are we trying to do - make a monkey out of everybody? He asked why are we doing this,
adding that he understands that this man moved three times in the last three months. On being asked by
the Mayor what action the City staff has anticipated regarding the problem in question, Mr. Barfoot
stated that if the Council will leave the matter with staff the staff will do what it can to get Mr. Cook
out of that location.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the City
Council on action that is to
of New Brunswick on Rothesay
Manager is instructed to have a written
be taken to have Mr. Cook removed from the
Avenue on which he has located a metal-
report for the
property owned
covered mobile
next meeting of
by the Province
home.
.
I
I
~.
I
.
I
I
.
.....1
"'"
309
.
IlI1ahle ,f""
One #/;/e
I!puse
I C7Ud, IJ.
0n<.."en1f-
lJlal7n.l1dt//
CP/17)?J.
~!I)?Jeh-/ $'
. /11 hee.:: p-P
puP //c:
,Pu ,. /70 S e j
l/ahF{.
:EJedr~h?
Queen
(J. P 1(.
I
.
I
Noting that it costs a certain ,amount of money to have the City Manager write a report, Councillor
Davis stated he feels that the purpose of the aforegoing discussion is whether or not the City is enforcing its
by-laws. He commented that this particular case is minor and it is not important and it should be cleared up,
and stated that he thinks that the Council should simply order that this matter be cleared up and not have a
report - just have a statement saying it has been done. The Mayor noted that the Council would accept a verbal
report that it has been done. Councillor Davis noted that if we want it done, the law says it should be done,
and if the man is resisting, then it is a different story - but he feels that reports are not necessary - that we
should ask action, and get it done.
At this time, with the consent of Councillor Cave, Councillor Hodges withdrew the above motion, stating
that he has confidence that if the City Manager says he is going to do it, he will do it.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above matter be referred to the appropriate City staff
for immediate action.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to know why the above noted structure was permitted to be on
the said Provincial property ten weeks and no City staff reported it. He felt that that is the issue at point _
not the said metal shack. The Mayor pointed out that this is a City staff job and that the Council really should
not be involved in this matter, but that it is, now, because Councillor A. Vincent has brought it to the Council's
attention, and the City takes the action they require, which is what the staff is planning to do.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the
Common Council accept the following sums of money in lieu of land for public purposes with respect to the fol-
lowing named sub-divisions (the figure in each case is based on the value of the proposed lots estimated by the
Property Management Branch of the Department of Community Planning and Development and upon the percentage of the
value payable to the City under the Subdivision By-Law according to the zone in which the land is situated, and
the monies are to be deposited in the City's trust fund for the acquisition and development of land for public
purposes):-
1. from Mr. Bertram Queen, s-6 - the sum of $536.00 (this property is situated on the northerly side of the
Golden Grove Road, just west of its intersection with Wildwood Street - a 100 foot by 200 foot lot is being
severed from the total property and will contain a recently constructed dwelling; a market value estimate of
$6,700.00 has been received from the Property Management Branch; at 8% of the market value, the sum to be paid to
the City is ~536.00);
2. from Canadian Pacific Railway, C-13 - the sum of $2,220.00 (the Railway company is severing a 210,288 square
foot parcel of land - Parcel 75-2 - from its holdings at the southerly end of Bayshore Road where the shunting
yard is situated; according to the Property Management Branch the market value of the land in the sub-division at
the time of submission for approval of the sub-division plan is $74,000.00; the zoning of the land is industrial
which requires a 3% payment to the City in lieu of land for public purposes - the figure to be paid to the City
is, therefore, ~2,220.00).
In reply to Councillor Gould's query, Mr. Park advised that the money that is now in the above named
trust fund for the acquisition and development of land for public purposes amounts to about $40,000.00, and that
the funds are held in trust until such time as a decision is made as to how they might be expended in the acquisi-
tion of a sizable parcel of land for other purposes; these monies are kept in a separate fund on its own, expre-
ssly for this purpose. Councillor A. Vincent asked if we keep taking money out of this particular fund, every
once in a whole, and stated that he believes we have done so because there has been more than $40,000.00 paid
into that fund over, the years. Mr. Park replied that as far as he recalls there have been only two disbursements
out of that account and those were for two items upon which Council, after representation, decided that this
payment in that particular case should not have been made, so it was refunded to the payers; he believes these
refunds were $900.00-odd, each. In reply to a further query from Councillor Gould, Mr. Park advised that this
particular fund has. been in operation for about two years.
Question being taken, t)le above motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated February 12th, 1976, advising that the
Subdivision By-Law requires that electric power, telephone and cable television lines be placed underground
unless, in the opinion of the City, the installation of such power lines underground is not feasible, in which
case such lines are to be installed overhead at the rear of the lots to be served; that the utility companies
have found that the winter time installation of underground utilities is not satisfactory - on the other hand,
some developers will require winter time services; in such a case provision would have to be made for the temporary
overhead installation for the duration of the winter, the subsequent removal of the temporary installation and
the final underground servicing in accordance with the Subdivision By-Law. In citing the proposed amendment to
the Subdivision By-Law, the letter states that there is some urgency about this matter because the utility
companies have been approached by developers for temporary installations.
Councillor Kipping advised that he was withdrawing from any discussion on the above matter due to a
possible conflict of interest in that he is employed by one of the utilities concerned.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
1 RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation contained in the letter
~U~~;fy;f~~ dated February 12th, 1976 from the Planning Advisory Committee, relative to temporary overhead utility installation~
~J_~~)1V the Subdivision By-Law be amended by inserting the following as subsection (6) of Section 26: "(6) (a) Subject to
~ clause (b), where, after November 1 of any year, a developer requires temporary overhead installations for the
~~~r~~~ duration of the winter, he shall make the necessary arrangements therefor with the appropriate utility companies
pjVe,.~ee1~ (b) The concerned utility companies shall be responsible for the removal of the temporary installation and for
tttf//I-:t-fl. the final servicing in accordance with this Section within ten months from the date of the temporary overhead
1J?~.d,l~/' "nstallation.", and that the Legal Department be asked to prepare the necessary amendment to the by-law.
(7t'.f~ Councillor Gould asked why the length of time chosen in the above proposed amendment to Section 26 as
. $oT/c/-tor subsection (6) (b) is "within ten months". Mr. Zides explained that it is an attempt to get the underground
installations before the next freeze-up because, if they apply in November, they probably will not be going until
about December or January so with ten months on to it, again, you are back into November next year. Councillor
Gould made the point that if they apply in February and they cannot get it in in that year, ten months then puts
them beyond the next November, and they cannot do it again, so it is a vicious circle. Mr. Zides pointed out
....
1310
~
/ (!h? /V;,lQPJ/
"~e/',,{ead
t{~///7f-y
I hS-r.;;// Q/tf/"j,h.
.s~.b~ iv/s//J!?
:J3y-~w
5'uJd/vi S/Ol?
:Ey-./.i7W
5.:7: IIsff ~ao/.
II/?U$/hq 7~s-f
Ft>p~e "9-
/..,hd ammo
(}/?16)1. A1j//),f
2>P~ :P.!/-kw
that it has to be understood they are asking for temporary installation and ten months is the time limit
permitted for the final underground installation from the time of the. first movement for the temporary
installation, so it is up to the utilities, then - it is a question of trying to get it before the next
freeze-up; it is the responsibility of the utilities to put the underground installation in by the tert
months after the first application. Councillor Gould suggested that a five-month time limit would be
better. Mr. Zides replied that it is not enough time because then you are at a critical point; he added
that the time limit could have been eight months, but he does not think the time limit should be any
longer, or any shorter, than ten months because you are talking from a time span of a twelve-month total
period of which two or three months might be used up by the preliminary negotiations between the develop-
er and the utility or by the fact that the person does not decide that wants his temporary installation
until, say, about now - it is also possible. He further stated that the time limit could be eight
months, but it should not be any longer than ten months. Mr. Zides stated that because there is some
urgency in this matter, he would ask that the Council give at least one reading at this meeting of
Council to the said proposed amendment to the Subdivision By-Law; there is some urgency, because there
are some pending temporary installations if the Council approves this by-law amendment.
.
1
Councillor MacGowan felt that along the lines of Councillor Gould's point, the wording of the
proposed amendment should be changed because she thinks that, basically, what they are trying to do is to
get it in before the following freeze-up, so she would hope that the Legal Department would not word the
amendment "ten months". She noted that if they take their temporary permit out in February that takes
them into December, but she felt that is not the purpose - they want it completed in the fall, before.the I
weather gets cold again. She asked if that is the feeling of Council, also, on this point. The con-
census of opinion of the Council members was to accept the proposed amendment as recommended by the
Planning Advisory Committee. Mr. Rodgers noted that the amendment to the by-law is to be prepared, based
on the wording recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee. The Council members confirmed this
observation. Councillor MacGowan asked if that wording meets with the City Solicitor's approval, and does
he think that the said wording is the intent of this, and does it protect us. In reply, Mr. Rodgers
stated he assumes that Mr. Zides submitted this wording to fit his recommendation of what he wants in the
by-law. He stated that if the Council wishes something else, it should change the wording - he does not
have the authority to change it. Councillor MacGowan stated that her suggestion would be that the date
would be changed, and the Council would have to leave it with the Legal Department to word it correctly _
but she thinks that the intent is that it would be completed before the fall of that year - she pointed .
out that if the application is received in February or March of any year, ten months could take you into
Christmas, and even though it is their problem to have the underground installation in within that ten-
month period, they then say they cannot do it, so if you even put the date that it has to be done before
October 31st, or September 30th - before the freeze-up. She pointed out that it does not mean ten months
from November 1st, as worded in the proposed amendment.
For the purpose of supplying information on the subject, Councillor Kipping stated that he
thinks the point is that the temporary installations can be removed at any time - temporary overhead
installations are not a problem, it is the underground installations that are the problem, and the
temporary overhead installations can be removed at any time, even in a snowstorm, if necessary, so there
is no problem about that time fix - it is just more or less an arbitrary time frame.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Kipping abstaining from voting, as
indicated by him in his aforegoing declaration of possible conflict of interest.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
to Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The City of Saint John", be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision
of Land Within The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
to Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The City of Saint John", be read a second time.
.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision
of Land Wi thin The City of Saint John".
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion to declare an emergency and for glvlng of third reading
to the above amendment, but the Mayor stated that the Council has already asked the Legal Department to
prepare the amendment he would not accept such motion. With the consent of Councillor Cave, who seconded
the proposed motion, Councillor A. Vincent at this time withdrew the proposed motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission
advising that at a meeting of the Commission held on February 9th last it was resolved that the Com-
mission advise the Common Council that as the Commission's report on the Housing Task Force was referred
to City staff on August 25th, 1975, and as it appears staff are fully occupied with other pressing
matters, it has been unable to report to Council, and whereas several recommendations need policy dir-
ection by Council before they become outdated, the Commission advises the Council that it is prepared to
further review the situation and make detailed recommendations if the Council should see fit, be re-
ceived, and sent to the Land Committee for a recommendation.
I
Councillor MacGowan commented that if the City has been too busy in six months to prepare a
report, why not just let the Housing Commission go and do it piecemeal and bring in a recommendation; she
added that the Land Committee is dealing with land, not housing.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay".
Read a letter from Councillor Kipping stating that it is becoming apparent that effective
enforcement of the City's Dog By-Law has become more necessary than ever, since the garbage collection
system has been changed, and that he will present a motion related to this at this meeting of Council.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that an all-out effort on enforcement of the Dog By-
~
JI""
31l
.2Jp~ ~-,4
. t!'~:;;Pee~
I
I
.
I
.
I
~lfh'
l1iflf// itf
ft/a/k-f?td-
15'Gll~Jle
/('Plj7/Pj'~s I
{kIM, Nod:
.
....
Law be made, effective immediately, and that weekly reports be provided to the Common Council on the progress
eing made.
Councillor Kipping stated he thinks there is more urgency than ever, now that the garbage system has
been changed - garbage is placed at curb side and, indeed, is found most of the time on the street or on the
sidewalk strewn about and, most times, the reasons that garbage is strewn about is because it has been mauled by
cats and dogs (he noted that a regulation concerning cats is another problem). He stated that the other matter
as far as the all-out enforcement of the Dog By-Law is concerned is that there are dogs running in packs throughout
the city and not only do they rip the garbage up these days because we have spread the garbage out before them,
now - and he is not quarrelling with that because we have to put the garbage out this way - but these dog packs
constituting a danger against children, as well, and he has complained to staff about this several times in the
last several months and, really, the dogs are still running - the same dogs are running in his own neighbourhood
that have been running there for at least two years and what worries him is that some citizens are getting so
irate about this that they are apt to take a few things into their own hands - some of the dogs have already been
stoned. He stated that in connection with this subject, also, he would like to see a clarification of the role
of the Animal Rescue League, and he added that the role of the League is not completely clear to all Councillors,
he does not think, and he believes that that should be clarified in conjunction with this, and if anyone on the
staff at the moment can clarify it he would like to see if that can be done at this time. He asked what is the
League's job and how far can the League go. Mr. Barfoot replied that the said League keeps the pound for the
City and is responsible for picking up these stray dogs for which the City gives the League an annual grant
towards the cost of maintaining a dog pound under the City's Dog By-Law. Councillor Kipping asked if the League
goes on the call of the Police or a private citizen. Mr. Barfoot replied that he presumes the League does,
indeed. Councillor Kipping stated that he feels that the presumption of the City Manager is not enough. He
stated that from his own experience, the Animal Rescue League is not as effective as he would like to see them -
they do not pick up the real, wild strays which are causing the problem; he added that the nice, pet dogs that
are loved and treated carefully are not the problem, really, generally speaking - they may be running loose but
they do not harrass people - it is the wild dogs, practically frothing at the mouth, that are running in packs,
that are causing the problem and these do not seem to get picked up. He stated that what is going to happen is
that they are going to get hurt, and everybody will be unhappy.
Councillor Parfitt made the point that in order to enforce the said by-law more patrolling would be
needed, but the Animal Rescue League has only two trucks to patrol the 103 square-mile area of the city, and the
City's grant to the League was cut off last year from $45,000.00 to $33,000.00 for 1976. She suggested that the
present $5.00 fine regarding dogs running loose be increased in Saint John, noting that in the areas bordering
the city (Grand Bay and Fair Vale) the fines run as high as $50.00; her thought was that if the fines were
increased in Saint John the owners of the dogs would not let them run loose. In addition to Councillor Parfitt's
notation regarding the area to be served by the two trucks of the League, Councillor Cave stated that the League
does not have a large personnel. He felt that before the Council does anything, it should be studying the Dog
By-Law because of the restraints, to see how the City is going to raise enough money to pick up these stray dogs;
he added that if the City is going to enforce the by-law, it is going to have to spend money; he is not against
enforcing the by-law, but let us do it properly - he does not know how we can do it properly with the restraints
the City is faced with. Councillor MacGowan advised that the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee has
been concerned about this problem of stray dogs, so the Committee has invited the Chief of Police and Mr. Turnau
of the Animal Rescue League to attend its next meeting, to see where the problem is regarding responsibility to
pick up these stray dogs; she added that we want to try and solve this problem. She stated that in regard to the
amount of the fines, the Committee feels that where the City has had to cut the grant to the League, perhaps they
should be looking at increasing the cost of the license and, also, making sure that all the dogs have a license,
because there is a great source of income there if they really tried to collect, and she does not think that the
City should be subsidizing to the tune of over $2,000.00 a month - she thinks that is a very healthy subsid-
ization for it, and she feels that we have to get action. Recalling that at one time, in past years, the City
was giving the League a grant of $10,000.00, she thinks that the City is presently giving the League a very good
grant but she thinks that the people who own the dogs will have to pay a greater license and she thinks we will
have to make Sure that the fines are imposed and are heavier, too. She added that this subject will be discussed
at the said Committee meeting on February 25th next at 12.15 p.m; and any member of Council is welcome to attend
that meeting, when the matter of solutions will be discussed. Councillor Kipping added the following points to
his discussion on the aforegoing subject matter: the situation is bad enough now, but what will summer be like;
it is his opinion that garbage collection crews must take the trouble to clean up properly where the garbage has
been put out - this is a very real problem around the city.
Councillor,M. Vincent withdrew from the meeting during the above discussion period.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until the Council
obtains further information as to what is required to strengthen the Dog By-Law, and what the cost would be of an
all-out enforcement of the said By-Law.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with Councillors Cave, A. Vincent, Green and Hodges
voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Kipping, Davis, MacGowan, Parfitt and Gould voting "nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Kipping, Davis, MacGowan,
Parfitt and Gould voting "yea" and Councillors Hodges, A. Vincent, Cave and Green voting "nay".
Read a letter from Councillor Kipping, advising that at this meeting of Council he wishes to present
the opinions and feelings of the many citizens who have contacted him regarding the sudden and illegal walkout of
the Saint John Civic Employees' Union, Local 18, C.U.P.E. on February 11th last. Councillor Kipping thereupon
read the following statement:- "Your Worship and Fellow Councillors: During and following the illegal work
stoppage by our outside employees, members of Local 18 of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, last Wednesday,
Thursday and part of Friday, I was besieged with telephone calls and personal contacts with irate citizens
expressing their outrage at what all of them felt was an irresponsible act of bad faith and ingratitude as well
as illegality. It is one thing to suffer a legal strike whether the employer likes it or not, but it is totally
another matter to suffer an illegal walkout for no emergent reason. A contract exists between Local 18 and the
citizens of Saint John as represented by the municipal government in which Article 3 (b) states that there shall
be no strike or lock-out during the life of the Agreement, in accordance with the Industrial Relations Act of the
Province of New Brunswick, yet illegal work stoppages and threats of the same have been the frequent behaviour of
Local 18 and others before, during and after the contract negotiations which concluded last fall with the most
generous settlements since the great give-away during the construction of Expo '67 which might just have made the
big Unions.power-drunk and caused this whole decade of discontent. In church last Sunday, our minister spoke of
discontent and compared it to a kind of self-destructive urge, possessed by those afflicted with it; this may be
prophetic for Local 18 since I was told by a few of those who contacted me that if the present outside workers
didn't want to work or to honour their contract they would be glad to have their good-paying jobs and unparalleled
fringe benefits, jobs of which many it was said require, after all, only a minimum of skill and responsibility.
I am sure that many of the seventy-odd regular casual employees who have been laid off due to our budget restraints
31Z
~
U/a/k- cut-
$7: C/w'e
Fp/j//Pyee./
!/n/b)?/ /VOl It
would be very happy to have full-time jobs, and there are others on the unemployed lists and in lesser
jobs who would be glad of the opportunity to earn $5.09 to $6.28 an hour plus unparalleled fringe benefits,
particularly at a time when jobs are disappearing a lot faster than our business entrepreneurs can create
them - that is $5.09 and $6.28 an hour plus unequalled fringe benefits plus the opportunity to earn
rather large amounts of over-time at premium rates, such as the $300.00 extra one member of Local 18
earned in a few days during our recent storm disaster. In any case, the message that came across loudly
and clearly to me, and which I am passing on here, is that if Local 18 officials don't want their members
to work there are others - contractors and individuals - who are ready, able and willing to work and to
honour any agreements they may make. Let me turn for a moment to the reasons put forth by the President
of Local 18 for the illegal walkout. Of course, short of emergency situations involving urgent matters of
safety combined with gross long-term negligence by an employer, there is no reason acceptable for an
illegal work stoppage, but the President did pull his men out illegally and offered the reason that there
was a large number of unresolved grievances which had accumulated over a period of time and the City
Manager had not met with the Union to discuss them. I have examples of the so-called unresolved griev-
ances which I will give at the end of my presentation, if Council wishes. Now, even if that were a
factual statement - that is, that there were a large number of unresolved grievances - instead of the
misrepresentation, which it is, I don't know how any administrator, burdened with floods, almost in-
solvable budget problems and other disasters, could up to now have found the time to meet with a group of
Union officials who, having decided that they didn't like an answer they have already got in the first
step of the grievance procedure are now obviously embarked on the well-travelled voyage through the
remaining steps up to the Common Council, where they will not only get a fair hearing, no matter how
petty the problem, but where statistics prove they will usually receive a favourable decision for the
wrong reasons; but Local 18's President's reason does not by any stretch of the imagination justify an
illegal walkout, leaving unattended water and sewer pumping stations, safety pressure gauges and chlor-
ination stations, many City buildings and installations, garbage along the streets - for the second week,
in many cases - abandoning urgent jobs like repairs to the causeway, which could breach if we have
another storm, closing down all the arenas - causing inconveniences which hundreds, if not thousands, of
children and adults suffered while the City suffered the unwarranted loss of revenue; but the crowning
insult, added to these injuries, was the massive traffic tie-up on Friday morning which occurred as a
result of no-one being available to prevent that small amount of snow from packing into glare ice and
paralyzing the City's traffic. Most of us were late for work that day - some didn't arrive at all - at
what cost to our employers we don't yet know. The many accidents caused lost and wasted money, not to
mention the as yet unknown effect on future insurance premiums. At least two of those who contacted me
suggested that those involved in accidents due to the condition of the streets might well have a good
case for suing the Union. There is one final important development: the news media has been reporting
all week-end that the President of Local 18 has stated that if meetings promised for this week do not
satisfy him there could be another walkout. I submit, ladies and gentlemen, that if that happens drastic
action is called for. Your Worship, I have attempted to represent the opinions and feelings of many
citizens as completely and accurately as I am able. Thank you."
Councillor M. Vincent re-entered the meeting during the aforegoing presentation.
.
1
I
.
Councillor Cave stated that, being Chairman of the Works Committee, he received many calls ,
along the same lines as Councillor Kipping has mentioned, and he was amazed when he went out on Friday at
10.00 a.m. and found people not to work at that time. He stated he realizes'that we have some good
people in Local 18 and that we have some "hot-heads". He noted that the Mayor has asked the City Manager I
what action can be taken, if any, and he stated that he would propose a motion that this matter be
discussed in Committee of the Whole to see what action, if any, can be taken.
On motion of Councillor Cave
(111rd-/1J17 /tJ5t) Whole to
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter be discussed in Committee of the
see what action, if any, can be taken.
Councillor Hodges noted that Councillor Kipping has made some strong anti-Union remarks, as
usual, and stated that it amazes him that Councillor Kipping does not tell the Council who these people
are; he stated that he does not think that the Council should entertain something of this nature at this
time until it finds out what it is all about - who are the people involved - because he himself on Friday
morning had no problem getting to work whatsoever, except on one, and he uses the same city streets that
everybody else uses. Councillor Parfitt stated that she thoroughly concurs with what Councillor Kipping
has said and that she, too, got many calls and she wonders why some of the men of Local 18 were making
calls "Why are we on strike?"; she added that when they mentioned that over 400 attended the meeting she
understands from Personnel that it was approximately 300; she added that we hear of the rights of unions
today and she felt that it is about time we thought of the rights of the citizens, who are the employers
who pay the wages; she suggested that we find out if there is any talk of another illegal walkout and
that we act instantly to do something so that people's safety can be looked after. Councillor Gould
stated that he concurs with Councillor Kipping in being rather appalled by the actions of C.U.P.E. 18,
the outside Union, and added that he, however, has to feel that one of Councillor Kipping's statements,
he does not think, is quite right, or it should have some comment made about it - and that is the state-
ment that when the grievance procedure is followed when it reaches Council that favourable decisions are
often given for the wrong reasons. He stated that he objects to that statement - he thinks that the
people are trying to make decisions with the facts presented at that time - that is done in Committee of
the Whole - and he thinks that the majority has to rule whether we agree with it or not, and he thinks we
have to live with it. He stated that he does find that despite the walkout there were some C.U.P.E.
Local 18 members who were very displeased with the fact that they were walking out and they themselves
had some critical remarks to say about their fellow workers, and he finds it strange that they followed
their fellow workers and went out, because if he were a Union and he did not like what they were doing he
would go to work, anyway - personally. He suggested that the Union should follow the procedure that is
provided in the Working Agreement - that is, the step through the department head, the City Manager and
Common Council. Councillor Davis, speaking on the motion, stated that it seems to him that the most
prominent comment that was made in the press and on radio was the lack of communication between man-
agement and the worker. He stated that he cannot speak on that, but he does know that he does not know
what the grievances are - the lack of communication between everybody and himself is pretty bad, he
noted, because he does not know what this whole thing is all about and he assumes that the other twelve
at this table, or who should be at this table, know what the grievances are; he feels, therefore, that he
should be informed in public, right now, what the problem was and that the Council not go into Committee
of the Whole, he suggested, with this matter. He felt that the motion should be disposed of, right now,
and the Council get on with the report from the City Manager, or anybody else, who can tell Councillor
Davis what brought this on and what is going to bring it on, the next time. He added that he does not
think we should blame a Union - the Union is alright - some of the fellows in the Union are not _ the
Union is a good idea and they should be strong and they should do things right - if they have done things
right, he wants to know - if they have done things wrong, he wants to know. Councillor Hodges stated
that it is quite obvious that he has a connection with the Union, but he wanted to make it clear that he
does not know what it was all about, and he does not know any of the grievances that the Union has. He,
.
I
1
.
~
"..
3ta
.
I
#/.;1//Ir-(/1(
5.7 {ii/Ie
k"m pl,-ee5
(/nt 1m,
/Vo. Ii
I
.
I
stated that since he sits on the employer's side of the table he has been fair and square both with the Union and
with management. In discussion of the motion, Councillor Cave explained that he wishes to know what all the
Union's grievances are, which is the reason he moved that the matter be discussed at full length in Committee of
the Whole; he added that the Council can make it public any time. Councillor Kipping noted that in his pre-
sentation he mentioned that he had some examples, and he stated that he would be willing to give those, if
Council wants. Councillor Cave stated that he would like in Committee of the Whole to be able to determine
whether or not the Union's grievances met with the requirements, and he wants to discuss the matter with the City
Solicitor to determine whether it met with the requirements of the contract, or not. Councillor A. Vincent
stated that, as the only professional unionist sitting at this Council table, he wants to go on record that he
came in and the City Manager told him he could not tell Councillor A. Vincent what it was all about, and Coun=
cillor A. Vincent went on record and gave his views that the City Manager that he should not even meet them until
they went back to work - he added that he understood that the City Manager did not listen to his advice. He
stated that he just wants to go on record that we did not rob the Montreal Expo - we don't go before public
utilities to get.wages, we go before fair employers - as the only professional union labour leader on this
Council, he wants to go on record if you check his voting record he voted more against Union grievances than he
voted for them - he voted because that was the way his conscience and his dictates told him what to do - he does
not have to go to church on. Sunday and be instructed from his pastor what to do - he does it seven days a week.
He stated that he would like to know how one Councillor says he got some information when it is not supplied to
all the other Councillors - he went in and the City Manager gave him his word he did not know what it was about.
He stated he was making this point and he wished an answer; he stated that he does not want anything regarding
this matter in closed session of Council to get his answer. Councillor M. Vincent asked the City Solicitor: in
keeping with the terms of any Agreement we may have, what happens if the discussion that we want to have at this
time deals with some of the points that possible grievances may be pending on - are we putting ourselves in a bad
light, or in a bad position, legally, if we have a discussion about them at this time? Mr. Rodgers replied that
he has not said anything on this matter to this point because the Council has not reached a stage of discussing
what the complaints are - he does not even know if the City Manager can give the Council that information, but as
he (Mr. Rodgers) understands it, if there are grievances there is a procedure to follow - he does not even know
if they have reached the City Manager level yet because the first step is not to the City Manager - the City
Manager can probably comment on that - but, certainly, if the discussion that follows in a few minutes concerns
the actual grievances, then it would be very unwise for Council to become involved in that because the grievance
procedure calls for Council to make a decision at some point in the procedure, and that decision is based on the
facts presented to Council at the hearing. Councillors Hodges and M. Vincent claimed that one Councillor has got
them already so we disualify ourselves. Councillor Kipping stated that, to set the record straight on that, he
does not have copies of any grievances - he thinks the fact of the matter is that no grievances actually have
been submitted, except one or two, and we have already seen one grievance recently, as we all know, in Committee
of the Whole, from Local 18. He stated that what he has is what is common knowledge - really, on the street _
from the Union officials themselves talking about their problems - and he has examples of what they consider to
be their problems - because, don't forget that they closed down the arenas a couple of months ago on a "wild-cat"
walkout, very short-lived, but they closed them down because they had certain problems that they felt were
important, and he knows of these, that is all - he has made it his business to find them out - he has no grievance
knowledge and he is not sure that any grievances have actually been submitted.
The Mayor asked if Mr. Barfoot has received any grievance from the Union yet, or any information about
what they are going to grieve about. Mr. Barfoot replied that he has one grievance which is at the City Man-
ager's level - that is, the only written grievance which has been filed in this matter. Councillor A. Vincent
asked to hear that grievance, but the other Council members did not concur in this request. Councillor A.
Vincent asked if Councillor Kipping has a copy of it. Councillor Kipping replied that he has a copy of nothing,
he just has examples. Councillor Davis noted that he asked that the City Manager give a defence of his action
and he thinks the Council should hear it, and that is all. Mr. Barfoot stated that he would ask that the Council
consider Councillor Cave's motion as there are some background information which he believes Council should
consider not in open session; however, at the meeting of February 12th, the second day of the walkout, he did
receive from the Union officials a written list of areas of complaint, and as far as actual formal grievances
being filed there is only one which has been filed in this matter which is now at the City Manager's level and
being dealt with. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the news media was wrong when they said that the City Manager
promised to set aside a date to meet them and the City Manager has not even had the proper grievance filed. Mr.
Barfoot replied that we are setting aside a date to meet the Union... Councillor A. Vincent interjected that he
does not think that the City Manager should meet any member of Lccal 18 unless there are proper grievances laid
down and the proper channels followed - that is where we are getting into all the problems, he felt.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Cave, Kipping, MacGowan and Gould voting
the Mayor and Councillors A. Vincent, Parfitt, Green, Hodges, Davis, and M. Vincent voting "nay".
. "yea" and
(1fltdl,1f!eti
amM, ftll;p,
I $,:r::gd.
7P-'lde
F/t;ptt/l1;l
GZ/el7 ~7/5"-
1?trcM~!I
I /Jlle. d/;redJ
~J'7~h~
7iw~forcr
JieA'-I&rn
L.-IL
ref1~/?"f-
. ;?/"5z"e~
,{.;;>A-~
/f'l/;'hj
lr.....
Councillor Kipping reminded the Council that we have been advised by the City Manager to take this
matter into Committee of the Whole. The Mayor stated he believes there is nothing more that the Council can
discuss on the subject. Councillor Kipping noted that all he wanted done regarding this agenda item was to read
into the record as the opinions and feelings of citizens.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Board of Trade, noting that
the continuous problem of flooding in the eastern portion of our city is of grave concern to our citizens and
that the hardships and destruction faced by the families and businesses in this area must have a permanent
solution and that the costs, in terms of damage to homes and businesses, must not be allowed to continue, and
urging, on behalf of home owners and businesses in the eastern part of Saint John, that all levels of government
give serious consideration to implementing recommendations from previous reports such as the Proctor & Redfern
Ltd. Report of May, 1974, and adding that immediate and priority attention must be given to solving flood con-
ditions caused by Marsh Creek -- be received and filed and the Board of Trade be advised by the City Manager of
what action this Council has taken in the matter.
Councillor Gould asked if we are really waiting for the Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report to find out
exactly how much it is going to cost. The Mayor replied that we had a meeting and we have certain things we are
going to clear up as fast as we can along with it, and we met with group from the Glen Falls area; it will clear
up a lot of things before we get the anticipated report - there are things that we feel should be tied in - who
will finance them, et cetera, which we are prepared to discuss; we had a very good meeting the other day. He
stated that we will advise the Board of Trade of what is transpiring.
Councillor MacGowan asked what action has been taken about the filling of Mystery Lake. Mr. Barfoot
replied that that was reported to the City and we investigated the complaint; he understands from the report that
the filling is taking place upon land owned by the particular person concerned - it is not obstructing the
channel - it is 15 feet away from the edge of the brook; he does not recall that the report mentioned that the
fill was being dumped in the water but he noted from the report that it was being kept back from the brook.
Councillor MacGowan noted that this is not the same thing as filling in at the Lake. He stated that he can
investigate this matter further. The Councillors and the Mayor agreed that he do so, and Councillor MacGowan
added that she would like it to be investigated, tomorrow. Councillor Kipping noted that what needs to be done -
I 314
~
/IJ!I.5~e!J'~'e
;:////n}
.E/s/e t1!aflH6'
t9leJ7 Fd//S
F/Dh~ ah7hr.
/' /t?/?7e;,-rdl"f ~
Jj.'/II~), ~/-
pdl/s/.1155ex::'.
t:r,ss-<</dil k
Sc'",,/ ~u;ll"1!/.
-p,/tl!e C~/e-F
not just investigation - is that if anybody is dumping in there and changing the contour of that bank:and
displacing water they need to be stopped, but very quickly. Mr. Barfoot advised that if they are not
dumping into a natural brook which comes under the Water Act we have no control over people dumping on
their own land to raise the level of their own land - this is entirely a private matter. Councillor
Kipping stated that he wants to be sure that that is what is happening. Councillor MacGowan asked if
what Mr. Barfoot has stated applies even though it creates a problem for other residents, adding her
opinion that if this is the law, then it is time we took some action and have the law changed; if people
can raise the water so that it is going to create a serious hazard for other residents there, then she
does not think we can take this sitting down, and say we cannot do anything - she feels that we will
raise a complaint and get some action, from whoever has the authority to do something to stop it. Mr.
Barfoot advised that he can ask for a further report on this matter. The Mayor asked Mrs. Elsie Wayne,
Chairman of the Glen Falls Flood Control Committee, who was present at the meeting, if she knows whether
the fill is being dumped into the water. Mrs. Wayne replied that the Committee asked an official of the
Environment and Fisheries Department of the Province to examine the area with the result that over thirty
photographs were taken of all the areas of Mystery Lake where dumping was taking place and there was more
than one, and of another area of a brook that was completely filled in which now will flood Hillcrest
Drive, Cathline Drive and this area which never flooded in fifty to sixty years and which now floods. She
stated that the official of the Environment and Fisheries Department said that they cannot do this. It
was noted that the City Manager is to follow up on this filling problem and submit a further report to
Council subsequent to investigating the matter.
.
1
On motion of Councillor Cave
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Elementary and Junior High
Principals' Association protesting the cutting of school-crossing guards and requesting that, for the
safety of our children, the City not lessen the coverage at the said cross-walks, be received and filed
and Mr. Murray A. McGowan, President of the said Association, be informed that the matter of priorities
regarding these guards is to be discussed with the City Manager by the Common Council to reach some
conclusion satisfactory to all and that the priorities are being studied regarding using school-crossing
guards from the ranks of Grade 9'students.
During ensuing discussion, Chief Ferguson supplied the following information:- seven school_
crossing guards of the twenty-five have been removed under the City's budgetary restraints, and we are
monitoring the remaining eighteen school crossings. With regard to whether or not the meeting that was
to be arranged between a small delegation from the School Board of School District Number 20 and a
representation of Council, has been set up yet, the Mayor replied that it has not, and that meeting will
possibly be held on Wednesday. On the point of whether all the safeguards have been taken to make sure
that where the gurds have been removed that the schoolchildren are being protected by the use of the
Police Department and whether that is still being carried out, the Chief replied that the Department is
doing a study in this regard and is looking at the various cross-walks, and he will have a report on the
matter on February 17th - it is not completed, but the Department has been sending more policemen out ,to
protect the children and we are hoping to get around the situation; we are taking action against those
car drivers who do not stop at the cross-walks and we are charging them, and we are looking at the matter
very closely; in regard to whether all the cross-walks are covered in the meantime while the study is
being made, the Department is trying to get as many policemen on the busy cross-walks as possible, but
there are times when they are not covered - he wishes we had enough cross-walk people for every inter-
section in the city; at times the cross-walks at Union Street and Wall Streets are covered, and at times
they are not covered - he agrees that this is not very satisfactory - the times they are covered are when
the policemen are available; the Department will know within a day or two what it is going to recommend
regarding the school cross-walks to the City Manager, through to Council - the areas that the Department
finds that we really need people at. Councillor MacGowan commented that in the meantime, she thinks it
is terrible to take the crossing guards off and that she thinks they should be there until we have some
other alternative - they have to be covered. In reply to Councillor Davis' query, Chief Ferguson advised
that the number of cross-walks that we normally covered was around twenty but the number was increased
last year to twenty-five. Councillor Davis expressed the opinion that we should not reduce the crossing
guards and that we should keep them at full strength until such time as the Chief comes up with a report _
we may run out of funds a little bit early, but he does not think we should reduce them. He stated that
he has learned that Fredericton, Moncton and Halifax spend far more than Saint John does for school
crossings. He felt that if there is one thing the Council should back-track on regarding the budget is
this particular item, and that the school crossing guards should all be put at full strength until we run
out of money; it is his opinion at the moment that we should keep these school crossing guards on until
we find a cheaper way or a better way, and if we cannot do so, we keep them on. Chief Ferguson stated
that he could have the report for next week's Council meeting with the recommendation contained in it.
Councillor Davis stated that he would not reduce the number of crossing guards until that report. The
Council was reminded at this time by Mr. Barfoot that the Council decided on December 31st, 1975 to
reduce these guards and the staff subsequently took action to do so. Councillor Gould made the sug-
gestion that, in the juggling of budget items to take care of these crossing guards' cost, that the City
delete the painting of traffic lines on the city streets over the summer time and thus save that cost
this year.
.
I
.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
I
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that with regard to the letter dated February 6th,
;.?1e7~ ,t,IuztO~~/~ 1976 from the Maritime Automobile Association, which expresses concern regarding the decision of the
~~~P~. Common Council to reduce the number of adult school crossing guards based on economical consideration
only; and which advises that there are two types of school child protection methods (traffic control
t'P05S-~~/)( devices, and physical methods) and in some instances, a combination of both methods is needed; and which I
~~ PI' Art(~~~S suggests that the Common Council may wish to ask one of the City's agencies, either the Traffic Engin-
~ P )" eering Department or the Police Force, to survey the crossings under the protection of the adult guard
C' -~~/~s system, to see if an alternative method can be used, such as installation of traffic lights, pedestrian
/'#55 cross-walk, or school safety patrols; and which notes that if there are not sufficient breaks in traffic
~tt;-V'e;1' when school safety patrols are used so that the school child cannot cross without interference from motor
vehicle traffic, then more assistance in the form of traffic lights, crosswalks, or adult supervision
should be made available; and which advises that specialists in school patrol safety are available from
both the Canadian Automobile Association in Ottawa and the American Automobile Association in Washington,
U. S. A., and that the Maritime Automobile Association would be pleased, at no charge to the City of
Saint John, to bring a specialist to Saint John to assist the Common Council in reassessing the City's
situation -- the Common Council accept with thanks the said offer made by the Maritime Automobile Assoc-
r..J'.461' C"/'tI5f-~ iation, and that there be no reduction in the number of school crossing guards and that the patrols be .
v~'.7 put back on the school cross-walks until the meeting that is to be held between a delegation from the
~~~ar S Saint John Board of Trade and representatives of the Council takes place. !
res-6o,.t?d
~
,..
. &11, /l5$t>t5'.
~;. /ikd..?t1
7?e~Cl;tdell.
s. T :JJNHd/.
..L he<.
:tJu~f,e7!-
Cl'~n :c-
I
I
.
I ;:eb, e2
S-t-61'h?
7JPIUt?1"' .
l'a/j~l'e / J?
e/i,/ ~//
(laC'/( p..,e
e-merff'nc'.!7:')
I/jlr:l-IJ"I~ /
S.J:Ci&
~// ...f'fJ?/,k.
.u,/P/l,X~
//~6
C/f-y fJ/~;'
h're C/M
I
/Cilul r'~
I Se>u-ch "f'h
1.::0'1/1 / /
,QS "$€P/tJ/Ij
.;J.~o-:ltl~
;2.~'1-~3 ()
~lia/1/o#t"
s-t-. d
7i'~mph
2Jptj/e
. f/hi~p6/gS
~ I 731'~:17
:Demo/lei
Te17~e,r.5 to.
e~//
......
~115
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Canadian Association for. the Mentally
Retarded, Saint John Branch Inc., outlining the Association's financial problems and programmes that are con-
ducted, and requesting the City's continuing support and assistance in carrying out its programmes by not reducing
the City's grant amount for 1976 below that of 1975, be referred to the City staff for an appropriate reply as to
the amount that has been appropriated as a grant for 1976 to this organization.
Read a letter from the Saint John City Hall Employees' Union, Local 486, C.U.P.E. advising that during
the recent power failure on February 2nd at City Hall, the hazardous situation has been brought to the Union's
attention in that the lack of proper emergency stairway lighting in the City Hall building has created very
serious problems which could lead to personal injuries to employees using the stairs, particularly in the event
of an emergency evacuation of the building, and requesting, therefore, on behalf of the Union members that
immediate action be taken with the owners of the building to see that this hazardous situation is corrected
before a serious accident occurs.
Councillor A. Vincent in the above matter, asked if this is not a violation of the Building Code and if
it is a violation why the owner has not been prosecuted. In reply to the two questions: is this a violation of
the Building Code; and why the owner has not been prosecuted if it is a violation; Mr. Rodgers replied that,
first, the matter has not been examined to determine that it is a violation and, secondly, if it is examined and
the violation is established then, of course, discussions will take place and determine what action is warranted.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels, also, that we could really nail them if we wanted to under the New Brunswick
Fire Prevention Act which Fire Chief Clark should be quite capable of answering for. Mr. Barfoot advised that the
Fire Chief has given him a report on this matter: there is an emergency power supply in this building and an
emergency generator which is located on the top level of the City Hall building, capable of supplying emergency
power to the fifth floor level including the Police elevator, the detention cells, the heating system, the fire
pumps, the corridors and the exit stairways; in the power failure of February 2nd there was a malfunction of
these emergency generators due to a surge and thus, to date, the emergency power supply was cut off; the neces-
sary parts have been delivered and repairs are under way. Mr. Barfoot stated that he has asked the owners of the
building for a complete report on this matter and a run-down of the failure and we will be communicating this.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if public assembly places have to be provided with temporary emergency lighting. Mr.
Barfoot advised that there is an emergency power system in this building. Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that
there are no such emergency lights in this Council Chamber, and added that he cannot find a fire escape nor
emergency lights in this Chamber, and he asked why, in view of this, the City does not lay charges or stop paying
rent. He stated that it is against the law to have a public assembly building without emergency lighting being
provided, and the City should set the example. Mr. Barfoot replied that the City staff will follow up on this
matter.
During further discussion, Fire Chief Clark advised that the problem experienced at the City Hall
building through failure of the emergency power generators was experienced in many other buildings in the city at
that time; the City Hall building meets the National Building Code 1965 under which this building was built; it
.has an auxiliary emergency system that supplies the power to the areas of the building required under the Code;
it is an automatic system that cuts in when there is a power failure; the power surge burnt the two generators
out within a matter of seconds from the time when the power was cut off; the parts have been ordered and the
system will be back into service as of February 21st; he confirmed that it is in the Provincial fire regulations
that public assemblies should have emergency lighting, and he advised that from the records that the Fire Depart-
ment has checked with the owners of this building, the auxiliary generators on the top floor of the building do
not supply the lights in the Council Chamber. Councillor A. Vincent stated that the point he was making was that
even if the auxiliary generators were working, the Council could not have conducted a meeting in the Council
Chamber because the said generators do not supply emergency lighting to the Chamber, and that he thinks the
owners should be notified forthwith that they are violating the Code and that the City is prepared to charge them
if they do not do something about it, tomorrow. Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded,
that the landlord be notified of the Code and that legal action be taken to make him comply with the Code.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by
Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the City Manager and the Fire Chief, along with other ap-
to submit a recommendation to Council regarding the above discussed matter,
Saint John City Hall Employees' Union, Local 486, C.U.P.E. be so notified.
,
propriate City staff, be instructed
and that the Executive Committee of
Councillor Davis suggested that the motion include the direction that the landlord of this building be
informed of the relevant portions of the Code that apply to this matter and be told he must comply with it. The
noted that the above requested report, he thinks, will contain a recommendation regarding that point, as
Councillor Davis asked that an item from the Land Committee be added to the agenda, concerning the
purchase of property in the South End, this being an emergency item.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named item be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that when the
Common Council gave approval in principle to the South End Development Project it instructed the Land Committee
to acquire the properties necessary for the implementation of the first phase of the plan (the first phase
includes the assembly of land and properties for new housing in the Britain Street area) and that these pro-
perties will form part of a land assembly programme; and recommending that (a) the City acquire 220-224 and 228-
230 Charlotte Street (a lot measuring 41 feet by 124 feet, with two large vacant residential buildings which will
be demolished immediately) from Raymond Doyle Properties for the sum of $10,000.00, and that (b) the City acquire
81 Britain Street (a lot measuring 40 feet by 102 feet, with a two-storey single-family residence which will be
kept in management until the rest of the properties have been acquired) from Raymond Doyle Properties for the sum
of ~7,000.00, making the total cost of acquisition $17,000.00; and further recommending that the said 220-224 and
228-230 Charlotte Street be advertised for demolition as soon as ownership passes to the City -- be received and
filed and the recommendations adopted.
In the above matter, Councillor Davis explained that the reason for the emergency is that there is
action before the Courts through the Fire Prevention Act for the demolition of these buildings - this case comes
p in a couple of days and because of that we have managed to acquire these properties at about one-third the
original asking price; it works out to less than $2.00 per square foot, which the Land Committee considered fair.
316
~
:pp~4s-l e:JJ~
,//Job/Ie -hpme
?/aIJI'},/9t?i ,,/s.
. C>PP7h1.
s.:rc':v/c
kn?f?/~6'f!'S '
to/tW, ,.(04;1/ /;
f..(/",Ik-c>kr
{bu;?, 11 y;~
SUI??/7?6'r "b~e5
rlA/ef' o-r~hc
Tno:lr:7i'c :9y-~
LEG A L
/9/en ;:;aI/$'
.,e;';aI/ n2.,
;rJd/1sh Creek
(C'~ ~-/.pe '/;'ni?)
:Plop//. Gt?vt:
stres('t?n
c/ 'iy ~~(oi-l()
O;'/~ 0";:
pph~e
/IJ/fl/5Ie r p..,e
7W.5f/ce
/J/pto)" Vt?)IC!e
/kf-: c()/kd/O/7
~ ro/udar.:t
-f'ti7e, ?rlfme
Councillor Cave asked permission to place an item on the agenda regarding a request for temp-
orary placement of a mobile home by Mr. Douglas LeBlanc.
.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above mentioned request from Mr. Douglas
LeBlanc be placed on the agenda at this time.
Councillor Cave explained that it appears that Mr. Douglas LeBlanc who lives at 33 Loch Lomond
Road was asked to vacate his flat and he cannot get a place but he has an opportunity to purchase a mobile
home and place it on a lot owned by Mr. Bradford Hersey at Red Head, and Anthony's Cove.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Douglas LeBlanc of 33 Loch Lomond
Road, making application for a temporary permit to place a mobile home on a parcel of land adjacent to Mr.
Bradford Hersey who owns the vacant lot on the left side of the Anthony's Cove Road, located between the
house of Mr. Rufus Frozzel and a wooded parcel of land, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for
a recommendation.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the matter of illegal work stoppages by the Saint John
Civic Employees' Union, Local 18, C.U.P.E. be referred to legal session of this meeting where the Council
can take action on it.
Councillor A. Vincent asked the Chief of Police how many citizens were charged on Friday,
February 13th last, for having summer tires on their cars, noting that he assisted several times that day
in moving peoples' cars to one side of the road while he had no trouble driving his car around that day
because he had the right tires on it. The Chief replied that he can check and find out the information
that Councillor A. Vincent asks for in this regard.
.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Davis voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
The Mayor reported that a meeting was held with the group from the Glen Falls area and various
points were brought to the City's attention and the following action was decided upon:- to seek money;
checking backfilling; pumps available in an emergency to do extra pumping - we checked into the availability
of them so that ,we can call them in; a location for the obtaining of sand bags so that if the people want
them they could/buy them - some of the people at the meeting representing industries thought they might
buy them and put them around their premises if we had another flood; contact the Government concerning the
centre line of Marsh Creek - it is understood that people own up to the centre line of the Creek and we
were going to search that matter out; advise citizens of the action that they can take to help themselves
in such things as preparing for drainage now by cutting through the ice to allow water to drain away from
the houses; check developments of the lower plane; public relation reports to citizens - the City's public
relations man should be reporting more on what action is taking place; the Council to have a motion passed
requiring Strescon to widen underneath. Mr. Barfoot confirmed that Strescon is one of the areas that has
to be widened. The Mayor added that apparently Strescon will do it.
I
A report from the City Solicitor, dated February 13th, 1976, relative to the City Manager's
recommendation to the Committee of the Whole session of Common Council held on February 9th last that the
Province be notified that as of March 1st, 1976, voluntary penalties under the Motor Vehicle Act can no
longer be paid at the City Police Department, was considered and discussed. The report cites Section
357(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act and states that in view of same, and having regard.to the fact that only
the Minister or Peace Officer authorized by him, are permitted to collect money for violations under the
said Act, it is the City Solicitor's opinion that the City Manager or the Common Council should not become
involved in this matter, and that it is strictly a matter between the Police Department and the Minister
responsible for the enforcement of the said Act. The report advises that the said section is designed to
provide a convenience to the motoring public as well as asllowing the Police Department some discretion as
to what offences warrant action in the Court and what other offences, with the concurrence of the offender,
can be settled without the instituting of Court proceedings. During the ensuing discussion, Chief Ferguson
advised that he would like the Police Department of the City of Saint John to be relieved of the said
collection of voluntary penalties payments by the Province undertaking such collections, because it ties
up one person in the City's Police Department, full-time, to do so, and he added that he does not think
that the Police Department should be responsible for this block of money. He stated that about three
months ago he met with the Minister responsible for enforcing the Motor Vehicle Act and this subject was
brought up and the Minister said he had hoped that not only the City of Saint John but no other town, city
or village would be responsible for collecting such voluntary penalties, and including the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police, and they are getting it written in the contract that they will not collect any more fines.
He stated that if the Council consents, he would like to meet with the Minister and the Deputy Minister to
see about the Police Department relinquishing the collecting of these fines.
.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Chief of Police meet with the Minister responsible
for enforcing the Motor Vehicle Act and see if the matter of collecting voluntary payments of fines under
the Motor Vehicle Act can become the responsibility of the Province of New Brunswick:
!UTI) FURTHER that the report from the City Solicitor regarding this subject matter be received
and filed.
Councillor Parfitt and Chief Ferguson withdrew from the meeting.
.
Consideration was given to the City Manager's report dated February 16th, 1976 regarding a work
stoppage by the Saint John Civic Employees' Union, Local 18, C.U.P.E. on February 11th, 12th and 13th,
1976. The report cites the City. Manager's conclusion that the illegal strike by members of the said Local
18 was a most irresponsible act, and had the weather been worse at that time, the City of Saint John would
~
,..
C/6u ~<1"'/
.W~/k?Put-
S.J: CI///e
Fh?f?h,::r.ees
f4/{)h,~/g
au/? /l.
t/inC~J1t-
I ,(;;J6,J1e/~
1i'eI>?PJ/.;:J/ Q
C!t.'ffj P5o-
/1 ne oEer.il
-c()rs pro;.,
(/17/011 /:Br-
. .
l.1dll'll )1.f.
un It-
/J1t-f w/-tA
./5tee.I1.,c
~o~dl /1
UhJ/Jr-put
I gpu i"h.kh.
/anL
ciJS5emjly
,{D1J1,{ ~hl
A'dll7d /n
~/td- pn
$I'lt-..u'n .si
{pd;ve'en
tJ/;.;Ir/oHe
$Y'€hRY
.
I
I
.
~
3J7
have been in very dire straits, and advises that the City staff is investigating means of taking disciplinary
action against the Union membership, and the City Manager believes that the Common Council should also look at
legal remedies.
During ensuing discussion, Councillor A. Vincent noted that he was told that police cars and fire
trucks were in need of gasoline during the above mentioned Local 18 walkout, and stated that he feels the City
should therefore appear before the Labour Relations Board of New Brunswick for the purpose of having the gasoline
pump operator removed from the Local 18 bargaining unit, adding that'he feels that operator should be classed as
a confidential employee. Councillor Hodges pointed out that it cannot be done, under the Act, to make this
exception from the bargaining unit. Mr. Barfoot added that there is no such thing as an "essential employee",
and advised that we have had an understanding up until now with this Union, but in this last walkout the under-
standing just did not work. Councillor Hodges felt that an informal and confidential discussion could take place
ith the executive of the Union, regarding the suggestion made by Councillor A. Vincent that the Council meet as
soon as possible with the said Union executive and tell them what the Council thinks regarding the matter of the
walkout (Councillor A. Vincent had further suggested that in the presence of the said executive the Council adopt
a resolution instructing the City Manager to take legal action against Local 18, regarding whatever damages, et
cetera are involved, if the act occurs again - give them a fair warning as a fair employer should do). During
ensuing discussion, the City Manager advised that with regard to the problem with the Union, he thinks that the
basic problem, generally, is in the Recreation Department about the administration of the arenas because they are
trying to administer them in an efficient manner as we have administered them in the past, and because there are
now larger numbers of people involved the Local 18 executive are trying to make the arena operations the same as
the rest of the City Works operation - the same shifts, the same subforemen, the same number of people hanging
about at every level - and we are going strictly by the Working Agreement, and he is not going for this change -
so we are just sticking to the Working Agreement and enforcing it.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the Common Clerk in conjunction with the Personnel Department,
if necessary, notify the executive of Saint John Civic Employees' Union, Local 18, C.U.P.E. and all members of
the Common Council that a meeting is to be held on Thursday, February 19th next, and that arrangements be attempted
to have the said meeting take place at the Admiral Beatty Hotel for the purpose of discussing the policy as it
relates to Local 18 on any further illegal walkouts.
The Council members advised that the City Manager, the City Solicitor, the Director of Personnel and
Training, the Commissioner of Works, and possibly the Commissioner of Finance would be required from the City
staff to be present at the above named meeting.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that the City is buying a block of land from Charlotte Street to Sydney
Street on Britain Street, facing the sugar refinery; it is fifty per cent funded by the Federal Government,
twelve and one-half per cent by the Province, and we are buying it piecemeal. He stated that we want to speed up
the purchase of that land so we can come up with some low-cost housing or with a housing programme for that area,
and the Land Committee would like to be authorized by the Council, or for the Committee's agent to be authorized,
to be able to make an offer of a down payment up to $2.00 per square foot for that land in that block.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Land Committee, or the Committee's agent, be authorized
to offer a down payment up to $2.00 per square foot for the purchase of property located in the block of land in
the South End on Britain Street, between Charlotte Street and Sydney Street, on the northerly side of Britain
Street.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Common C rk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-third day
of February, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, S. Armstrong, Chief
Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner ,of Administration
and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides, Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of
Housing and Renewal Services, of the Community Planning and Development
Department, C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, D. French,
Director of Training and Personnel, R. H. Stone, Deputy Chief of Police,
and G. Baird, Commissioner of Economic Development
'318
--'
7i?hL~r dt:t:'-
7PU/'/5-t///t?m -
7f u I"e
:lJdN?4'S-, .&pk":'
/u.
(/n/f7)'l /abe/
~/st"Jer ~~
A,;;))?Cris!-er
/J1e/l/Pl"la/ ;:;,~
Jj;nd'e>r.s ~
;::ire hP~e 1:-
efu/jJh11? 17 &-
?ehP,ns d~~
G-p/~ s<<'p.f/~es
.4fpm-hiy r~
Feb,;t s-!prm
~m';:'!le5 --Co
t!t'.f!f pope%.
J)/ l~pidall?H
ePl tI~$. ~;:e,y
mea5upes I"~
pte.bl/a
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
February 9th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
February 16th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report from the City Manager,
the lowest bid received on each item for printing of tourist literature, namely, that of Barnes-Hopkins
Ltd. at $49.50 per M. on the Tour Map, and Keystone Printing at $157.00 per M. on the Key to Saint John,
be accepted.
In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's question as to whether the request will be made to have the
Union label placed on the above named printed material, Mr. Barfoot advised that this will be done.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report of the City Manager, the
lowest bid received, namely, that of Wortman Enterprises Ltd., in the amount of $19,990.00 for supplying
and installing 1,000 bleacher seats at Lancaster Memorial Field, be accepted.
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's question as to whether the above named firm is the same firm
that the City was going to buy a snow removal machine from at one time, for our arenas, Mr. Barfoot stated
that he believes it is the same firm. Noting that these bleacher seats are badly needed by the City,
Councillor M. Vincent expressed the hope that they will be received in time for this coming summer, and he
added that he imagines that the proper steps have been taken to ensure that this company can, in fact,
supply them because he believes we had some difficulty with this company on an ice-making machine for one
of the arenas. Mr. Barfoot replied that the point made by Councillor M. Vincent is well-taken. Councillor
A. Vincent asked if we have a deposit cheque with the bids. Mr. Barfoot replied that this point will have
to be checked.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table
Clerk proves to this Council that there is a deposit for default if failing to produce.
until the Common
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors Davis and Hodges voting
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the
Purchasing Agent on the summary of bids for fire hose and equipment, bids for such materials be accepted
in accordance with the said bid summary recommendation.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager and the Purchasing Agent, bids for supplying golf supplies be accepted as recommended in the
submitted s'ummary of bids.
During brief discussion of the item of men's umbrellas that are included in the above golf
supplies, Mr. Nicolle advised that these are being purchased, as a sort of pilot project, in response to
inqu1r1es that had been received about them, to see how well they will sell. Councillor A. Vincent commented
that he thought that all pilot projects had been cancelled under the austerity programme.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
(Councillor Gould entered the meeting)
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report for January of the Division of Technical
and Inspection Services, including Plumbing, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that after the terrible February 2nd last storm, he would have
thought that the above named Department would be filing with the Council a proper report of damages to
City property, and he asked when he can expect to see a copy of that report, if any is forthcoming. Mr.
Barfoot replied that a complete report will be filed with the Council on all the damages and costs incurred
in the storm, and this report should be ready within two weeks. Councillor A. Vincent asked: because of
the storm, what extra, if any, precautions or measures have been taken to protect the general public from
buildings that are in a very unsafe condition as of today - what has the City done about it. The Mayor
noted that on Prince William Street (Chipman Hill) there are two such buildings. Councillor A. Vincent
stated that he can tell the City many such buildings. Mr. Barfoot, in reply to the question, stated that
he believes the City staff is following the usual procedures. Councillor A. Vincent asked what the usual
procedure is, because he knows of many buildings in this community, and within this building, that are
unsafe to the general public, and he stated that he thinks that the City should supply the technical
services of telling the owner at least that his building is not in safe condition for pedestrians - for
instance, a wall fell down on Prince William Street and pedestrians have to come out on the street to get
around that location where the debris is still on the sidewalk - and there are many other places; he
thinks that the City should see that the Building Inspection Department makes a list of these things and,
~
.
1
I
.
I
.
1
I
.
....1
r'"
319
:})/~/H .
./(qS. Sdl-N
h1e.i/.5IeP~
re ;u"//c
I
I
.
I
.
I
t/rkl7
l7?qlllZH/."~/
.PDcK 5T;. -
/!1a,.A-ef- sf".
project-
:l3-':<~
/11///5-1:
Fbr/?l?s -eel"
Gr_n
. /If-" yo I" ,
f!/-t;f /&r.
....
particular, the buildings that are unsafe - rope them off or have them roped off and have some repairs done,
or have them torn down - we are not doing that, he noted. He stated that he can show the Council buildings that
re not safe to walk by. He asked what the City is doing about this situation. Mr. Barfoot replied that where
we are aware of unsafe situations he thinks that the Department will take the proper action against them, but we
cannot, he thinks, take action against a situation of which we are not aware. Councillor MacGowan' proposed a
motion, that was not seconded, that Councillor A. Vincent be requested to submit the names of the buildings to
which he refers, to the Building Inspector so that action can be taken immediately. The Mayor suggested that
possibly Mr. ;Barfoot maybe take":thisJmatter"up with .the Pol,ice :andcWork_s Departments and when, they are doing
their chores they could keep reporting th~~e buildings as they see them unfit, and the Building Inspector could
then follow up on it. He added that Councillor A. Vincent will provide a list of the'buildings that he knows of
that require action to be taken on.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the property
of Forrester Green at 23-25 Mill Street (F-6-11-12) is required for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme and that
the approval of the Partnership has been acknowledged at the figure of $40,000.00 to settle total compensation,
free and clear of all encumbrances and to include any and all claims of any nature whatsoever, and further
advising that an appraisal has been placed on file which supports the said settlement figure of $40,000.00, and
requesting the Council's approval for the acquisition of the said property for the said figure free and clear of
all encumbrances and to include any and all claims of any nature whatsoever, with the said settlement to be
subject to the normal adjustments for any outstanding taxes, water rates, et cetera, be received and filed and
the requested approval granted.
The Mayor asked why we are paying more than the assessed value of $24,200.00, and Mr. Barfoot replied
that the negotiated settlement of $40,000.00 is based upon an appraisal; before any properties are acquired in
the Urban Renewal area there has to be basically three appraisals, and this settlement is based upon the appraisals
which have been made, of the property. Councillor Hodges asked if this is the second time that Mr. Green's
property had to be acquired, it being his recollection that Mr. Green used to be on Main Street. Mr. Buck
advised that Mr. Green was part-owner in Red and Green on Dock Street and he is the owner of this property on
Mill Street; he also was the tenant of a building which the City owns next-door to this Mill Street property,
which was previously owned by Mr. Fine - but Mr. Green did own two properties. In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's
question as to what appraisers were used to come up with a settlement of $40,000.00, Mr. Buck stated he did not
have that information with him, but it would have been one or twO! o~,the three appraisers that we use, namely,
. Roy de Stecher & Associates, Appraisal? (Fundy) Ltd., and Sherwood. Councillor M. Vincent asked if Mr. Buck
recalls if it is true that one of the' appraisals was far less 'than $40,000.00. Mr. BUCK staied that the ap-
praisals that he remembers - the one that we used here - was somewhat in excess of $40,000.00. Councillor A.
Vincent asked the date that the property last changed hands and was it not after the Urban Renewal started in
that area. Making affirmative reply, that this is correct, Mr. Buck stated that the property did change hands
from Raymond Doyle to Mr. Forrester Green for a sum which was reported to be very much in excess of this figure _
he thinks the figure was reported to be $70,000.00. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understood that once
Urban Renewal has an area all laid out on a map that the property within that area cannot change hands _ he added
that that is what he has been told. He stated that the point is that it ws brought for around $18,000.00 and is
going to be sold to us for $40,000.00 - he is saying that this property has changed hands once to his knowledge,
and he thinks maybe twice - he is told at least twice, since the Urban Renewal blocked it off as an Urban Renewal
area, and, therefore, he thinks maybe we should have another investigation, he does not know. He added that he
is really upset about this; that this property could be permitted to change hands. Mr. Buck explained that there
is no "freeze" - if the owner of the property wished to sell property in this area to anybody else, there would
be nothing to prevent the sale. Councillor A. Vincent felt that this defeats the whole purpose of Urban Renewal,
in such case. Councillor Davis pointed out that if you buy one of those properties it does not guarantee that
you are going to get more than you paid for it whenever you might sell it, and he added it could be expropriated.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that the property in question is not worth $40,000.00 and he is opposed to it and
will vote against it. Councillor A. Vincent asked if it is not true that Mr. Doyle and Mr. Green are alleged to
be partners in other businesses. Mr. Buck replied that he does not know whether that is true or not. Councillor
A. Vincent asked if Mr. Buck has never discussed anything with those two people, jointly. Mr. Buck replied that
he has not discussed whether they were partners or not; he thinks the relationship between the two here is that
of mortgagor and mortgagee in this particular property - he does not think that makes them partners. Mr. Barfoot
explained that the properties settled in the Urban Renewal area go through the appraisal process and through the
appraisal sub-committee of the Partnership which is composed of City, Provincial and Federal representatives who
have to approve the appraisals, approve the settlement and then recommend it to the Co-Ordinating Committee of
the Partnership to then accept it,~and then.the said Co-Ordinating Committee recommend to the various levels of
government for purchase and this is the process that has been gone through regarding this particular property.
Councillor A. Vincent forecast that if the Partnership is going"to pay $40,000.00 for this small property on Mill
Street, and is going to negotiate for the purchase of the Irving Oil Limited property at the corner of Dock
Street and North Market Wharf, and the said small property is worth $40,000.00, then you are going to pay two
million for the said Irving property, based on that value; he added that we are trying to buy the whole area
there. Councillor Kipping stated that he is concerned about real estate prices in the city and he thinks that if
Councillor A. Vincent has any information that would shed any light on this the Council should probably table the
matter now.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above matter be tabled until some further investi-
gation can be done regarding market prices and sales in that area or until Councillor A. Vincent or the Council
is satisfied that the price in question, namely, $40,000.00, is alright.
Councillor A. Vincent felt that if the City could see whether the owner, Mr. Green, if he paid $70,000.00
for this property, took a tax loss, it would be helpful in resolving this matter - he added that this would be a
question of the owner showing us his tax return.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with the Mayor and Councillors A. Vincent, Kipping,
acGowan, M. Vincent and Pye voting "yea" and Councillors Davis, Higgins, Green, Gould, Hodges and Parfitt voting
"nay", and creating a tie vote.
Question being taken, the motion was lost, with the majority of Council members voting "nay".
The Mayor, in the'above matter, suggested,that',a report come, to Council next week with more detail, and
he asked Mr. Barfoot when the item can be brought back to Council, with more detail. Mr. Barfoot replied that he
could bring it-back next week with possibly more detail. He suggested- that maybe the Mayor' and he could discuss
the matter when the Mayor has an opportunity. The Mayor agreed to do so. Councillor M. Vincent stated he
questions whether, in paying the sum of $40,000.00 for this property, the City would be going contrary to the
$24,000.00 assessment (he would like to know who put the $24,000.00 assessment on the property), if it is a
Provincial assessment, by paying $16,000.00 more. Councillor Parfitt stated that she would like to know the
number of square feet in this property.
3')0
,....\..:1
~
Fe,<<htCOir/~h t?-'c
Cana6 Kh~!'.f-
(Pt?'P, /-fJi'.
/II_"-Kd p". ~~
. ~ Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to have an up-to-date cost to date of what we
~~~~~;'I' have paid out pertaining to acquiring of lands on the westerly side of Dock Street to date, how much more
is owing, and how far away we are from pouring concrete for the Saint John Regional Library that is
~P;J' 1fe'~~ supposed to go in that area, and if the developer has posted a performance bond with the City as yet.
Councillor Gould asked if the FENCO study in question has been presented to the City as yet. Mr. Barfoot
l1,~ L? I/"~ replied that a preliminary report has been presented to the Co-Ordinating Committee of the Partnership,but
t"~"H- '7. Y / r/t-C"> ..
/ ~ . not as yet to the Councll; the Commlttee has asked for a further look at work to be done there and will be
",~J?~ ~d~~/~, reporting on this, shortly. He added that copies of the preliminary report will be available to all
~t7C'k' G~~I?s6s, Councillors.
t!'1-~') j Re://pr,I;1!
,,('P~r'f ;
r ~ ;7I~tJ 5tH' /
s-t-~~ I'e 6~
11/.iii//
t/rb~J7 ~ne.
r;~ 0 (Y/.sI/n St:
r/'>vi1?ff 0;1 C'.?_
,( -t- d.
~'-hL a/V,P9,/'SCl-
~/t?11 2k':
Ell' p,.t7'p"./~-I-/O'J?
:B;I/ r7f' CP#s
elf!! JOIJc/7ft>Y'
12lJ'h;l!?}: t/ CPJ7~P
.< t!"f(!N~ I H rw bt/
c; ~l'l7b~;'/
,(0/"/ /t?t!'$
'~*/y~
$.,;I(:"ClI<~4t
9" J:;,lrw~",~~
kpl Me'S
.5 u~ -rL/y/'.s/I'n
'-.9,.tt~ N?~//r
R"~.$-t- a.~5~
hl-erj7N~s~
C!;m~ac~ SC:"i'-
,,( ~1711 ,4Yl~. ~?-
at!?y#/o,umt!?d
Read a letter from the City Manager, advising that the property at 520 Main Street (F-IO-4-1) of
the Irving Oil Company Limited was required for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme and was expropriated by
the City of Saint John on January 24th, 1969 since agreement for compensation could not be reached with
the owner, and that application was made for a hearing before the Land Compensation Board to determine
compensation; the Board recently met and awarded to this company an amount of $9,000.00 plus interest at
5% from January 24th, 1969 (the assessed value was $9,600.00 and the appraised value was $7,500.00 of this
property), compared to the $15,000.00 compensation sought by the company. The letter requests the approval
of Common Council for payment of this award plus the said interest at 5% from January 24th, 1969 to
February 27th, 1976, and also requests Council's approval for payment of the owner's Bill of Costs in the
amount of $525.15.
Discussion ensued regarding the policy of paying a Bill of Costs in such a matter, and Mr.
Rodgers suggested that perhaps it would be better if he brought in a written report explaining what Bill
of Costs is all about, and how it arises, and the reason for it, and added that he would be pleased to do
so for the next Council meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be given
for payment of the Land Compensation Board Award in the amount of $9,000.00 plus interest at 5% from
January 24th, 1969 to February 27th, 1976 as compensation for the acquisition of the Irving Oil Company
Limited property at 520 Main Street (F-I0-4-1) that was expropriated by the City of Saint John on January
24th, 1969.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by
Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the information with reference to the Bill of Costs in
to this Council by the City Solicitor as an explanation of same,
acquisition.
the amount of
regarding the
$525.15 be submitted
above named property
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that approval be given for payment of the accounts received
from Palmer, O'Connell, Leger, Turnbull & Turnbull in the total amount of $672.90 for legal services
endered in connection with the acquisition of the following properties required for the North End Urban
Renewal Scheme, the approval of the Partnership for payment of these accounts in the said total amount
having been acknowledged:-
F-6-19-7.
51-53 Dock Street
John Searle Agencies Ltd. (Mar. 24-Sept. 12, 1975)
$ 295. 00
Brunswick Ready Mix Concrete (Sept. 14-Dec. 23, 1973)
$ 377 .90
F-ll-6-16
Chesley Street
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that approval be granted for payment of the account received
from McKelvey, Macaulay, Machum & Fairweather in the amount of $475.00 for legal services rendered in
connection with the acquisition of the following properties required for the North End Urban Renewal
Scheme (April-October, 1975), the Partnership's approval for payment of this said account having been
acknowledged:-
F-6-19-14 & 15
L-6-19-16,17 & 18
Nelson Street )
North Market Wharf)
Warehouse & Transport Ltd.
W. F. Allan Co. Ltd.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be granted
for payment of accounts received from Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation Ltd. in the amounts of
$1,039.30 and $8,285.14, respectively, for professional services rendered in connection with the pre-
liminary study and soils investigation of the proposed sea wall on the harbour face of the Market Square
Development, the Partnership's approval for payment of the said accounts having been acknowledged.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green .
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that East
Coast Enterprises Limited is developing approximately 300 feet of Candace Street and 300 feet of Lynn
Avenue, which will result in their being extended to their common point of intersection and which ex-
tensions will make available 14 lots for one- or two-family homes; and further advising that servicing
plans were submitted by the developer and met with the approval of the Engineering and Works Department;
and further advising that according to the City's sub-division policy, the City will be responsible for
the following costs: (1) water materials (watermains, gate valves, fire hydrants, et cetera) $10,000.00,
(2) sanitary sewer materials (pipe, man holes, et cetera) $4,000.00, and (3) storm sewer materials (pipe,
man holes, et cetera $4,200.00 -- totalling $18,300.00; and recommending that the above expenditure be
approved for water and sewerage materials to be charged to the 1976 capital budgets, and that the Mayor
and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in due course -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
.
I
I
.
I
.
1
I
.
~
~
32,1
:J}. "R.E: ~
.C<i1use~-;99"
/I. J)...L. .I ht. 1.
Manager,
invoices
Regional
authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved
for engineering services in connection with projects that were undertaken under the Department of
Economic Expansion programme:-
Courtenay Bay Causeway
A. D. I. limited
Engineering services for Western Approaches
Payments previously approved
,sufi recommended for payment, Progress Estimate. Number.43,
,_ ',_' .,d~~"d December. 31, J..9,7~ " " . Co "
$ 184,170.59
$
136.03
1..;...,. _~-,J,
S..T ;?!-o/e:>r
1~~er.s~A
11.2J.I ,(t-d.
2.
Saint John Major Water Supply
A. D. I. Limited
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 6,
dated December 31, 1975
$
$
14,871. 40
238.56
/)f11,L'n-/- e'" 3.
(?"I/' 6eW~r
1611 '#e/s
/)~. ,(-c-,c,
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer System
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 51,
dated February 3, 1976
$ 181,705.88
$ 264.46
4.
Bayside Drive Reconstruction and Extension
Province of New Brunswick, Department of Highways
(Transportation)
Engineering services and supply of materials
:Eei!lg /1U..2J.
reedJ7dn. q-
.2Jepl. /ijJth-
11/,;;l!fS {~
.
I
Payments previously approved
Invoice Number 3303
3308
3326
3327
3351
3352
3376
3512
3513
3514
3515
3739
3741
3742
3743
3769
3770
37H
3989
3990
4501
4511
4512
$ 1,530.44
648.75
4.08
$ 41. 99
414.72
4,776.85
2,301. 76
1,248.88
10.00
10.00
1,577.00
1,677.58
3,701. 60
3,635.35
11. 00
87.92
34.77
1,577.00
1. 45
100.08
4.00
26.55
1,577.00
$ 127,699.60
Total payment recommended
$ 24,998.77
Feb..z Sed'"
:i)ekij I h
~~,. rtf'S-
.~"r..,;nf/PJ?
~ide
fA//i(t?J?i-J7
5UI'J/f!?
(! /-1 !f '!Jr.
In reply to Councillor MacGowan's question as to when the Milford-Randolph-Greendale collector sewer
system will be completed, Mr. MacKinnon stated that it will be completed this summer. Councillor M. Vincent
asked if there is any truth in the fact that the reason there was such a delay in the power being re-established
in the East End of the city (following the February 2nd last storm) was because there was survey work being done
to have Bayside Drive widened, and they wanted to have this completed before the new poles (replacing those that
were broken in that storm) were put back in. Mr. Barfoot stated that he had not heard that rumour but he will
check into it. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Council could have that report next week, because he, too, has
heard the same rumour.
" r
, :..... .
On motion of Councillor Gould
I~p/t-<ii/
prPjqcts
/I1!//t?s7Jr.<I-
tJ.-RP)fdf-J1?d.
SeK/t!~~ '
WOlWr/?1dll
()en;l/~ .T
1 ~!faJ1 a. .t~
~kAJ,,~,4(A 2.
'1?i1u/t'J1t!P ~
W~MtJ/r ~
.5' (?IUilfJ" <P- .
Wevi7?rm~/J?
~n/~
WOl!i t'Mdr-
. At-;/.
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED
payment of the following construction progress
regarding capital projects, as follows:-
that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
certificates and approved invoices for engineering services
1.
Nyles Drive and Garnett Road
Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
Sanitary sewer and watermain
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
$
76,812.50
93,917.50
14,087.63
72,501. 81
7,328.06
approved
payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated February 19, 1976
$
Lakewood Avenue, Pauline Street
Ocean Westway Construction Ltd.
Sanitary sewer and watermain
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 5
Retention
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
and Westbrook Avenue
approved
payment, Progress Estimate Number 5,
(, ",dated February 19,19.76
$ 123,687.75
126,132.41
18,919.86
100,375.99
. c
$
6,836.5.Q
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, noting that the City's
.....
322
~ i-/mu/Dd/t?n
(;!rClnr ,4.!f~~
l?Je~ /9'7~
.:f)ef'#:. ;?;'.etb. ~t9Z1.
(.{UP?/:.. 4un?
~reU?-C-1
$ewl!!'i" .
,(ClA-owe?t?d I9vl?
1J.;;1I6//),~ S~:
W't'.ffP/VPff ~
er;uJ? /l. I//n~
71-vv. tPt?vf:
t/rkin ~h~
/I.fJPI'w'J/ ~/S
(' holley) ,(-tL
/lf7/N'Dl/~1
IY ~p-t-/.;d/()J?
7r/ -7;?wJ? 1Pe.;;!
$,1p /ll.;;1/J? ~
Irv/n.1' 0/1 t'a
.I-t-,(
g7, g9, ~I 4", P.
e..; /If, :7P!/ c e
,(emL tbh?~.
~~ar/ /7f$
t/"'~h '1?eJ?~~
$kJVin/~- J?
'/;;'.9':5' .,..h!/
c-a.
;r.~f. p. c. Jbc.k
$I, fJtJH/~r ,P~t1
/l'p~Ib1/ .5... /
~
application for a 1975 stimulation grant was accepted by the Department of Municipal Affairs for an 8~inch
sanitary sewer installation for Lakewood Avenue, Pauline Street and Westbrook Avenue in the amount of
$100,000.00 and the grant was to be paid to the City on an amort'ization'basis over teri"years 'upon the City
funding the cost and when the debentures had been issued, and advising that the City has now been informed
y the said Department that the completed project has been inspected and approved, and that the Department
will pay the said $100,000.00 grant in lump sum rather than over ten years upon completion of the submitted
Grant Agreement, which has already been signed by the Minister of Municipal Affairs, and further advising
that the Agreement has been examined by the City Solicitor for form and the Commissioner of Finance has
agreed that the requirements to substantiate the City's payments for the project can be readily supplied _
and recommending that the said Grant Agreement as submitted be executed by the Mayor and Common Clerk, on
behalf of the City of Saint John, and that the requirements for the said lump sum grant be met, be received
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
I
In the above matter regarding the said 8-inch sanitary sewer installation for Lakewood Avenue,
Pauline Street and Westbrook Avenue, Councillor A. Vincent asked what the City has paid for such work and
is supposed to recover, to date. Mr. Barfoot pointed out, in reply, that a stimulation grant is justa
grant of a certain amount of money towards a particular project - the City selects a project and it costs
approximately $100,000.00; however, the total grant of the Province, as long as the project costs $300,000.00 _
the grant that the Province has allowed for 1975 was only $100,000.00 even though the City had applied for
something like nine million dollars - and the above named $100,000.00 is the $100,000.00 which the Province
's now proposing to pay the City on the execution of the Agreement. He added that the project in question
has been paid for, and probably cost more than the sum of $100,000.00. Councillor A. Vincent asked if we
did not have an understanding with the Provincial Government regarding 1975 that if the City spent that
$100,000.00 grant the Province would give the City more. Mr. Barfoot replied that he knows of no such
understanding.
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
, .RESOLVED that in accordance with the request of the City Manager, .
approval be granted for payment of the following accounts received from Appraisals (Fundy) Ltd. in the
total amount of $3,710.00 for professional services rendered as follows in connection with properties
being acquired for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme ~ the Partnership's approval for payment of these
accounts having been acknowledged:-
Appraisal fee for F-5-1-29, 31 Water Street, Parrtown Taverns Ltd. for period of January 13, 1975 to
January 30, 1976. Preparation of interim appraisal and final appraisal, consultations, investigations,
review of financial records, et cetera $ 2,310.00
Negotiation fee for F & L-6-19-20, 7
to September 25, 1975. Meetings and
of counter claims~ et cetera
North Market Wharf, Leonard & MacDonald for period of August 5, 1975
consultations, recalculating business disturbance claims, preparation
$ 1,2TT.50
Negotiation fee for F & L-6-19-20 as above - meeting and consultations October 2 and 6, 1975
$ 122.50
I
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he questions the number of hours to appraise, to have meetings,
or to have considerations on properties, by the appraisal company. Noting that one account was for 66
hours to appraise a tavern on Water Street, he stated that what he wants to know is who monitors whether
66 hours, for example, of work went into the appraisal of the Parrtown Tavern on Water Street. Mr.
Barfoot replied that this is the appraisal sub-committee, basically, which is composed of the professionals
from the Province, the Federal Government and the City, to examine each bill as it comes in and recommend
to the next committee its payment; the appraisal company is a professional service much the same as
engineering or legal fees and if it takes 66 hours, it takes 66 hours; but there is - and this is why we
have an appraisal sub-committee who 'have some idea of what 'a reasonable charge is for an appraisal.
Councillor Davis noted that these appraiser~ also did a financial app~~isal.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table and that
the said appraisers be invited in to explain the methods by which they do their appraisals.
.
Question being taken, the ~otion to table was carried with Councillors Kipping, Higgins and,
Gould voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be
ranted for payment of the accounts received from Tri-Town Realty in the total amount of $825.00 for
professional services rendered as follows in connection with properties being acquired for the North End
Urban Renewal Scheme, the approval of the Partnership for payment of these accounts having been acknow-
ledged:-
1
Preparation for and attendance at Land Compensation Board hearing, one day, F-IO-4-1 Main/Portland Streets,
Irving Oil Company Limited $ 240.00
I
Preparation for and attendance at Land Compensation Board hearing, two and one-half days, F-11-27-13, 37,
38, 41 Elm Street, C. and M. Joyce $ 585.00
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be granted
for the payment of the accounts received from Shawinigan Engineering Maritimes Ltd. in the total amount of
~1,500.65 for professional services rendered in the 'appraising of the Dock Street power plant in connection
with the North End Urban Renewal Scheme, covering work carried out during the months of June through
October, 1975, the approval of the Partnership for payment of these progress accounts having been acknow-
ledged - and that the said accounts be charged against the project and shared in the usual way.
.
,
....i
"..
.t/rb~n
1?R/Je~/
C~rkt 2>PKh
m/~ 4Cb.
31. 3t, 41 f}
C'..~ JdYde
~o /flqll7
~n'fldt?/I
c~~-t-P/_
Ex-,orfJ,es-
Adn/tbh/j/-
cMpsky&:.
~a,,~lr
z.;}-t-~~
I
~.:lt) IJ1GJ/n
$-t-:
3')')
. ~'lJ
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green "
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, authority be given for
payment of the accounts received from Clark, Drummie & Company in the total amount of $6,298.00 for professional
services rendered in connection with the following noted properties being acquired for the North End Urban
Renewal Scheme, the Partnership's approval for payment of these accounts having been acknowledged:-
37, 38 and 41 Elm Street
properties and eventual Land
$ 4,743.00
F-1l-27-13
expropriation of
C. and M. Joyce: Acting on City's behalf with respect to
Compensation Board hearing (March 1970 - December 11, 1975)
F-IO-4-1
respect to
18, 1975)
.
Main/Portland Streets
expropriation of property and eventual
$ 1,275.00
Irving Oil Company Limited: Acting on City's behalf with
Land Compensation Board hearing (December 2, 1968 - November
F-1l-3-4, F-1l-4-3 & 6
reviewing bill of
Chesley Street
cost, obtaining release
McCormack & Zatzman Ltd.: Studying Judgment of Land Compensation
$ 280.00
Referring to the matter of acquisition of 520 Main Street from Irving Oil Company Limited and the above
account from Clark, Drummie & Company regarding this property expropriation in the amount of $1,275.00, Councillor
A. Vincent stated that it might be of interest to Council and it certainly would be of interest to himself, that
when the City Solicitor brings in his request on a previous motion (regarding the Bill of Cost) with respect to
this property, that the City staff supply the Council with a true cost of that one building; that is, add up all
the bills pertaining to this one property - what we paid to the Oil company for acquisition of this property,
what the interest is, what our charges are, and everything else, to determine the true over-all cost of acquiring
this property.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Fire Chief, sub-
a letter from Number 2 Company of the Salvage Corps and Fire Police which advises that at the annual
of the said Company on January 20th, 1976 the following officers were elected: Captain - Gordon F.
Lieutenant - Gerald A. Maxwell; Secretary - Kenneth A. Briggs; Treasurer - Harold Priddle; Number 1
Foreman - Stuart Hutchison; Number 2 Foreman - Kenneth Steen; Number 3 Foreman - Harold Mayes; Number 4 Foreman _
Donald Burnett - and which asks that Captain Burley and Lieutenant Maxwell be confirmed -- be received and filed
and the request acceded to.
J)e.,t"e,.,,<:d
I w/d~l/; ng
.l3y- ,(';'1(/
~ {, b t(/a-k~
S-r-.
/l, ..<.1}e&
/lfP6'Q~eh
. (',"01, ~4
JJt?/'e/'~
~VtflA'/~..7
~-/qH/S
(/1}/"17 --
~krjJJo
Si/$.
I J/,4J?J? .4v10-'
C'()mm.
aMH./1 Y/:
h"'e- pt:ap,.
I b/d".fI'.
JfU//~>>5
l!:frh?/-C;
>>l7pe.nT' !f
.;jl'f./~C' e nr
~O .f?66
;r'eder/tJo
~
. ,,(,;UU( tl//?/m.
.T#J~p&d; db
tlf' b/ d'f$.,eCC'.
.....
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the building
at 266 Waterloo Street, owned by Mr. A. L. Belyea, has been fire damaged and needs extensive repairs and re-
modelling at a cost of between $20,000.00 and $25,000.00 and that permission has already been given for temporary
roof repairs, and further advising that this property is subject to deferred widening regulations, thus requiring
Council's approval, and as the amount exceeds $10,000.00, there should also be an agreement entered into, and
further advising that no change in use is contemplated for this building, so no recommendation is required from
the Planning Advisory Committee; and recommending that permission be granted for the repair and remodelling of
the said premises subject to an agreement being entered into with the owner to reimburse the owner for such
renovation costs up to a limit of $20,000.00 should the City require the premises for street widening, such
agreement to run for ten years, with the liability of the City reducing by one-tenth each and every year -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute
the said agreement on behalf of the City of Saint John.
Councillor Hodges commented that, with reference to the matter of applications that are being received
for permission to repair, remodel or renovate properties that are subject to deferred widening regulations on
Union and Waterloo Streets, and the fact that the Council in the pa~t has refused to permit such work, it seems
to him that with the City of Saint John in the financial position it is in will never be able to widen those
streets because of the extreme costs, in his viewpoint, and if that is the case, he thinks it is about time that
this Council took action to have that motion rescinded, and he would think that the Council would look into this
and see that the proper staff bring in recommendations regarding same, because we are only wasting our time,
otherwise. The Mayor replied that this is a point well-taken. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the above named
amount is the total cost of the building permit. Mr. Barfoot relied that he does not have the full information
on this, but he understands that this was the cost of the repairs which are subject to the deferred widening by-
law. Mr. Zides reminded the Council that the Planning Advisory Committee is to look again at the deferred
widening by-law matter in May of this year, having made a recommendation last year to the Council not to alter or
change the deferred widening by-law at that time; also, in May, the Committee will take a look at the new traffic
situation that is shaping up and give the Council a recommendation - or before May, if needed. Councillor A.
Vincent noted that the property next door at 266 Waterloo Street is all connected with this matter, and he asked
if a building permit is being obtained for that property, as well. Mr. Zides stated that a building permit is
not being obtained, not that he is aware of, yet. Councillor A. Vincent asked if this matter of fifty per cent
or more damaged by fire has "gone out the window". Mr. Zides replied that the fifty per cent rule applies in
various situations - it does not necessarily apply to deferred widening because he thinks the Council is back
again to the point as to what Council might permit - he thinks Council could permit anything _ a brand-new
building - if it wants to provided the builder enters into an agreement with the Council that is satiSfactory to
he Council; the fifty per cent rule, therefore, has nothing to do with the deferred widening by-law. Councillor
A. Vincent interjected that his question is merely: do we have a regulation that says that if your property is
fifty per cent or more destroyed by fire you cannot rebuild it; he added that you have implemented it with other
people. Mr. Zides stated that there is a rule like that, but it has nothing to do with deferred widening.
Councillor A. Vincent, stating that he was not talking about deferred widening, stated that he was therefore
asking: regarding the property between 266 Waterloo Street and the Bank of Nova Scotia - has a building permit
been issued, and is there going to be one. Mr. Zides replied: not to his knowledge, but he will have to look
into that, of course. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like a report for the next meeting of Council,
if possible, whether it is fifty per cent damaged or not.
Councillor Davis stated that the matter of building inspection and other technical matters in that
field is going to be thoroughly reviewed by the Land Committee at the next meeting, when the Committee hopes to
have a very thorough meeting on the subject, on March 1st next, and from that meeting should develop a report by
staff on how to handle these matters of buildings and properties damaged by heavy winds and fire. He added that,
at the moment, it is a nebulous thing and we cannot get direct answers, so we hope to have by two weeks, perhaps,
a thorough investigation and a report to Council on these things.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that, further to
1324
~
~In.end'md-?t! t'i
/I~I't?eh?~h~ re
s..r /Und!f
If~/pn .2Jei/t?~
m'l7r- Cbh?m.
(/J1,fie?n )
C',;;ipn'tftl
.L nepJ"/zpn:;d-/c1l?
d S.::T.Hmlli,ff
J?ey/(m .J)evp/o~
J1?9d C7",mnJ-
,f/"A's-!t. 2~r
It/3kr-4d~
,<~ .
C'A/H/dks S;;17;C.
t9m1nF/
.:J). /41f.,4"e Id' ,(-c.
~u(pm6'd-
HI77fq/
;yo:-
the February 16th, 1976 resolution of Common Council concerning the previous agreement between the five
municipalities and the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission, authorizing the Mayor and Common
Clerk to execute the agreement subject to the matter of representation being satisfactorily resolved, 'he
was submitting with this letter for Council's confirmation the proposed agreement, and further advising
that, apart from the matter of representation, there are a number of detailed changes which have been:made
from the original draft before Council, and that the Council's confirmation is requested of these changes
as listed in his letter, and recommending the execution of the said agreement, as amended, be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute on
behalf of the City of Saint John the said agreement, as amended.
.
Councillor MacGowan stated that with reference to paragraph 5 of the proposed agreement ("Additional
Commissioners not 'exceeding three in number may be, but need not be appointed, by the Commissioners I
appointed by the MunicipalHies,." )" she would like that delete<!..peca:us",., she could see ,us .g",.tting into
problems there if you have three extra - you already have ten for Saint John and the others would be
nine - if there were three appointed outside the Saint John area, which very well could happen, then Saint
John is still not in the majority.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter be tabled and sent to legal session
where Councillor MacGowan can obtain full answers.
I
Councillor Kipping pointed out that if there is any further delay on this matter - it has now
been delayed several times and it has been gone over and gone through very thoroughly - the City stands a
very strong chance of losing any money to which it is entitled - and it is entitled to quite a bit, at the
moment - from the Province. He stated he would just as soon see the matter wound up in open session,
right now, and any objections thrashed out. He asked if the matter can be finalized in legal session or
will it have to come back to Common Council in open session. In reply, Mr. Rodgers stated he assumed that
legal session, in the above motion, was for the purpose of discussing and asking questions and getting
answers that Councillors might wish to get, but authority for the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute the
said agreement would have to be done in open session of Council. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he
challenges that legal interpretation given by Mr. Rodgers, and would ask for independent legal advice.
.
Question being taken on the motion to table to legal session, the motion waS lost with Councillors
MacGowan, Kipping, Pye and Green voting "yea" and Councillors Davis, Higgins, Gould, Hodges, A. Vincent,
Parfitt and M. Vincent voting "nay".
Still pursuing her point, Councillor MacGowan asked what was the purpose of increasing the
number of Saint John representatives to ten on the above named LCommission in the light of the said par-
agraph 5 of the proposed agreement, and in the light of the reference on page 8 of the proposed agreement,
her point being that the majority of the City of Saint John representatives on the Commission is lost if
there are three new appointees because there would be twelve, possibly, and there are new municipalities
that can be added, so the ten representatives on the Commission from Saint John does not solve our pro-
blem - that is not what we were aiming for. It was pointed out to Councillor MacGowan that this was a
matter that would have to be dealt with, whenever it would arise, to ensure that the City of Saint John I
maintains the majority position on the Commission.
"nayl1.
Question being taken, the motion was adopted with Councillors MacGowan and A. Vincent voting
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Economic Development, advising that, further to the matter of the proposed agreement between municipalities
to join in the Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission, the Commission, at its regular meeting held
on February 18th, 1976 recommended that it become incorporated under the Companies Act as a non profit
company without share capital for the purpose of carrying on its business of regional development, and to
own and develop industrial parks and to maximize the opportunities to utilize funds from provincial and
federal sources for this purpose - and requesting that the Common Council concur in this action by the ...
Saint John Fundy Region Development Commission, be received and filed and the request acceded to.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
, , ,',' RESOLVED that as r",c<<mmended by the City Manager,. authority be
granted for payllent of the following named invoices:-
indsay Better Water Industries Ltd.
Chitticks Sand & Gravel
D. Hatfield, Ltd.
$ 2,038.99
$ 3,292.05
$ 3,059.90
I
dated December 30, 1975
dated February 11, 1976
dated February 9, 1976
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's query of February 16th, 1976 regarding rental of equipment,
Mr. Barfoot advised that the 15-yard dump truck was used in the Sanitation Department to catch up after
the Christmas season when there was a tremendous amount of garbage which had to be caught up with for
various reasons; the 6-yard dump truck was used in the Water Department for regular duties when we needed
a truck and could not obtain any from other City departments as there were none obtainable which could be
used to service the said Department. Councillor M. Vincent asked if it is true that we are short a vehicle
in the Water Department and that we are going to have to almost rent a truck for that department on a
full-time basis. Mr. Barfoot stated that before utilizing rented equipment, throughout the Works Depart-
ment we use our own trucks to the maximum. In reply to the question asked by Councillor M. Vincent, Mr.
MacKinnon stated. that normally in these figures of hours of rental of equipment - for example, that for
232 hours that is before Council at this time - that involves more than one truck - just with the regular
number of hours it would have to be a minimum of three to four trucks and it probably represents half a
dozen trucks rented in various times during the week - it is not one truck for the total period of time;
we do require trucks, but it is usually for short periods of time and it is usually a large quantity of
them. Councillor M. Vincent asked if it is true that the Water Department is going to require the services
of a rented truck or more than one truck for almost a period of a year, or longer; that is, is it true
that there are no other trucks available to the said department without going to a rented truck. Mr.
MacKinnon replied that the department is not short of trucks - we have trucks that we need on a full-time
basis with full-time chauffeurs to do full-time jobs but for the remainder of the jobs whether some of the
vehicles are down and whether or not they are capital jobs or jobs that are not normally scheduled as on-
going work, we rent that equipment provided other equipment is not available to that particular department.
Councillor M. Vincent asked how many weeks out of a year'we would be renting a 6-yard dump truck for any
civic department. Mr. MacKinnon stated he would suggest that the City is probably renting 6-yard dump
I
.
~
,...
325
.
{/"b~h
1?t?J1t!'K/~/
C<lPf,J;yt:'<
.3;! 39;///.1f4..
Sr.
17i}/f (;(e
SEeckr'1l-
1'1,S51?e, ~-t,t,
~.;JI1/t' C't7/?I/'-
EtL.
#,Ilfll";;'/SOi,("
/?)f'/".;l/ ~/S
I (FuntLy);(
$ult!iIY/,s/p
~-~w
.
1
.
C/tfu- .f't,/I 'e/-
./ -tl?r
/l1€'xan/rCl
$1:
o I/e/"n,:j-f-l-
~ '1J?f
17h;J#/e
..2'y- ,4w
I
T~ -rr:i~
~-~w
.:lJu {let-
1~7t
.
.....
trucks every week during the year and those numbers vary from one to forty, and as high as fifty-five, in the
past.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be granted
for payment of the accounts received from Roy de Stecher & Associates Ltd. in the total amount of $1,774.82 for
professional services rendered and court costs involved in connection with the Land Compensation Board hearing on
the Cecil and Mary Joyce properties on Elm Street (F-11-27-13, 37, 38, 41), these properties being required for
the North End Urban Renewal Scheme - the Partnership's approval for payment of the said accounts having been
acknowledged.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if it is usual to have two separate appraisers on an appraisal job on the
same property in a situation like the above matter. Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply. Mr. Buck at this time
gave an explanation of the appraisal process, and confirmed that we had both Appraisals (Fundy) Ltd. and de
Stecher appraise the Joyce property on Elm S~reet.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green and A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting a draft of the
proposed amendment to the Subdivision By-Law that received first and second readings by Common Council on February
16th last, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision of Land
Within The City of Saint John", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Councillor MacGowan recalled that when the above by-law amendment went to the Legal Department at the
last Council meeting, she was questioning the ten-months referred to in subsection (6)(b), and stated that she
still questions it for the reasons given at the February 16th meeting. She stated that she would prefer to see
the period limited to nine or eight months because she thinks that gives the developers or utility companies
ample time to get the job done - she would like to see this clause in the by-law changed to nine months rather
than the ten months, anyway. Mr. Rodgers noted that if the Council wishes to make that change, it can do so,
right here, and that the amendment was prepared on the basis of what he thought the Council had adopted. Coun-
cillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, which Councillor MacGowan seconded, that the said by-law amendment be
revised by changing the word "ten" in question to "nine". Mr. Zides noted that we deal with three utility
companies and he found it a little difficult last week to get together with all of the three people who work with
the Planning Department on sub-division reviews, and so on, but after he met with them and explained what had
been discussed at the February 16th Council meeting none of them saw any real objection to changing that wording _
they felt there was nothing wrong, for example, with using language something like this: that instead of using
the words "within ten months" they would say "by, say, November 1 following the date of the temporary overhead
installation". He stated that none of them would object to that wording; unfortunately, he was not able to give
that advice to the City Solicitor until this morning. Mr. Zides added that the rule in question does not come in
until the first of November of anyone year and that means, in this particular case, that the developer or
utility company would have a period of up to twelve months, actually, but it could be six months, seven months;
the rule comes into play only if somebody wants an installation after November 1 of anyone year and the utility
companies are quite happy to have this by-law amendment wording as in the draft, left as is, or it is just as
well to have something to say that by November 1 of the year following the installation you would have to get
things straightened out. Councillor A. Vincent withdrew his proposed motion, in view of the explanation given by
Mr. Zides. The Council members made no change to the draft amendment to the above named by-law as prepared by
the City Solicitor.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The City of
Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting a draft
of a proposed amendment to the Traffic By-Law incorporating the recommendation adopted by Common Council on
February 8th last from the Traffic and Safety Committee that this by-law be amended to change alternate side
parking on Alexandra Street to prohibit overnight parking, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting Traffic on Streets in The
City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of the Motor Vehicle Act 1973 and Amendments Thereto", be read a
first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting Traffic on Streets in The
City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of the Motor Vehicle Act 1973 and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting
Traffic on Streets in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of the Motor Vehicle Act 1973 and Amend-
ments Thereto", be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting Traffic on Streets in
The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of the Motor Vehicle Act 1973 and Amendments Thereto".
Read Report of the Budget Committee
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Budget Committee
reports
Your Co~ittee begs leave to report that it sat several days during the months of November, December
and January to discuss budgets and wishes to submit the following report and recommendations, namely:-
326 '
~
/97C
:lJca(ff~r
(;?rc,J7ts
{J,U/?, /l, Ifi~M
l0~ ",'t!(){/6'I"!/
ff mpJ7//!-s re
.ilJpt/e ~rad5
t'17h7h1/1nfee
lY~ok
1. That the following grants for which appropriation has been made in the 1976 budget be
the payment of which shall be by instalment or otherwise, at the discretion of the Commissioner
during 1976:
approved,
of Finance,
Health Organizations
Victorian Order of Nurses
$ 3,000
Welfare Organizations
Canadian National Institute for the Blind
Salvation Army
*Family Services Saint John Inc.
Social Services Council
Visiting Homemakers Service
Volunteer Bureau
600
1,125
~,OOO
3,750
3,000
1,500
Educational Grants
Canadian Association for the Mentally Retarded
University of New Brunswick
2,625
50,000
Recreational and Cultural Services
Lord Beaverbrook Rink
Saint John Horticultural Association
New Brunswick Museum
Saint John Regional Library
New Brunswick Competitive Festival of Music
Atlantic Symphony Orchestra
Clock Upkeep
Senior Citizens Housing
Young Women's Christian Association
Catholic Youth Organization
Saint John Boys' & Girls' Club - Operating
Saint John Boys' & Girls' Club - Building
Young Men's Christian Association
New Brunswick Historical Society
New Brunswick Youth Orchestra
Saint John Art Club
Loyalist Days Incorporated
Grants not specified
Arts Council - Artist in Residence
Senior Citizens I Centre' (,
Saint John Marine School
33,900
44,000
20,000
85,000
675
750
625
13,800
750
3,000
22,500
30,000
7,500
1,000
, 750
Free rent
7,500
6,000
3,500
Free rent
$1,000 Rent Reduction
*(Conditional on Canada Assistance Plan grant)
23rd February, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
, RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recom-
mendations contained therein adopted.
,
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Barfoot confirmed to the Mayor that the above noted appropriation
of $7,500.00 for the Loyalist Days Incorporated is a cash grant. With regard to the grant being made to
the Visiting Homemakers Service, Councillor A. Vincent asked if the City does not recover fifty per cent
of that from the Federal Government. Mr. Park advised in reply that the sum of $3,000.00 to this organ-
ization is the total outlay from the City and the City recovers $1,500.00; with regard to the City recovering
fifty per cent from the Federal Government, there have been efforts made over a considerable period of
time to effect recovery under the Canada Assistance Plan for a number of these grants paid to welfare
organizations - as has been previously reported to Council, we have been successful so far in having three
of the organizations recognized for this purpose and we are continuing through the Department of Welfare
of the Province of New Brunswick to press for recognition of a number of the others - so far, we have 'not
achieved this but we are staying in touch with the Provincial Welfare Department hoping that there will be
recognition of these other organizations as time goes ,on. Councillor A. Vincent noted that the Visiting
Homemakers Service does an excellent job and the reduction 'in the City's grant will cause some poor worker
who cannot go to work because his wife is in the hospital to have to stay home with the children and we
will have to keep him on welfare. The Mayor noted that the figures listed on the above named report of
the Budget Committee are those ,that were accepted by the Council when it prepared the budget.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the City staff prepare a list of how many of the above named
grants, showing the percentage of recovery, that the City recovers, and that such list be provided for all
Council members. He asked that such list be provided at the convenience of staff.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
begs leave to report that it
and Councillors Cave, Davis,
Committee begs to submit the
sat on Monday, February 16th, 1976, when there were
Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, A. Vincent
following report and recommendations, namely:-
Your Committee
present Mayor Flewelling
&ht:'R~/()/? '!t and M. Vincent, and your
/I1a$kr '?/um~ -
/ ' . 1. That the Special Master Plumbers License issued to Mr. Laurie MacDonald on August 18th, 1975 be
^/~BJ7~~ . ~~ncelled, as recommended in the letter dated February 13th, 1976 from the Master Plumbers Examining
MUJ-/.9~2>P.1 oard. .
tPPh~~~ ~~~J 2. That the Master Plumbers License issued to Mr. Ronald Fraser on March 13th, 1975 be cancelled,
as recommended in the letter dated February 13th, 1976 from the Master Plumbers Examining Board.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"'"
;32:7
Of) /1)171 /~;ll?e
. tl/hP/e _
p~,. ~.
f7!~d'y
/l!ul7/c/rl
~I(/u" rl!".h
-&-1t?J7,s ,,~
C/I/~~ o..,c
~li
3. That the Common Council endorse the concept of an independent bureau of municipal labour relations as
proposed by Mr. Peter E. Grady, Mouth of Keswick, N. B., and the. appearance by Mr. Grady before The Cities of New
Brunswick, and that Mr. Grady be so informed.
23rd February, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that section 1 of the above report be adopted.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that section 2 of the above report be adopted.
C'!?II I7J!.
I Y;'nt1'~I1t-
Cb/71~e~
:g. G,;;;,/e
7JIU.h1'/IJ?~
..L I7S/,t!?et!'PP
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that at the Committee of the Whole meeting of February 16th last a
motion was adopted in the form of praise offered to the Plumbing Inspector, Mr. B. Gale, who has a very difficult
job. He stated that he would like to see that motion of praise come out of that Committee of the Whole meeting
somewhere along the line that the Council publicly supports the Plumbing Inspector in his efforts to try and
clean up a very unpleasant situation. He added that Mr. Gale did an excellent job in this regard.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that section 3 of the above report be adopted, and that the
report be received and filed.
.
It was noted that Mr. Grady will be appearing before the meeting of The Cities of New Brunswick that
will be held on February 28th in Moncton.
Noting that the next item of business was the report from the Nominating Committee, the Mayor requested
that the matter of appointments to the Fort La Tour Development Authority be held out from this report, and not
considered in this report.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as requested by the Mayor, consideration of the matter of
appointments to the Fort La Tour Development Authority be deferred, for the time being.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the following appointments be approved, as recommended in the
from the Nominating Committee, namely:-
Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee - two-year term from January 1st, 1976:
Councillor MacGowan, Mr. T. A. Scribner, Mrs. George Turner, Mrs. Eleanor Sheehan, Messrs. William Prouty, Paul
Price and Terry Alderman, Councillor Hodges and Mrs. Stephen Clark;
to the Mayor's Committee on Alcoholism - two-year term from January 1st, 1976:
Councillor MacGowan, Dr. J. A. MacDougall, Miss Anne M. McGrath, Father Joseph Woods, Messrs. Earl Campbell and
Michael Haynes, Mayor Flewwelling;
Sites and Events Committee - two-year term from January 1st, 1976:
E. Cooper, Mrs. R. B. Marr, Mrs. H. M. Watts, Reverend Arthur Long, Messrs. Vincent
Leo Mulholland, F. Earle Corbett, peter Trites, Clifford Skinner and James P. Murphy;
to the Traffic and Safety Committee - two-year term from January 1st, 1976:
G. M. Dykeman, F. Bailey, W. R. Godfrey, S. Wrigley, D. Spinney, H. Mayes, William Chisholm and Robert
.
to the Plannin~ Advisory Committee - three-year term from January 1st, 1976:
essrs. E. B. Fitzgerald, E. Cohen and Leonard Lawson;
,
o the Board of Commissioners, Saint John Re~ional Library - three-year term from January l~t, 1976:
Messrs. Basil B. Stead, Lawrence Machum and Thomas Crowther, Councillor Hodges (liaison);
to the Saint John Port Development Commission - two-year term from January 1st, 1976:
Messrs. Ralph Daley and Thomas L. McGloan;
.0 the West Side Community Hospital, Board of Directors - one-year term:
Councillor Hodges;
to the Saint John Provincial Hospital, Board of Directors
ouncillor MacGowan.
On motion of Councillor Green
.....
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report dated February 18th, 1976 from the
Traffic and Safety Committee, the Traffic By-Law be amended to delete Bay Street from Manchester Avenue to South
Bay Bridge, and Manchester Avenue from Manawagonish Road to Bay Street from Schedule M - 40 MPH Speed Limits of
the said by-law, and that the City Solicitor be asked to prepare the appropriate amendment to the Traffic By-Law
in this regard.
lJ.-'1p,C'/C4 5~~4f ah7-""l>.
71>;;lh;'c ::?J'1- 8# . .
S?",ed ;:zo"kes: .:B~~7f.
/YjeJ~k.s7fi9'" /9()e;.
CJI'I-:/ Sp~;dT~r
1328
I
,,(ah/{ tJ,Mm.
~.;;, s€' me /?r--
-='1.1fr t?t'me ,I? ~
".ycilf/,!, flqn6oU:
:lJL
$t?lIVer.
7!(),(Il6'!f 7i1"/W/ .;
,Ediseme JIlt-
d~rtM'me,l?r
/V.I '/. /4/'?~u.
~
$ewel"
JfO#f"~y 'M1'b7/.
Nhn $ear/e
b'pY()'pr/~t/()
/fJt. P/t!'~J?t-
/l (/l?, + /fkc
.:J)o17~/1!I .sT.
extens/t1
JJOll?7a 9''fs
JPI?J? 77Jo,m~
~l"sA ~~A-
.seWd)r sC~t!?
~sel1?eJ?t-
Ff1;1J?c/j J)pnO/h~
//J;lr~1; ae-ek
Sewer .s(J~Pfl1,
2Jdln.;,f's
..2)~m~!fes ~
"c.ilsemenr
(von .Ie ::B/.;;mc
1I/~/"'sA t?reek
&ewtlr 5C'J;e;'??
k~s"n?'/?~""'"
-C.t?,P sf?/I
Ce,,~(!! W~rJ,
/I'J..ar.5h Creek
$ew~r SC'ht?ht
"<-dlS~Mel?t-
C'1c:Jfoel7~e ?;
;lfc;l""'/~I4/ r;- _
.T~ J?/6;n XaVfj/
/lJar91 {" rt?t?,I(
Sewer sdAtP/71(?
~stfJ??ent-
EvI'e>'/~ $k01~_
/l1.i1Y'~j, C"'1eK
$eWer ~t:nt!'''''
k.;l 5' mt!? ht-
Erv/J'?/Z- &orn
/!1dJ"sn Cf..et/Jr
,sewer $C"hem
KdSl!'l?7enr
Wm. 1? l!.:Ir,./
If/~I"".sh Creek
.s___,gr SC'~t?
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee with regard to
Common Council resolution of December 22nd last which laid on the table the City Manager's recommendation
that the City of Saint John enter into an easement agreement with the National Harbours Board with
respect to an easement right to maintain, operate, reconstruct or repair a sewer pipeline at Rodney
Terminal, Saint John harbour - and which referred the matter to the proper land committee for the proper
easements and proper legal documents to be negotiated, advising that at the meeting of the Land Committee
held on February 2nd last this item was referred back to Common Council as the Committee felt no action
on that Committee's part was necessary in dealing with this sewer easement agreement closure __ be
received and filed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter dated December 19th,
1975 from the City Manager (which letter was laid on the table by Council resolution of December 22nd,
1975), the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute on behalf of the City of Saint John an easement
agreement with the National Harbours Board with respect to an easement right to maintain, operate,
reconstruct or repair a sewer pipeline, 85 inches in diameter, on an area of approximately 65,850 square
feet situate at Rodney Terminal, Saint John harbour.
On motion of Councillor Davis
I
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising
that the Committee has been dealing with Mr. John Searle for the purchase of 1,579 square feet of his
property required for the extension of Mt. Pleasant and MacDonald Streets and these dealings have proven
unsuccessful as the Committee has contacted and offered Mr. Searle $2,400.00 for the said land (sub- '
stantiated by an independent appraisal firm) and Mr. Searle is requesting in excess of this - and recom-
mending that due to the fact that negotiations being unsuccessful that proceeding commence for the
expropriation of the required amount of land, namely, 1,579 square feet as indicated on the submitted
map, needed for the Mt. Pleasant and MacDonald Street Extension.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, Mr. John Thomas
of 451 Rothesay Avenue be paid his claim for $500.00 for damages to his property (in the form of loss of
an apple tree, a willow tree and shrubs, and loss of lumber which was piled in his yard, as well his
driveway was damaged) which resulted from construction of the Marsh Creek sewer line.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, Mr. Francis
Donahue of 9 Simpson Drive be paid the sum of $768.30 for the permanent easement for the Marsh Creek
sewer line across his property (2,672 square feet) plus interest and damages incurred during construction
of the said sewer line.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land
Committee, Miss Yvon LeBlanc of 27 Golden Grove Road be paid the sum of $681.80 for the 716 square foot
easement for the Marsh Creek sewer line, plus interest, damages and replacement of topsoil on her pro-
perty with regard to construction of the said sewer line.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as per the recommendation of the Land Committee, Mr.
George W. Parkin of 29 Golden Grove Road be paid the sum of $281.80 for the 1,212 square foot easement
area for the Marsh Creek sewer line, plus interest and replacement of topsoil on his property for the
construction of the said sewer line.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, the City pay
Mr. Clarence J.Barriault and Jeanien Savoie, joint owners of 7 MacKay Street (the former R. Beale
property), for the 1,100 square feet of easement area for the Marsh Creek sewer line, and interest, for a
total compensation of $165.00.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, Mrs. E. Viola
H. M. Skavn of 573 Rothesay Avenue be paid the sum of $250.50 for the 1,670 square feet of permanent
easement across her property plus interest, for the Marsh Creek sewer line.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land
Committee, the City pay Mr. Ervin J. Morneau of 579 Rothesay Avenue the sum of $150.00 for full com-
pensation, interest included, for the 250 square feet required from him for the Marsh Creek sewer line.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, Mr. William P.
arrity be paid the sum of $150.00, interest included, for the 368 square feet of easement area acquired
y the City for construction of the Marsh Creek sewer line across his property at 19 Golden Grove Road.
~
.
1
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...
.S.T:mJ'1T
':7)e{/r? e>"pm~
D.:r"
fZ& - 7Jdt!,
2/, /,?7c)
S.T PqPT
l:J)ev~?mpJ7
lomm.
b~-4w
7eN77 :; d-/'
rd.,t#re nee
ClhJdn/md)?
e~Jd4e/~
1.6"",,1"/;'
2Jel/d/o//~1171.
(?pn;m/'tir?'e
. C'dtLn,
/(/ffl;'.f
(/n/lJJ1 5t-.
.:l.-WdJ':f
:Cp..;;J-I::FYc
17r.il#/'c~
$;i1M!f f., pM!
lb// -tax
.
I
I.ZJ~ 2y-
e~I'C"e~
'?,;I/ fax
e/'.f/t?:S d
IJI@,
. TYQJ?~i.en-C-
Wo/'" ~1'9
8'-1-:/ Ilifr,
:l3al/__~
ct- S. 7-
Ce> n.7~j>(L.eI/D
c:,/7~~Jts
ll.... {}e7tA-n,IfVf~'
329
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report on the activities of the Saint John Port Develop-
ment Commission during the period of July to end of December, 1975, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Port Development Commission
advising that at the regular meeting of the Commission held on January 16th last, a discussion was held regarding
ppointments to the Saint John Port Development Commission for 1976 and the proposed by-law regarding the annual
meeting, and that by resolution the Commission decided to ask the Common Council to amend the Terms of Reference
of the said Commission by deleting Article 5:1 of the Terms of Reference and substituting therefor the following,
"5:1 The Annual Meeting of the Commission shall be held in the month of February in each year at which meeting
the Commissioners shall appoint from amongst themselves a Chairman and Vice-Chairman who shall hold office until
the next annual meeting. Officers of the Commission may be re-elected but may serve no more than three con-
secutive years." -- be received and filed and the requested amendment be approved and referred to the City
Solicitor for drafting.
Councillor Kipping advised of his interest in the activities of the above named Commission and its
methods of operation, and stated that the Council Committee on Economic Development would like to have a look at
this proposed amendment; he added that here is the occasion when a suggested amendment is before Council, where
it might do the whole thing at once, if there is, indeed, anything else to be done. He stated he wonders if the
over and seconder of the above motion might consider withdrawing the motion and referring this request for an
amendment to the Council Committee on Economic Development and the said Committee will look at it and look at the
over-all by-laws of the Port Development Commission. The Mayor noted that, in this case, the Commission is
asking for just a simple thing, namely, to have the date of the annual meeting changed. He added that the said
Council Committee on Economic Development has the right to go and look these things over, however. The mover and
seconder did not accede to Councillor Kipping's suggestion that the above motion be withdrawn and the matter be
referred to the said Council Committee.
Read a letter from Councillor Kipping advising that there are three questions he wishes to ask of the
City Manager in the event that the reports involved are not on the Council agenda for February 23rd:- (1) what is
the status of Council's request for a recommendation from the Traffic and Safety Committee concerning two-way
traffic on all of Union Street; (2) has anything yet been determined about the feasibility of the City imposing a
head tax or a poll tax; (3) what steps have been taken regarding the "all out effort of enforcement of the Dog
By-Law" as directed by Council on February 16th, and with what results.
In reply to the first question of Councillor Kipping, Mr. Barfoot advised that this matter was taken up
at the February 17th meeting of the Traffic and Safety Committee and the Committee at that meeting agreed to a
30-day trial period being initated for two-way tr~ffic on Union Street - however, to initiate such an action has
a number of side effects on traffic lights and a few small operational details and, so, before that recommenda-
tion comes to Council there will be some further in-put from staff on that matter; it is expected that the
recommendation will be coming to Council very quickly, within another one or two meetings of Council.
In reply to the second question of Councillor Kipping, Mr. Barfoot stated that the levying of poll
taxes is not within the jurisdiction of the City because the City does not have such a power; if such a tax was
contemplated, it would require a resolution of Common Council to petition the Provincial Government to change
what has to be changed; we believe that permission would not be granted since poll taxes were considered one of
the nuisance taxes at the time of centralizing assessment and collection, and that was the reason it was discon-
tinued. Councillor Kipping stated that he wonders if Mr. Barfoot would give that, generally speaking, information
in writing to Council so that Council can then decide as a Council whether it wants to go to the Province about
it or not; and, further, he wonders if Council might consider putting this matter on the agenda for meeting of
The Cities of New Brunswick so that this Council can get some "feel" from the other municipalities. Councillor
Hodges expressed his opposition to the imposition of a poll tax, noting that the problem is the people who come
in to the City of Saint John and do not stay; he added that his attitude (from his knowledge of the past regard-
ing the poll tax collection, when wages were garnisheed to pay such taxes, only those who could be located to get
these taxes from, and who got caught, had to pay the said tax) is, that it would have to be a case of everybody
paying such a tax, or nobody pays it, in fairness. Councillor Kipping pointed out that that is why he wanted a
report in the matter. Councillor Davis recalled that the Byrne Report in 1967, under the Equal Opportunity set-
up, actually eliminated the non-resident tax, the poll tax and all other nuisance taxes and placed the taxation
authority in the Province - the Province collects all our taxes, and even if they do not collect our taxes we get
paid for them. He noted that, like most other cities, our big problem in Saint John is to try to pay for the
problems caused by non-resident workers. He stated that it seems to him that the City has to begin looking to
the Province to tax the outlying areas for the City (whiCh is being done in places in Europe and in the United
States where municipalities and homes within a certain radius of the city pay a certain amount of tax which is
remitted to the city). He added that the City of Saint John does not get any compensation now in this regard
from the Province because the grant system has been altered - theoretically, that was supposed to have been it,
but now, the home owner does not pay a provincial tax so the entire matter is distorted. He stated that he feels
that is the only solution at the moment and that we should press the Province for that; he felt there is nothing
wrong with it, it is an equitable tax and it is much easier to collect - you cannot collect from individuals any
longer - it has to be through properties. Councillor Kipping felt that this is the kind of a decision that will
come out, he thinks, of a report which lets the Council know about the feasibility of a head or poll tax - he
added that it may well turn out that a head tax or a poll tax is not a feasible thing, but some alternative is,
and the problem has been well stated by Councillor Davis.
In reply to the third question of Councillor Kipping, Mr. Barfoot advised that the Animal Rescue League
as contacted on this matter and the League was contacted about the same time as the amount of the grant that the
City has given them, and the upshot of these two contacts is that a meeting will be held with the executive of
the League on February 25th, having been arranged by the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee. Coun-
cillor MacGowan, chairman of the said Committee, advised that the said meeting will be held at 12.15 p.m. and
that she would hope that as many Councillors as possible would be at that meeting.
On the question of whether or not to have the matter of head tax or poll tax raised at the forthcoming
meeting of The Cities of New Brunswick, the concensus of opinion among the Council members was to retain this as
a City of Saint John issue at the present time. Councillor Kipping, during ensuing discussion, pointed out that
there is also the problem of transient workers in the city and the fact that there is no way we can get any kind
of support from such people for the maintenance of the city and that they, indeed, have added to the City's
problem. He stated that such a group is one of the reasons, along with these people who live in neighbourhood
communities, that he asked for the Council to find out about the feasibility of a head tax or a poll tax; he felt
that both aspects should be looked into, at the same time. The Mayor, in summary, stated that the Council will
leave this matter, with all the information it has, for the City Manager who will check into it for the Council
and find out what is available, and report back to Council. Councillor A. Vincent stated that the Building
Trades and the Saint John Construction Contractors Association could probably supply statistics, if the Council
3ao
~
Cb'O'7.
k'/',pf?/hf
,
Sf. J;se,/lAs
45,P'
.:l3.a.!/~N"L .:7J r.
//?Olmi::o -r
S~-MI-'y aMh1
(1~UJ? /r1f/?/h,f
7Pu&K ,.,~zfes
TN r"'~ (:0 2y-
,.(~W
(}/.,!y S'ot~/-ft?r
$. T .:J)i.>t-~bou
CJQunc/1
SI1t?HI ~ lee/
(:!pn -6rt7
~.;j/t-
$t,.~ts ..,...
5/~ewa//(sL,
,.f'n1'Y.<<f WPI"',,:S-
::O")7t:
tl,.e,iiler S-:r
:J)/5-&-. (?pu!'tJ'/!
p..,c 'P~J// C
';::"7 f//o~C:tI. 'A
.s. T('/y/c KP'1-
?/o~et?5' t/J?/oJ?
/'1/,. /d
aU!? Kpf?/J1.f
wants some co-operation in that line (regarding transient workers), and that he would be happy to work
with the City Manager in this regard. The Mayor acknowledged this offer of assistance.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named letter submitted by Councillor Kipping,
be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of Directors of St.
Joseph's Hospital, advising that upon the recommendation of Councillor H. Green, who is a member of the
said Board of Directors, the Board is consulting with the Common Council regarding the problem that Bayard
Drive, a public street, was originally intended to handle the traffic to and from the said Hospital but
the traffic on this street has now reached such proportions as to interfere seriously with Hospital
traffic and with the movement of ambulances and that the Board finds that the said street is being used as
a short-cut for trucks of all descriptions and that parking is taking place in areas which are considered
fire zones, and that these vehicles are also interfering with the traffic flow, and asking that some
action be taken to remedy this situation which is presenting a hazard and interfering with the services of
this Hospital to the public, be referred to the Traffic and Safety Committee and to the proper authorities
for a report to Council.
I
I
Councillor Hodges pointed out that the Traffic By-Law regulates what streets can be prohibited
for trucks, and that hospital areas are designated as "quiet" areas, and that it is a question of en-
forcement of the by-law. He noted that we can suggest to the Chief of Police that his department look
into this regulation and he suggested that a few fines imposed on trucks going through the street in
question would convince the truck drivers that the City means business. On the matter of truck routes,
Councillor Kipping stated that he had occasion just last week to look into the matter of truck routes,
because there was a heavy haul going on out in the Millidgeville area and he discovered that unless a
given street, or streets, are specifically named in the by-law you cannot hold a trucking firm or any
truckers off them. He felt that that sounds like a pretty poor law, and stated that he suggests that the
Legal Department be asked to look into the truck route by-law in order to see whether it is really workable
or not or just how cumbersome it is. The Mayor noted that they can do that when they are considering the
above named request from the Board of Directors of the St. Joseph's Hospital.
.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from The Saint John District Labour
Council asking that the Common Council make every effort to have the condition of the streets and sidewalks
in this city corrected, and noting that the use of salt would greatly improve these winter conditions by
removing some of the build-up of ice on most streets and sidewalks, and commenting on the cost of salt as
against cost of cleaning sand from catch basins, be referred to the Engineering and Works Department for a
report.
I
Councillor A. Vincent felt that it would be a good idea to maybe have somebody from Saint John
Civic Employees' Union, Local 18, C.U.P.E. sit in on with expertise advice, on how to save costs (re-
garding use of salt on city streets and sidewalks). Councillor Davis commented that salt does have an
effect on asphalt - in the'cracks, particularly - and it is not quite as simple costing as it might
appear. Councillor A. Vincent expressed the hope that the above requested report will refer to that
aspect of the matter. Councillor Kipping stated that he hopes we are not losing sight of the environ-
mental factor, as well, and stated he thinks that the Council had already decided it would cut down on use
of salt, not only for the sake of saving money but for the sake of protecting the environment from the
damage which salt causes.
Read a letter from the Greater Saint John District Council of Public Employees, C.U.P.E. pro-
testing the unwarranted verbal attacks on the officers and members of Local 18, C.U.P.E. by Councillor
Eric J. Kipping and others during the Council meeting of February 16th last, and stating that without
determining the facts, Councillor Kipping assumed that the action of the Union was not justified, and 4It
stating that his description of a legitimately negotiated contract settlement, approved by the Common
Council and signed between the City and the Union, as being a "great give away", not only indicates a
personal anti-union bias but also attacks the principle of collective bargaining and reflects on the
competancy of the City officials and members of the Council who ratified the union contract. The letter
advises that Councillors Parfitt, Kipping and Gould, in referring to alleged calls from Local 18 members,
conveniently forgot to announce that the Union's action was supported by the vast majority of Local 18
members who democratically voted to take such action. The letter states that the District Council con-
tends that the Common Council, if truly desirous of maintaining good relations with the Union, should
concern itself with methods that would reduce the frustrations of union members who are forced to take
strike action in an attempt to resolve numerous, long standing and justified complaints. The letter I
states that the said District Council questions the attitude of City officials who appear to be more
concerned with technicalities of grievance procedure than with providing quick solutions to the problem,
and trusts that the City officials responsible will be directed by Common Council to make every effort
possible to resolve the long "list of written complaints" submitted by the Union, and that these efforts
be carried out as speedily as possible. The letter states that the District Council trusts that, in
future, all members of Common Council will take into consideration all the facts before making public
statements.
The Mayor advised that at the meeting we held with Local 18 (on February 19th last) Councillor
Kipping explained his statement and the President of Local 18 stated that he respected Councillor Kipping
for speaking his mind and he stated that he would like to do the same although he did not agree with
Councillor Kipping; the Mayor added that, at least, the said President respected the statement that w~s
made by the Councillor.
I
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Greater Saint John'
District Council of Public Employees, C.U.P.E. be received and filed.
.
Councillor Kipping stated that he first felt that he should answer point by point this unusual
attack on those Council members who would dare to speak out against a union, but he has decided, however,
that in view of the statement read to the executive members of C.U.P.E. Local 18 by the Mayor on behalf of
all the Council during the said February 19th meeting, Thursday evening, his basic position has been
supported by this Council and the message of the citizens whose views he attempted to reflect has now been
of',~~.;~ .~'_,-:_, ~::"\"':
'. ~"'::ll
-. . :;...... ;.
'.~; ;., J ;
. ' -
~
"..
~3 ~~ 1.
Councillor Green indicated that he will endeavour to obtain information on a possible location for a
sub-Post Office in the lower West Side, and stated that he would hope that the Postal authorities would be
~~J1 willing to increase the stipend to operators of these sub-Post Office facilities, it being his understanding that
one of the reasons Mrs. Saunders resigned was the small amount that was offered to her as Postmaster _ this was
her main reason for turning down the contract, he added. Councillor Hodges advised that he understands from some
of the Postal people that in order to put its own Post Office in lower West Saint John it would cost around
$30,000.00 a year as a starter, not taking into consideration the cost of equipment and whatever other facilities
~~~~~- would be needed in an operation of that nature, so it is his feeling that the Postal authorities will have many
-t-/t7n ~.P?I'IJ. thoughts before they will put their own people in such a postal facility.
?e~/-c-/ol?"5 /"
:lJlA.S S~I"J//
.C:I"Y T/'Idl?}s/
~-t-/XJ/,
S/m,ndS ,,;'
.s,., C";tf/,;:'!'/?S
/If,l~,,L 's/Nti'.
?n"~$ Sr.
C'd/~ehS ~
..
1
$.:7:C/v/e
K hJ,P/tJ"y6'es'
I tIb/PJ1,
.%./ lJ
w,;;/k-f?u-C
.
I
.
SU~:I!'PS~
(lfl/ce,
VP. s~/)?t-
JOhn
I
7bs-C/'J"}PlS{;e.
1 a.ttl?
~
officially sanctioned, and there should be no need for him to defend his actions. Councillor Hodges stated he
wanted it clearly understood that he does not support Councillor Kipping's remarks - he, and the Council as far
as he knows, have not voted in support of Councillor Kipping's remarks. Councillor Kipping asked if Councillor
Hodges supports the Mayor's remarks. Councillor Hodges stated that some of the remarks that Councillor Kipping
made at the February 16th Council meeting - that the trade unions are power drunk - he, himself as a trade
unionist has never been power drunk - he has not been interested in power of any sort and never has been - he has
no ambitions. Councillor Higgins interjected that this is a personal matter and has nothing to do with the
business of Council; he suggested that the discussion in question on February 16th is on the records for everyone
to see and they can interpret it, one way or the other. He stated that he does support the Mayor's remarks - he
does believe that there are excellent points made here in the above noted letter by Mr. G. Shannon, President of
the said District Council of Public Employees, that all members of the Common Council take into consideration all
the facts before making public statements, and what have you, which he (Councillor Higgins) is sure the Mayor has
done. He stated that he thinks what the Council has here is a breakdown in communications and this can go on,
battle back and forth, week by week - we are sitting down now with them, he believes, and this is going to be
solved. He stated that in receiving and filing the said letter, he congratulates Mr. Shannon on the said letter.
Councillor Davis stated that he does feel that the Council made its position very clear with the
statement that the Mayor made at the said February 19th meeting, and that he also feels that perhaps that state-
ment should be read here so that it would be on the record and in the Council minutes - he does not suggest that
we read the whole statement but after dealing with the above motion it is his intention to move that the statement
that the Mayor made at the said February 19th meeting be in the Council minutes. He noted that in that state-
ment, in one of the last paragraphs, the Mayor says, "we cannot condemn strongly enough the irresponsible and
illegal actions of this Local", and stated that he feels that covers the situation very well without any malicious
diatribe - nothing could be misconstrued from that sentence - it is straightforward - and he thinks it should be
on the record. He stated that the point is that we are trying to have good labour relations here - we are doing
our best and they are doing their best - so let us not get the matter stirred up more than it should be.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understood that we had a meeting with Local 18 (on February 19th)
and that the statement of policy was delivered by the Mayor, and the matter was to drop and that we were going to
go from there. He stated that on reading the said statement just prior to the said meeting he thought there was
one thing lacking: the Mayor laid it on the lines to the Union but the Mayor failed badly, on Councillor A.
Vincent's behalf, to lay it on the negotiating committee of the employees - he noted that it is a two-way street _
it is a contract that they, too, should carry out their form of policy - that if there is an agreement that
should be followed - and that is what caused part of our trouble and before anyting was read in the record he
asked at that February 19th meeting if it was a Council meeting and was told it was not - because he would have
objected there, he explained. He stated that before that policy statement is read into the record - and he is
for that policy statement - he wants the other side clarified, too, that we are not only the boss as a Common
Council of the four Unions, but we are also the City Manager's boss and that any more delays Or unnecessary _
first of all, the grievance procedure of Local 18 has got to be clarified - it is not workable: when a man
grieves to a foreman and because the Commissioner of Engineerings and Works is out of town on City business or
not available they go to his assistant, then when it comes to the City Manager it is sent back to Local 18
because they did not go to the said Commissioner - that is wrong, morally wrong, in good labour relations. He
stated that we should name the position, or name something, and that we should also correct - and this is what he
got from the men of Local 18 at the said February 19th meeting - they, too, want that thing straightened out. The
Mayor replied that we'will look into it. Councillors Davis and A. Vincent agreed that the method used by Local
18 in drawing it to the Council's attention - by walking out in an illegal strike for a day and half - was not
the way to do it - if they want to draw something to the Council's attention, the Union knows how to do it.
Councillor A. Vincent added that he thinks he told the said Union that. Councillor Parfitt stated that it is,
indeed a "two-way street" - we only heard one side, and that she would like the City Manager to clarify what
happened on that Wednesday morning and what followed; she added that she learned from the radio the Union was on
strike and that she was talking with Mr. Barfoot at noon-hour (that day) and they came in without appointment
that morning as she understood it, at 9.00 o'clock, and spent some time with him and then Mr. French took over
and he heard at noon-hour that they had walked off. She added that she wished Management would speak up, too.
Councillor Gould stated that he thinks that the statement that was made by the Mayor was as a result of Council's
concern at that time and he thinks that maybe Council did leave out the Management side of that in that statement,
but that statement was specifically meant for the Union from the Council, he pointed out, and that was this
Council's approval of that statement to the Union. He added that if the Council has a statement to make to the
City Manager it will do so.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. W. F. Griffith, Postmaster, in reply
to the Council resolution of February 9th last which was enquiring whether the present situation wherein there is
no sub-Post Office in West Saint John (since the closing of the sub-Post Office on Ludlow Street) cannot be
rectified, advising that the said Ludlow Street sub-Post Office was closed at the request of the operator and not
by any action of the Postmaster; that regarding the post office located at the corner of King and Ludlow Streets,
in a store operated by a Mrs. Saunders, which had operated there for a period of two years, Mrs. Saunders, for
personal reasons, submitted her resignation as Postmaster, effective November 6th, 1975 and that after canvassing
the west side, the Postal Department was successful in obtaining the services of Mr. Burton Leaman to operate a
sub-Post Office at 77 Ludlow Street and Mr. Leaman submitted his resignation as Postmaster effective January
15th, 1976; that the customer service representation of the Postal Department has been unable to obtain premises
for a sub-Post Office; that the Postmaster will do everything within his power to provide some sort of postal
outlet for the Post Office's customers residing in the lower west side area - and, in the interim, if any member
of the Common Council has knowledge of a person who is interested in operating a sub-Post Office, he would like
to know and he will take immediate action in this regard -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the following petitions be referred to the Transportation
ommittee:- from the Simonds Lions Senior Citizens, requesting that the City take action concerning the City
Transit Limited buses being taken off on Sundays and at 7.00 o'clock p.m. and expressing the view that the City
should subsidize the said company or take the company over completely; from North End Silver Threads Senior
Citizens Club, protesting the curtailment and reduction, of bus service in the city to all citizens and pointing
33:2
?el/-C-Ipn /,,(2
PU$ .9tPrv/c>e
~7fff 7N1J7S/~
,<t/
$r. c,.t/.;?t9;?S
$~,.v/tJes S. J:
..Lnc.
~n:l?"r~~/
ammo
($,1/ fA.5);es
23uqe--t- am.
s.:r;sc>~po/
/J1,;;ri}?e n-ch-
n%,f,.'I
1?en:r f?Wlo/. p.
//~ /1-1, Wm. ~
Jl/"o V. 1:7(/ vi:
1I/~/,,)7<<:J) w,.~
el'O$:;-w.-lk
~Uq/?/s
lJfarl-lJme I/a/p
mt?J/le /l$'soC".
SeJQP/ Ed.
!(1,''1hts of
C't?fU/17~u S"
Kl2.lqhts qF
Co:1"u m.6U's
~,:J) - J>u rL!I
I'lssQC'.
~e-A~n;'h~
Jl!ql1n ,Il/(/h-. t:.
7?e-:zon/nf
KI7I~h'S of
eJ,ru /17~H s
s,:r?o/~n?el7;
'Jf>r;>-fed. ,pS50C'.
/yp,61
PoI/ce .7Je pI.
1?w;/es 4-
1?tyt6/dl PJ?s
t!/.fy /l&r.
out the difficulty that senior citizens will now have in getting to shopping areas, doctors and hospitals,
and expressing the view that the City should take over the bus services or subsidize City Transit Limited
with help from the Provincial Government; from Senior Citizens Services Saint John Inc., City Market
Building, protesting the shortening of the bus service hours and advising that this will mean a big drain
on the Old Age Security if senior citizens have to rely on taxis for transportation to and from the Senior
Citizens Centre activities and it will also curtail their visiting the sick in hospitals, and stating,the
view that the City should either subsidize City Transit Limited or take over the bus service.
At this time, Councillor MacGowan submitted a letter, addressed to the Mayor and Council, from
Mr. S. Hughes of 143 Ludlow Street, Saint John West, expressing his concern at the lack of bus service for
the general public on Sundays, and pointing out that in most cities in advanced countries bus services are
run as a public utility to service the taxpayers, who keep the city running, and are subsidized as such,
and not run for a profit as is the case in Saint John, and stating that he is sure that on rethinking this
matter, the Council will come.to the same'conclusion as this would affect many people of moderate means
who have no other means of transportation. This letter was also referred by Council to the Transportation
Committee at this time.
~
.
1
Read a letter from Mr. Edoardo Weis, Director of the Saint John School of Marine Technology,
which School occupies premises in the City-owned building, second floor, at 115 Prince William Street,
advising that bills of recent date for rental, heat and electricity have been received regarding the said
premises and that, as explained to the Common Council on earlier occasions, the case of the School is that I
since this School was started there has been a deficit and the School asked, and asks again at this time
if the City could grant it remission for the full amount of the bill for 1975, 1976, and assist the School
in building and developing it to the future University of Marine Sciences in Saint John.
Councillor Davis asked for a statement on the affairs of the Saint John School of Marine Tech-
nology insofar as the City is concerned. Mr. Park advised that, in outline, the situation is that the
only payments that have been received against the charges for rent, heat and light have been the donations
that Councillor A. Vincent was able to succeed in obtaining from B. M. & P. I. W. of America which is one
of the Unions with which that Councillor has connection - and those are the only credits that have been
made against this rental account in the period of 1974, 1975 and 1976, to date. He stated that the said
School owes us $9,000.00 for rent and other charges.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be turned over to the Budget Com-
mittee of Council.
Councillor Higgins commented that the Council has to start taking a long took at the Provincial
involvement - it started with this - and the City's own involvement, and also with Mr. Weis.
On motion of. Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Myrna D. Wright of 171 St.
James Street, Saint John West, on the subject of cross-walk guards for the safety of our children, noting
that it is necessary that a satisfactory solution be found as soon as possible and that while the Council
has ordered the return of such guards this move will involve additional monies that must now come from
other areas of the City's budget, and stating that since the Maritime Automobile Association is willing to
train people to cover these cross-walks she sees no reason why this cannot be done on a volunteer basis by
the people of the community on a rotating basis, and that she, for one, is willing to take part in some
type of organized programme that will see the said cross-walks covered on a basis that will not require
further reductions of other city services, and suggesting that the Council investigate this as a possible
permanent solution to what could be a dangerous situation, be received and filed and Mrs. Wright be
thanked for her interest and be informed as to what action the Council is taking with regard to cross-walk
guards.
In reply to Councillor MacGowan's question as to when the meeting is to be held with the re-
presentatives of the Maritime Automobile Association (that Council approved on February 16th last), as
well as with the representatives of the School Board, District Number 20 and the Knights of Columbus, the
Mayor advised that the Common Clerk has been in contact with the Maritime Automobile Association. Coun-
cillor MacGowan received confirmation at this time that all school crossings are covered, presently.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the application from the Knights of Columbus, per
R. D. Purdy Associates, Architect, for re-zoning of approximately 65,000 square feet of land in Silver
Falls Park off Martha Avenue near its junction with Cindy Lee Street, on which it is proposed to be
erected a building of a non-profit community oriented function, be referred to the Planning Advisory
Committee for a recommendation, and that authority be granted to proceed with advertising regarding this
proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning a proposed lot backing
onto St. Joachim's Church and Silver Glade Nursing Home lying opposite what would be the intersection of
Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue with a frontage of about 515 feet along the latter and a depth of about
IB6 feet, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential district to "RM-l" Multiple Residential
district, be read a first time.
Read a first time the,by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto"., .
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
.
I
.
I
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Saint John Policemen's Protective .
Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., with reference to the Rules and Regulations pertaining to the Saint
John Police Department, advising that the Association was approached by management as to the said Rules
and Regulations being outdated, along with many sections not being applicable in these times we now live
in, and pointing out that the Rules and Regulations were last revised in October of 1969 and the Association
has set up a committee to deal with the Rules and Regulations and notified the Chief of Police to this
~
,...
ifu/es..,l
.~~u/~~/.oh.
7bfii!t?
8& ~/'.
1
S:T1M4t!"~
Prb.t:. &.:
IVp.6/
"I7b//ee :2)e,
h;p'J?5
fl()//c~ re
IQC'.4/~f/jJk
CI '6y ~r.
(3.?~I1.2JaJ//
~'v/q
(?/I7p/t)!t6"e's
. ,..,s/;;1epe
I
.
I
I, !e11{;X ../
. -i1t"t"'rlS'P-
.:Ble.#c~r
SearS
{..(kl"l-rn~n
/:nterlJ:/:y.
I/-t-a.
~ClhC~~r
1fl,~1i
.~un,.4
{I/';JC'enr
'Po/''ee a/I?
.:J)u m 9/ Jut
v;()/afhl;lfs
<>I-r- /;(um?
?p//'ee:lJi- 'pI::
lil...
~3~1:,)
effect by letter dated January 11th, 1976; a copy of which is submitted, and requesting that management also
appoint a committee in this matter, and also requesting that the Common Council suspend the Rules and Regulations
and no one as of this date be charged under them, until such time as they are revised, and explaining that the
Association feels that by doing this some serious work on consideration can be given to this matter so that it
will not take months to re-write them, and also due to the fact that management has pointed out to the Assoc-
iation the need to have the Rules and Regulations revised -- be referred to the City Manager for study and a
report to Council, and to the said Association at the earliest possible opportunity.
Councillor Kipping asked if the Council can assume that the City Manager will consult in the above
named matter with the Chief of Police, who at the moment is absent, before any such report is made. Mr. Barfoot
made affirmative reply. The Council members confirmed that there is no suspension of the above named Rules and
Regulations involved. Mr. Barfoot advised that a report will be made; the Chief of Police has the major in-put
into the Rules and Regulations, but with his absence from the city, the said report will have to take its place.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Saint John Policemen's, Protective Association,
'Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. asking that the hiring policy for the City of Saint John pertaining to the Saint John
Police Department, as it now stands, pertaining to anyone who would be thinking of joining the said Department,
and advising that the Association is of the opinion that of the last seventeen people hired by Common Council
that only one has been from the City of Saint John and the rest are mostly from out of the Province of New
Brunswick, and that the Association therefore requests from the Common Council that the said hiring policy be
made public knowledge to the citizens of the City of Saint John, be referred to the City Manager for a report to
Council with reference to this request from Local No. 61.
Councillor Davis noted that the above letter raises the matter of residency. He recalled that some
years ago, the Council removed any restrictions to employees on residency, and he suggested that perhaps the
Council should be looking at the whole matter, again, and perhaps the Council should ask the City Manager for a
report on how many employees live inside the City limits and how many live outside the City limits - not that the
Council wants to do anything about it or will do anything about it - but he felt it is a good idea for the
Council to know. He added that he understands the concern of the Police Department regarding the hiring of
people from outside the City and from outside the Province (Councillor Gould had pointed out that the concern of
the said Policemen's Protective Association is, how are our local people now going to become policemen, if they
wish), and explained that the point he was making regarding obtaining the suggested information is his concern.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he wonders if the City Manager might make a comment, or if the Council might make a
decision regarding this question: if there are any vacancies, or any positions to be filled on the Police Depart-
ment now, are we going to have the report from the City Manager first - or if the existing vacancies are going to
be filled - what is the City Manager's intention? Mr. Barfoot replied that there are a number of controls here:
first of all, there is the budgetary control which does not permit us to hire anybody until we know basically
next year's budgetary allotment; the last two years, he believes all the permanent recruitment for the City of
Saint John Police Force has been of graduates from the Atlantic Police Academy and, generally speaking, they have
been hired about December in the calendar year - so he does not look forward to any further hiring of probation
constables until next fall. Councillor M. Vincent stated that his specific point on that was: is there not
monies available for hiring of cadets for the summer months. Mr. Barfoot, in reply, stated that the Council has
allocated a certain figure for the Police Department within which to control its budget, and, recently, the
Council has approved the putting back on of crossing guards which requires approximately an additional $20,000.00 -
we have had, he believes, three resignations from the Department which will provide some funds - there is also
the request from the Chief for the hiring of some cadets, or as many as we can find money for, to assist with the
Police holiday season through the summer - this is still to be decided finally, as to what number of cadets it
might be possible to achieve with the present budgetary restrictions. With reference to the concern expressed in
the Association's letter that of the last seventeen people hired for the Police Department only one has been from
the City of Saint John, Councillor Green expressed his own concern in this regard and stated that he would like
to know if the policy is that we do not intend to hire anyone from Saint John unless they have already received
their training - and if this is so, how are the many good young men from the City of Saint John, whose parents
are paying taxes here, going to have a chance to maybe join the Police Force if they are inclined to like police
work, and so on. He stated that he would like to follow this up with the Chief of Police when he gets back, if
his policy is to hire only personnel who have attended the Atlantic Police Academy - and if that is the Chief's
policy, he would like to have this matter brought back to the Council and to himself, as well, so that the
Council knows just what is the score. The Mayor replied that the Council will have the Chief of Police explain
that policy, as referred to by Councillor Green. Councillor M. Vincent stated that his information is that there
are funds in the Police Department budget for the hiring of perhaps eight people throughout the summer for the
period of time and for the reasons as mentioned by the City Manager and, also, three vacancies for which money
was budgeted in the Police Department; he added that all he is suggesting is, that the Council has been requested
to provide Local No. 61 with an expression of the hiring policy and that before those positions are filled, if
they are going to be filled, that Council should first provide the policy. Councillor Davis recalled that the
Council was given the opportunity to decide on whether or not the City would continue the practice of hiring
people who have met the qualifications and send them to Holland College at the City's expense and put them on the
Force after they have passed - or the other option, of going to Holland College and hiring people who had grad-
uated from those courses, and the Council took the option - the cheaper option - of getting people who are
already trained; so, if there are young people in Saint John who want to be on the Force, the proper procedure
would be for them to go to Holland College and get their training the way people from other parts of the Maritimes
are doing. He stressed that the Council made that decision.
With regard to the tenders for bleacher seats, Mr. Barfoot advised that this was a tender for goods and
supplies and it is not normally not the practice to obtain a performance bond or a cheque on such items; however,
a performance bond will be executed by the supplier in this particular case on the awarding of the said contract
by Council.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report of the City Manager, the lowest
bid received, namely, that of Wortman Enterprises Ltd., in the amount of $19,990.00 for supplying and installing
1,000 bleacher seats at Lancaster Memorial Field, be accepted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked permission to place an item on the agenda of this meeting - that is, that
for the next month, the Chief of Police be instructed to have some special extra precautions made out at the City
dump during the period of the dump being closed. He stated that he received many telephone calls and, today,
that dump is a disgrace. He stated that from his personal inspection of the site, there are lots of'addresses in
the material that has been dumped, to identify the offenders, but he noted there are not any Saint John addresses
in that material - they are coming in from out of town and dumping it there. He stated that he therefore wonders
if there is any way that the Council could get the Saint John Police Department to maybe set up the Department's
radar trap out there and charge it to the Provincial Government for the Department's time and pick up a few of
834
~
.2)~~,;P;~h
vftJ/~zfi 'J7s ,,;;y~
a/?7p
PtJ;j~e 7)~
Cbu~. /1/ f..1'/>> IS
"1?e/?of?f'- ,.-e
rJ/d-llm6'/'S M
7O<<r/7~Mt?.nt- /17
,( et-J),..iaf~ ,~
~ /~7?' f(7<<N~-
rnt?nr
LEGAL
.:Bulld/nj'
~- ~ClW
OJmt7mlmen-t""
:Boq $<!t:"~' ts
~-F Ca)?.;r~a
e 'I/~ensh/f/
:&r&e~
(}/t-~ l71~r.
AGih ~ ~.m,.,...
~J'1'tf.. .:l3.:Jtler/6>-
./ -I-d
hllrv//,6.:l}vd.
ctr,;;,!n.;;;>,ff:?
these offenders who like to dump their garbage there. He stated that all along the Sandy Point Road area
is completely littered with this above mentioned garbage material. He felt that the Council should
instruct the Police Department that that Department should do something about it. The Mayor replied that
he ~elt the Department will be directed to take action in this regard.
The Mayor asked Deputy Mayor Higgins for a report on his attendance at the National Oldtimers
Hockey Tournament that was held last week in Lethbridge, Alberta. Deputy Mayor Higgins stated that he
planned to give a formal report on the Lethbridge experience next week, but he informally reported that he
was proud to have been a Saint Johner during his stay at that Tournament because of the fact that the
aint John Oldtimers team players and management and members of their families who accompanied them were,
without a doubt, the best ambassadors that the City of Saint John ever had, not only for promotion of .the
Tournament in Saint John in 1977 but also in the promotion of Loyalist Days itself. He paid credit to
Councillors M. Vincent and Cave, who were often mentioned at this Tournament, and who set the basis for
the Tournament coming to Saint John in 1977. He stated he found it a wonderful experience to attend the
Tournament, and to represent the City of Saint John at it.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillor M. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.
With regard to third reading of the proposed amendment to the Building By-Law, which was laid on
the table on February 9th last and referred to legal session to describe to the Legal Department the
condition of some of our buildings that are not covered under the present by-law, it was noted that this
subject was dealt with during open session of this Council meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above noted proposed amendment be placed on the
agenda for the open session of Common Council of March 1st next for third reading.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~
Common Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the first day
of March, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Com-
missioner of Community Planning and Development, D. French, Director of
Personnel and Training, C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks,
P. Clark, Fire Chief, and R. H. Stone, Deputy Chief of Police
A prayer, which was invoked by The Reverend Bruce Fisher, pastor of Bethany Pentecostal Church,
opened the meeting.
At this time, Mayor Flewwelling officated at a presentation of Citizenship Badges to seven
members of the Boy Scouts of Canada and congratulated each in turn. Noting that this was a new Troop to
earn this Badge, he invited one of the two Leaders present to give a summary of qualifications that must
be met by each candidate in earning the Citizenship Badge.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, further to
Common Council resolution of January 26th last which tabled a recommendation from the Land Committee,
adding to the previous Council resolution of December 19th, 1975 (which provided for the purchase of 9,000
square feet of property on Fairville Boulevard and continuing along the City right-of-way) the words "that
the City at its expense will provide Varta Batteries Ltd. with a revised survey plan and also provide that
the surface water will not drain on to Varta's property", pending a recommendation from the City Manager
on the drainage of surface water -- advising that the property of Varta Batteries Ltd. is low-lying and at
the present time drainage from the street and from the uphill property drains on to and across this
property, and that when the City builds a. road on the land it is acquiring from Varta, a culvert will have
to be installed under this road to provide for the existing drainage pattern - however, to provide that
.
1
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...
VCl/1i-a
. :13.;;;rt-k'1' /t?~
-Ihl
~;rw/k
Hvd.
.J)1f,;//17 ~e
,,(6/nA ~m
IF4>PP4')7f
cS~/f/&lffe' an
I""" h"e ;Poh
/V'tJ. / C'P.
/976 oIHctfl
(;?ar..'1 EWaJl"'.
wa/1/7:ilh -t-
1I1/:11?e'!I
. /1lf'.1'.?Vtf' ./'/t? s
pe. C/ftf
~J:'fJ?-c~
~u.lt'ge~)
ClA1J? iiiif' C1
n'S1G.ld-~,~e
p/sn
J?}."v. Go d.
:i)ept. W{>~
l;:-eJ..:<. sl-t7rm
:l)e/.;w /n
, /,(?w~r rt?.s~
-Cion
.m..zs/;U> .7),.,
witten//?5
tJ~!f /J'&r.
.
('oun. ;r;.
II/~t:'enr
1
I
t/j.j,;m ~JUl
M.,2 ~iJ1
.I1'V//11~ all
C1. A i-tfI
( /lcflot/s/-r!-;o
. .h)tJ}J;BS)
~mfh&
ftf?t>r-c
~
i)i35
t)t.
surface water will not drain on to Varta's property could involve the City in either curbing the new road and
directing the drainage from the new road back to Fairville Boulevard, and then along Fairville Boulevard ap-
proximately 1,800 feet to the new 42-inch storm sewer, at a total cost of approximately $80,000.00 for storm
sewer construction, or the infilling of the Varta property so that water would not drain on to the property --
and advising that the recommendation of the Works Department, in which he concurs, is that the City not agree to
the provision concerning the drainage of surface water on to Varta's property -- be received and filed and the
recommendation contained therein adopted, and that the matter be referred to the Land Committee for further
negotiations.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the above noted expenditure will alleviate the flooding problem that the
people on Fairville Boulevard are experiencing now. Mr. Barfoot advised that the storm sewer just opposite the
Eldridge property was completed this morning and this means that the worst of the flooding problem is now looked
after and there will be no more water over the road on Fairville Boulevard but there will still be water running
as it comes down - the Eldridge property should now be well-protected.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, Captain R. Myers and
ieutenant P. Letson, who are the newly elected officers for Number 1 Company of the Salvage Corps and Fire
Police for the ,year 1976, as contained in the list of officers elected for 1976 (other officers: E. Bowen,
Treasurer; D. Owens, Secretary; H. Boyd, Surgeon; E. Grondine, Foreman, Number 1; R. Hamel, Foreman Number 2; G.
Foreman Number 3; L. Brooks, Foreman Number 4), be confirmed:
AND FURTHER that as requested by the City Manager, and as recommended by the Fire Chief, Gary Ewart, a
new member of the said Company, be sworn asa member of the Company and a warrant be issued to him.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, in reply to the request
made at the February 23rd last meeting of Council for information as to what recoveries had been received by the
City for grants made to welfare, social services, educational and community services organizations from the
Canada Assistance Plan, listing the agencies to which the City has of recent years given grants and which have
been listed as Provincially approved for cost-sharing under the said Plan, and also listing the recoveries so far
achieved, be received and filed.
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Park stated he does not know the reason the City has not received
recoveries for all the organizations that have received Provincial approval, but he is hoping that the Department
of Welfare of the Province will find out what is causing the delay and, at least, rectify the situation and that
the City will soon be receiving reimbursement for the pertinent 1975 grants; meawhile, the City is still working
towards being reimbursed for all recognized organizational grants that can qualify under the Canada Assistance
Plan.
Read a letter from the City Manager, advising that allegations were made in Common Council meeting of
February 23rd last that the delay in restoring power in the Bayside Drive area was caused by the Power Commission's
desire to survey the area before poles were restored, and that, in point of fact, poles, which were blown down
during the storm were new poles required by the current widening of Bayside Drive to five lanes and that this
roject has been in progress for some years and the poles in question were placed between June, 1974 and November,
1975 and the poles that are now carrying power on Bayside Drive are strapped to the stumps of those that were
damaged; and stating that the rumour is therefore unfounded that restoration of power on Bayside Drive was
delayed by the desire of the Power Commission to survey the area in connection with the widening of the street.
The Mayor stated that he was sure that the Councillor who brought the above matter forward at the
February 23rd Council meeting stated that it was a rumour he Was referring to.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above named report be received and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that as he was the person who raised the above noted matter at the February
23rd Council meeting he wished to make the following remarks on the subject: at the last Council meeting under
the passage of some progress payments the matter of Bayside Drive came up and at that time he asked if there was
any truth in the rumours that the relocation of broken-off poles and the survey work being done in relation to
the widening of Bayside Drive caused the delay in the re-establishment of power in the eastern end of the city;
he thinks it is his responsibility, as an elected official, to ask any questions he deems necessary to ask to
anybody on staff he deems to have the answer - this was not, as the first word in the City Manager's letter
states any type of an "allegation" either against any of the companies or any of the labour force that Were
responsible for putting poles back up or doing any of the work - in fact, it was a request from a number of
people in the eastern area of the city who had asked if there was any truth in that rumour; he brought it before
Council, and the City Manager was instructed to bring in a report as to whether there was, or was not, any fact
behind that rumour, and the report that is now before the Council refers in two cases to an "alleged" delay and
"allegations", and he appreciated the Mayor having pointed out the fact that there were no allegations made, but
a request for the checking into of a possible fact or non-fact of a rumour; he thinks it is important that that
be corrected. Councillor Cave confirmed the fact that these poles were all moved prior to the February 2nd
storm - in fact, before the cold weather set in. He stated that he thinks that the Power Commission involved
deserves a lot of credit because its personnel worked day and night in restoring the power in the eastern section
of the city. The Mayor noted that we all agree in such comment.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, further to the request
made at the February 23rd last Council meeting for a total of monies spent in connection with the acquisition of
542 Main Street (corner of Portland Street) from Irving Oil Company Limited (F-IO-4-1), advising that the total
is $14,635.18 covering appraisal fees, demolition costs, court costs, the Land Compensation Board Award and
interest at 5% from January 24th, 1969 to February 27th, 1976, and pointing out that the owner's Bill of Cost is
presently outstanding in the amount of $525.15 and is currently under review by the City Solicitor's Department,
be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report for January of the Works Branch of the Engineering
and Works Department, be received and filed.
1336
,
~
II1MfiJly MfltJ
2c,L/ / ~/'nff
~-.I~ vr/
~il;t'/n~
jX?rll?I'~ 1l"ees
:Ba;/a'1 Hf,
LSfJeclf/oh
J)e/?'lf. )
{M p~/()I? /t?d:
.Lns}/.G'e.t,/Ol?
services,
J)~//,{I'n"I
1hs;oecf/oJ7
2)ej7t:
CO"'!?, #/.~~/~s
/1"1<l1#/C: .,r ~~
Cbnon.
/rd#/C :7Jy-M
/I/ex.;;~.,<r.. $~
OVBrnigh'f"
rrlr I J?,f
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report for January of the Water and Sewerage
Division of the Works Department, be received and filed.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
.
During discussion of the above report, when Councillor Parfitt pointed out that the average
number of employees during January this year was 111 compared to 107 in January of 1975 and Mr. Barfoot
advised that he believes there are some impending lay-offs in the Water and Sewerage Division, Councillor
Kipping noted that there were 354 citizen's requests during January of 1976 as compared to 187 in January I
of 1976 and commented that it would almost appear that some extra people might be justified even on a'
casual basis to handle those requests. In reply to Councillor MacGowan's' question as to whether the fact
that there was no consumption of water during January of 1976 from Little River-Silver Falls would mean
that the City lost revenue, Mr. Barfoot explained that this was caused by the industrial dispute at
MacMillan-Rothesay paper company and that the water consumption was zero. Councillor Cave, with reference
to the figures noted by Councillor Parfitt, pointed out that this does not mean that the City engaged
additional men - the men were taken from other City departments to meet the requirements of the Water and
Sewerage Division.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Respecting the Construction, Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John",
be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he has to vote against the above proposed amendment to
increase the building permit fees because it is his belief that the City is not qualified to collect these
fees, in that the Building Inspection Department due to lack of staff is not capable of carrying out the
provisions of the present Building By-Law regarding inspection services and this disqualifies the City
from retaining these fees and means that the City should return the building permit fee collected, for
instance, from Brunswick Square developers. Councillor Davis stated that the Land Committee has met to
consider the building inspection problems in the city and has found that there are several very severe
gaps in the Building Inspector's regulations and the Committee is trying to correct them: one of them is
that the garbage problem is referred to the Building Inspector and there is very little a Building In-
spector can do about things like that - the other problem that Councillor A. Vincent refers to is one ,in
which the City at the moment is not able to supply technical inspection; a building permit is purchased so
that the citizen is given inspection so that he gets a good job done and the larger building permits are
paid for by the larger jobs, but the City is not equipped to supply the technical service. Councillor A.
Vincent confirmed that the said latter point is what he was referring to and added that he thinks the
Council was misrepresenting the general public when it was going to continue to debate this issue at this
time, unless it was prepared to produce the service. Councillor Davis advised that there is a difference
in opinion: Councillor A. Vincent would like to redo the entire by-law to correct the situation, and
Councillor Davis personally feels that the small modification now before the Council in the by-law should
not make a great deal of difference, one way or the other. He added that Councillor A. Vincent is correct
in that the Council has to make some very drastic corrections in the said by-law.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for three
weeks and a complete investigation be conducted by the Mayor into the whole matter of the Building In~
spection Department and a report be given to Council.
Councillor Higgins stated he felt that the above matter hedges on the report that is to come
from the Land Committee regarding the Building Inspection regulations and problems. Councillor Davis
pointed out that the report that is to come from the Land Committee will not be received for a while. ' In
further explanation of Councillor A. Vincent's comments, Councillor Davis stated that Councillor A.
Vincent was saying that the City is not rendering service in some cases - the job is given a permit which
the Building Inspector cannot service because he does not have the technical assistance, but the dif- :
ference of opinion arises in the change of permit rate. He asked what difference will the change of rate
make - the City is still not supplying service in the high-rise building or the Coleson Cove project, or
things like that, but it won't make very much difference, at all. He added that he does not think there
will be any drastic recommendations coming to Council for some time. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that the
reason for the change in building permit rate was to cover the cost of the existing service that the
Building Department is rendering.
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with Councillors A. Vincent and Higgins
voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye and M. Vincent voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent asked the ~myor for a commitment that the amendment in question will be
accompanied by an increase in the services. The Mayor made reply that the said Department is being
studied with regard to inspection duties and requirements and that the Land Committee's report in this
matter to Council will be received at a later date.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and Higgins voting
"nay".
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Construction, Repair and Demol-
ition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to the
adoption of the above resolution.
Councillor Higgins advised that, with regard to the proposed amendment to the Traffic By-Law" he
has been approached by a group of citizens on Alexandra Street and there is further information coming in
to the Traffic and Safety Committee (regarding over-night parking regulations on this street), and he
would ask the Council's permission to table this amendment for a period of one week before third reading.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that third reading of the proposed amendment to the Traffic
By-Law regarding parking regulations on Alexandra Street be laid on the table for one week due to the fact
I
.
1
.
1
.1
.
.....
r'"'
';)"3 ...
0.. ,4
.
that information has been acquired by Deputy Mayor Hlggins in respect of this matter.
Councillor Higgins stated that if nothing transpires as a result of the information going to the
Traffic and Safety Committ~e, he will have the matter brought back to the next meeting of Council with written
information on the subject for Council regarding the further data that has been given to the said Committee.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
. ~'"1f. RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, to whom had been
C/~If.5{;. I t:/ D referred at the February 23rd last Council meeting for his views and opinion the matter of Bill of Costs in the
Itlr.l)~;? amount of ~525.15 regarding the Irving Oil Company Limited property expropriation, advising that in 1969, this
~eneMV~1' parcel of land was expropriated by the City of Saint John under the North End Urban Renewal Scheme, the question
~~~ /?7~in of compensation was finally settled by the Land Compensation Board and the Board's award against the City also
~~ included an amount for costs incurred by the former owner, and advising that under the Statute and 1966 Reg-
AFK ~~J"/~~l' ulations a Schedule of Fees governing costs are set down and that, in this case, the Bill of Costs has been
~~~~Szf$ prepared in compliance with the regulations, and that it also has been approved by the solicitor representing the
~. . City as in compliance with the regulations, and further advising that, in view of the foregoing, the City Solicitor
~rY/J7~t?/1' recommends that the Council approve payment of this item -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
CO. ~:t-".
I .Ad/nL CYt?h?f?-
:&t.
. Mnd ah1P!
~K?/".tJpr"~ -
"'fUn
KOIsemt?nr
(Jp!eSP)7 (};v
;:?re?j(;?t::!t-
;V;:8.fl?t'.
'PJ;;hl? A'dV/s.
I C"pm?n.
7pJ7/ J7ff
:lJy- ~w
'/PT slAoS
(!t?un,,/I
f'esplu ~/(7n
VCi rled
II.!. fh m ea.
7!fIrk, 79,.-1-,
. (~ew j?4n)
CIVIl! Inzp.-r
I ;}Je.;;4: {bh?
19111Moil ;t(e s
cue ~e;J.f1N
.7Jf?!f :8!f-:~
I
r/he/a/YYJga
dt7~S
:J)OfIlt"et?J1se
. /I,P,P/'Wn;t!'h
{1"h7P?/Hee
re :l>of
~-.(~w
U,/M.~~
..... /?~~$
Councillor Gould asked how many other properties of owners that the City has settled for in the above
manner, the City has included a Bill of Costs. Mr. Barfoot replied that he did not have the detailed information
on that, but he would think it depends on the Land Compensation Board Award. In confirming Mr. Barfoot's state-
ment, Mr. Rodgers added that the normal finding is that because if the City takes the initiative and expropriates
the land, when the Board makes the Award it also awards the owner costs that was incurred in the expense of
preparing the documents, and as far as he can tell, a Bill of Costs is usually associated with all of these
settlements.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that on
July 26th, 1973 the New Brunswick Electric Power Commission expropriated 41.53 acres of land from the City of
Saint John for an easement to Coleson Cove for power line Number 1116 and the Commission offered the City $27,098.3:
for this easement - and recommending that the City of Saint John accept the said offer plus interest at the rate
of 5% from the date of expropriation to the date of signing a release for this easement - and advising that the
Committee has an appraisal completed by the Property Management Department confirming the value of the 41.53
acres as offered by the said Commission be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letters dated February 25th, 1976 and
March 1st, 1976 from the Planning Advisory Committee, which advise that the Province of New Brunswick has passed
Order-in-Council 76-26 which amended several sections of the Province's environmental health regulations and
included a new section on lot sizes where on-site sewage disposal systems (septic tank and sub-surface disposal
fields) are to be used and which also advise that the Province is establishing a minimum 125-foot depth on septic
tank lots -- the Zoning By-Law be amended with regard to these regulations, as set forth in the said letters from
the Committee, and that authority be granted to advertise the said proposed By-Law amendment.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recom-
mending that the Common Council vary its resolution of April 21st, 1975 by adopting a new plan for Phase II of
Highmeadow Park, Part 2, showing the changes described as follows:- (1) the relocation of Block K so as to meet
recent distance requirements between building block and parking area, and (2) minor adjustments to Blocks A and E
so that there would not be a continuous building face; and advising that the new plan is being filed with the
Common Clerk, and further advising that in both cases the changes are considered to be improvements over the plan
which was recommended by the Committee at its March 25th, 1975 meeting and adopted by the Common Council at its
meeting of April 21st, 1975 -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor M. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report from the Civic Improvement and Beautification
Committee, advising that on February 25th last the said Committee, Mayor Flewwelling, Councillors Hodges and
Kipping, and members of City staff, met with representatives of the Animal Rescue League to discuss the City's
Dog By-Law and learned that there are a great many problems involved in enforcing this by-law and that some of
the main concerns expressed were the lack of registering of dogs by their owners, the "leash" laws, and the
problem of unspayed animals in that packs of male dogs are congregating (and noting that action must be taken in
this regard to prevent serious injury to the public and especially small children); and further advising that as
a result of this meeting the members of the Common Council present agreed to meet with the City Solicitor and the
Animal Rescue League representatives to discuss possible amendments which may be required to the present Dog By-
Law in order to eliminate these problems, and adding that a further report will be submitted to Council following
the said meeting -- be received and filed.
Councillor MacGowan drew the Council's attention to the statistics contained in the above report that
had been supplied to the above named meeting by the Animal Rescue League representatives, and which the said
meeting found appalling:- in 1974 there were 1,295 dogs impounded of which only 621 were claimed by their owners,
which means there were 674 dogs for which the League would have to find homes or do away with; in 1975 there were
1,349 dogs impounded of which only 626 were claimed; for the period January 1st to February 24th, 1976 there have
been 224 dogs impounded. She advised that one-third of the unclaimed dogs in 1974 were found homes for which
meant that 400 dogs had to be destroyed, showing that their owners did not care enough about them to go to the
pound and see if they were there - the same thing happened in 1975, and it looks as though we are going to have
the same situation in 1976. She felt that we have to make sure that people have licenses for their dogs. Coun-
cillor Hodges stated that he learned at the February 25th meeting that the estimated dog population in Saint John
is around 6,000 and that roughly only 2,300 people bought licenses for them.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that Councillors MacGowan, Kipping and Hodges be appointed a
.3~18
I
(lOIt?h7 / ,. e
~el :l3q; A.;}W
ep 'h. /I1.;;C' Gi:,lf/ifil
"j?j//l1i 1/~~t2S
t:,.'f!1 S,,1;:'/7!P!:L
:iJep~. 1bh~e u/""
~ J/ S-e-p/1e
/l11;~/ 'J?p.se~t!!
",( e~~e
C'I'Uh. 19. /II nctt'1?
1l"//?1;;'/ RpSC'"~
,t e~ue
~
committee to meet with the City Solicitor, Deputy Police Chief R. H. Stone, and the Animal Rescue League
representatives to discuss possible amendments which may be required to the present Dog By-Law in order to
eliminate problems, some of which are the lack of registering of dogs by their owners, the "leash" laws,
and the problem of unspayed animals in that packs of male dogs are congregating.
.
Councillor A. Vincent expressed the view that the appointment of the above named committee
should be done through the Nominating Committee. The Mayor explained that the above proposed committee
was being appointed as an ad hoc committee for the purpose of taking out of the hands of the Civic Im-
provement and Beautification Committee the Dog By-Law matter and placing it in the hands of the proposed
ad hoc committee under Councillor MacGowan, to deal with this one subject.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion. In the above matter, he asked that the
Mayor check the three nominees, to see who have paid their dues to the Animal Rescue League for the l~st
three years. He added that other people have done so, and he was asking that this check be made, for the
Mayor's records.
I
With regard to the dumping of fill in the Mystery Lake (also called Blackall Lake) area, CoUn-
cillor Pye advised that after he brought this matter before Council approximately a month ago, he in-
vestigated the area and talked with the individual responsible for the dumping and that person informed
him that in a three- or four-week period he had dumped the fill in question in the said area and this
amounted to several hundred loads of fill; prior to the dumping of this fill, after long and heavy rain-
falls this area took care of a vast amount of water - after the dumping of the fill the result of all
heavy ranfalls exerted a terrific pressure on the dam at Mystery Lake and this, when in existence, posed
a constant threat of destruction and possible death on anything and anyone who stood in their path in the
flood planes below - and the group he has in mind in particular are the residents of Glen Falls. He noted
that at that time the City Manager was to further probe into this matter, and he asked if the City Manager
has taken any further steps in that direction. Mr. Barfoot replied that before and after that time we
have looked at this dumping at the head of Mystery Lake and he has caused a plan to be distributed to
Council at this meeting showing, in the shaded land, one of the dumping areas in the Mystery Lake area; it
is very difficult to define what the edge of a brook is and the edge of a lake is in that very swampy
area, but dumping is not actually taking place in the brook - it is taking place around the shores of the
lake. Councillor Pye stated that he had noted that and it is true. He asked if the City Manager had 'the
City Solicitor contact the Provincial Department of Justice to get a ruling as to whether or not there was
anything in the Act that was applicable to this situation that classified it as a contravention of the
Act. Mr. Barfoot replied that he believes that Mr. MacKinnon had earlier been in contact with various
Provincial people with respect to this dumping. Mr. MacKinnon confirmed that the Department of the
Environment was contacted with regard to dumping in that area. Councillor Pye asked if that Department
made a ruling, stating that this was a contravention of that Act. ~tr. MacKinnon replied that they made an
inspection of the area, and he will have to assume that if it was a contravention that they would take the
action as they are the enforcers of that particular Provincial regulation; I~. Barnes indicated to him
that the material that was being dumped was not in the waterway as defined by the Act and that he did not
think there was anything in contravention to the regulation. Councillor Pye asked if Mr. MacKinnon knows
whether or not the Minister of Justice has made a ruling on. this matter, and whether anyone has contacted
the Minister in this regard. Mr. MacKinnon advised that he, personally, has not contacted the Minister of
Justice and he does not know whether or not Mr. Barnes, who is with the Fisheries and Environment De- '
partment, has done so; normally, Mr. Barnes has jurisdiction with that regulation and he asks the Minister
of Justice to prosecute, he would assume, rather than to rule on the regulation. Councillor Pye stated
that he would propose the following motion: that in view of Section 14(1) which says that any person
contemplating alteration of a water course or the water stored therein present a plan of their project to
the Water Authority and to finally obtain permission from the Minister of Fisheries and the Environment
and in view of the fact that this has not been done and this could be a possible contravention of the Act,
that the Council instruct the City Solicitor to request the Minister of Justice to immediately initiat~ an
investigation into this matter and if found justifiable to institute legal proceedings to test the validity
of this seemingly invalid action. Mr. Rodgers stated that he interprets the motion to be as follows:-
that the City Solicitor be asked to contact the Justice Department to determine whether they believe there
is a violation of a Provincial statute, that is, to determine whether they have had any reason or if they
have been contacted by other Provincial Departments to determine whether there is a violation under a '
Provincial statute, and if there is, he assumes there will be action taken by the appropriate Provincial
Department. Councillor Pye stated that he is asking that the City Solicitor contact the Minister of
Justice.
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor Pye
.
/ Seconded by Councillor Green
C'/.f..!l. SP//c/t-Qr RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be asked to contact the Minister
~11.1,.~I"~~/' of Justice to determine whether the Justice Department believes there is a violation of a Provincial
~ S ~/(!t? :l)~?r!-. statute or if that Department has been contacted by other Provincial Departments to determine whether
;'~ -'L/~/I'I1~ there is a violation under a Provincial statute, with regard to the landfilling operations that have been
~-tl!;;ler'f~ in progress around the shores of Mystery Lake (also known as Blackall Lake).
('~~C'If~;'II ~~ Read a letter from Councillor MacGowan, recalling that at its meeting held on September 22nd, 1
1975, the Common Council adopted a resolution requesting the Province to guarantee that tolls are lifted
completely from the Saint John harbour bridge during such period as the Reversing Falls bridge is closed
for repairs, and stating that she would urge that the Council take the necessary action to pursue every
avenue to have such tolls removed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
~P~ ~p~ RESOLVED that the Province of New Brunswick be advised that the
l!arJ,ar PI'",'d5 Common Council considers an emergency the guaranteeing that tolls are lifted completely from the Saint
~,//. et'et)o/~~ John harbour bridge during such period as the Reversing Falls bridge is closed for repairs, and that the
-~~/I"$ tft1./ Common Council wants action in this regard.
r.PeYel".1,iI7~ ~~ Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Mayor provide him with information as to whether there is
~I',.~t!! a $500,000.00 deductible feature concerning claims with regard to the harbour bridge insurance policy.
:zn.sU.lrdlI?~ re The Mayor replied that this information will be obtained.
h:JrbPUr .6r/~~e
(~eA(~~,.'~~1 In reply to the suggestion made by Councillor Kipping that the Council request the Saint John
Harbour Bridge Authority to meet with Council, perhaps in Committee of the Whole, for the purpose of
$. T /l"wrbpur riefing the Council on the harbour bridge tolls situation, to date, the Mayor stated that such a meeting
:lJrlMe /'?4..4a an be arranged.
!-I.;J/>PQur pr/t2'f'
~o//S On motion of Councillor MacGowan
I
.
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from Loyalist Days Inc. Board of Directors,
~
"'"
.-( 'Y.iiJ /~
:o:iJys .Lnc.
./~//sr
/ifP'Z!-p;-//ol
fie sAt?w$,
"c.
C't?ulj. /l.
Vt'!7t!{?/7r
~P!l.riJI/$t-
..:lb.!/s ~J1;l
I j%l ,,1/ ~;fhlh
Tn;lI1s.~~p.
zP;mm. '
ell-If 7it;ll1sH-
~-tll'.;u s :&'1"
I v/el? ." fiHrys
s.oT :J}1st-.^~
c.' 8'U 11t! 1/
1?,se /Y7.
JI~ml'/~fjn
CJ-e,!t:ten n,;/11
s,.. Cis. C/~
13<<$ s!fsk
. tjJf>P pc.Sd
.3U~$/P(!f)
::NU1k ftfj/:!st?!7
.7.Q/5~ m~
l/lJe/. see<<I'/t.
,Pd'17I'kh-t/~
Illll:>/;.;j(/ /
J.;.nP/I'S/1!.
b?-/lber...t;
/I1e c!O,;;j17,
(?/I/;'s+ 7017
F/tJ'odt'h j i
G!1e n hils
~Y'e~
.
lV!ordlttlr/(.{
toe ~/a5'
I d.e~kf//11elJ
!f/.iI/'S) af?CJ
,cloodlJ7f
reIW81{It?$
I
.
/J..:l3. Ct4ep
f),c.
.....
,3;39
requesting that no permits or licenses be issued by the City to carnivals, circuses, or travelling fairs, et
cetera to operate during Loyalist Days, July 28th to August 1st, 1976, without the approval of Loyalist Days
Inc., be received and filed and the request granted.
Councillor A. Vincent, noting that the City makes a grant to Loyalist Days Inc., asked if there is any
way the Council should instruct that they utilize local people in their parade, and so on, during Loyalist Days,
adding that he understands that local Saint John people cannot participate in the Loyalist Days parade - it is
his understanding that one group of majorettes (Saint John Strutters) or other leading Saint John bands or
majorettes~ere not able to participate in the Loyalist Days parade - he thinks that is morally wrong. The Mayor
replied that we will find the answer for Councillor A. Vincent in this matter.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the following letters be referred to the Transportation
Committee:- from The Saint John Dist~ict Labour Council commenting on the fare increases and the cutting of
services to the pUblic in the operation of the City Transit Limited bus system in Saint John; from Mrs. Rose M.
Hamilton of 187 Adelaide Street, objecting to the lack of bus service in the City of Saint John under the new
schedule of City Transit Limited; from the Golden Harps Senior Citizen Club, protesting the discontinuing of
buses in the evening hours under the new schedule of City Transit Limited.
The Mayor stated that he was told today by the Transportation Committee that one recommendation the
Committee felt that people should know the Committee made was a recommendation to the Common Council requesting
that the City subsidize the bus system operation but now we have come up with a different system which they have
agreed to, so now we are back to this system of operation. Councillor Gould felt that the public should also be
made aware of the fact that if we had had to add that subsidy to the mess we are now in for services - if you add
~500,000.00 to $1,000,000.00 worth of subsidy for a city transit - you ,can figure out what you are going to get.
Councillor Parfitt expressed the view that the City should subsidize the bus system in this city, and if the City
can teach people to use the buses more the City's amount of subsidy would be less. Councillor Hodges, for the
information of the public, noted that City Transit Limited has an exclusive franchise for another five years if
the company so desires and the point is that the company has a time limit to let the City know that is does not
wish to exercise that franchise. He added that the public does not realize that the City cannot take the franchise
away from the company like the public thinks the City should. He stated he is not too keen on subsidizing rich
companies.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Jack Wilson and Doris L. Wilson of 11 Vale
Crest Drive expressing objection to the building of a penitentiary in close proximity to their home, be received
and filed and that a reply be given explaining the rationale the Council used in making its decision regarding
the said medium security penal institution, and that a copy of this correspondence be forwarded to Mr. Michael
Landers, Member of Parliament.
Read a letter from Mr. A. B. Gilbert, Q. C., of Gilbert, McGloan, Gillis & Jones, as representatives of
between 400 and 500 property owners in the disaster area of Glen Falls, bringing to the Council's attention that
there have been four major floods in this area on December 9th, lath and 11th, 1974, on November 14th and 15th,
1975, on January 28th, 1976 and on February 2nd, 1976, and that this flooding has been due to a number of factors
over which the Common Council has control, namely: issuing building permits for buildings for which sewers will
empty into the existing mains which are already inadequate as storm sewers and domestic sewers; moreover, the
present construction which is going on is already increasing the rate of run-off of storm waters and will in-
crease it more and more in the future, in particular, the following: (1) there is construction going on behind
the Parkway Mall in the Westmorland Road area; (2) further construction is going on in Grove Heights on the
Golden Grove Road; (3) Blair Construction is putting up buildings on the Golden Grove Road; (4) on Simpson Drive
Extension, a house was moved into that area on February 24th, 1976 and more houses are planned to be placed on
small lots - this has already caused flooding of the basement of Philip W. Morris on Glen Road, which required
pumping by the Fire Department who were unable to completely reduce the water; (5) in addition, there are two
trailer parks: Glen Falls Trailer Park is being increased in numbers, and Morland Trailer Park off Rothesay
Avenue is likewise increasing. The letter notes that it must be obvious to members of the Common Council that to
issue permits to all this construction is really equivalent to issuing permits to add to the flooding, making it
utterly impossible for the residents of the area to survive in even a modest condition of comfort. The letter
refers to correspondence with the City Solicitor in this regard, and to reports made to Council in February and
May, 1975 by the City Manager and by Mr. Murray Zides regarding clean-up of Marsh Creek and to action with
respect to structures which constrict the flow thereof, and regarding the suggestion that development in the
flood plain in the watershed be "frozen" until the situation in the Great Marsh is remedied. The letter states
that the said solicitors therefore request on behalf of the citizens of the afflicted area that the City will
forthwith stop all buildings being constructed under present building permits, and further that no more building
permits be issued to anybody until the situation is remedied, and notes that is the immediate task before the
City of Saint John and must be attended to without delay. The letter adds that there are further steps that must
then be taken in accordance with the recommendations of the City's engineers to clean up, deepen and widen Marsh
Creek, and that plans already exist which were made a number of years ago, setting forth clearly the boundaries
of the Creek which have been encroached upon, and states that the solicitors are therefore instructed to request
the Council to give immediate answers as to whether the steps will be taken by the City to protect property
owners, or not, and states that if the City is prepared to take the necessary steps, full co-operation can be
expected by the residents of the afflicted area, and states that there are other steps which must then follow, as
spring floods can be expected against which their clients must be protected. The letter states that when the
solicitors receive the answer from Council they will then outline further steps which should be taken to remedy
the intolerable condition under which the residents of a supposedly civilized community are existing. The letter
concludes by stating that the solicitors' clients expect the Council to take immediate steps to prevent the
aggravation of conditions which are liable to lead to another flooding disaster in the weeks ahead.
Mr. A. B. Gilbert, Q. C. was present at the meeting. The Common Clerk advised that Mr. Gilbert wished
to be heard in the above named matter.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that Mr. A. B. Gilbert, Q. C. be heard.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion, noting that the meeting for hearing of dele-
gations by Council was not for another week.
340
~
/l..E CI!Jt?Pt;
G/. C'.
/fJ.;/rsh aeelr
.,e/",L/ ny'
remt?,r4't?.>
'Prpt!..ItJr<?-
7(ed-l'ern ../61.
ref?tJ;"-c-
&lien h//$
F!t7;/i t!c,PN?1.
6!leh hffs
eilre01 ';:/o"d/i!f
1Io~$es /110v.
i- tJ /JIg J7 1? d.
cill"e ~
f/.s/e lIfI..yne
F/t/I1ti/h:f
Mr. Gilbert advised that he was accompanied at the Council meeting by quite a large delegation
of residents from the Glen Falls ,area. He noted that of the four major floods in the Glen Falls area.in
the past thirteen months, two of them were declared disaster areas at the request of this Council. He
stated that these floods have really meant disaster to the members of those households that were affected _
he is told there were between 400 and 500 who suffered cold and hunger at a very bitter season of the
year, and he noted that we are now approaching one of the most dangerous months for flooding because we
have high tides - we are approaching a very bad season for this area and it has happened before in March,
April or May. He advised that these residents now feel that the only remedy, or series of remedies, to
this condition is to start with a reduction or stopping of all building, building permits and other
developments in that area which add to the run-off and add to the sewage. He noted that there is both
flood waters and sewage going through the same sewers, as he is informed - that results in these houses
not merely being flooded but being treated with the most distasteful conditions under which human beings
can live, and he stated that he is sure that all the Council members present would feel terribly and would
feel, in part, guilty if we had a major case of sickness - influenza or fever - developing from these
floods and it can happen from this sewage which is deposited in the houses and on the land of these
residents. He stated that he was asking at this time that the Council give a definite answer to these
residents to what the Council is going to do to stop this condition. He stated that it cannot all be done
in a hurry, but steps can be taken right now to stop further building and addition to the sewerage in that
locality. He reminded the Council that on August 5th, 1975 these residents were before Council, pro-
testing against development, asking the Council not to give building permits to add to this deplorable
condition. He stated that, years ago, Mr. Grey Murdoch a well-known engineer of this city, prepared plans
of the infringements on Marsh Creek and those plans ,exist in this city now and that the Council can get
access to them and can start cleaning up Marsh Creek just as soon as it stops this further construction _
every house that goes up adds to the problem. He stated that, in addition to that, there will then be
other steps that can be taken, one of which, he feels - he has been told by competent engineers - is the
greatly enlarged sewers and the separation of the storm sewers from the domestic sewers - but that is for
the future, perhaps a few months from now; what the residents are asking now is immediate because these
people are living in a state of fear -. he is sure that the Council sympathizes with these people but they
want far more than sympathy - they want action of this Council to stop construction now. He noted that
has been mooted before by employees of the City of Saint John, but it must be stopped or you are going to
completely ruin the value of 400 or 500 dwelling houses - he is told that the average value of those
houses without such flooding would be in the vicinity of $23,000.00 - these people are taxpayers - they
pay for their protection, and it is this Council's duty to protect them. He stated that he asks the
Council in all seriousness to consider this problem anew and take very drastic steps to protect these
people who have suffered beyond anything that this community has ever known before. He stated that if
that cannot be done, something else will have to be done by them. He stated that he begs of the Council
at this time to take this matter under the most serious consideration and to stop all construction now -
he does not call it a moratorium, he calls it more likely a type of "freeze" on all construction. Noting
that the Council had considered the question at this meeting of Mystery Lake, he stated that it is very
close to,Glen Falls and if anything happens to Mystery Lake there is going to be another disaster in Glen
Falls. He stated that he begs of the Council not just to give these people sympathy, not just to ask for
a declaration that this is a disaster area again, but to do something to stop what is bound to happen as
we know now beyond any doubt if steps are not taken by the Council. He stated that these people do not
want to get into any litigation with the City of Saint John which is their own home town, but they do want
to live in a state of comfort and happiness so that they will not face this constant fear of the disaster
upon them. He stated that it is up to this Council, and he asked what will the Council do - these residents
ask that the Council help to stop further flooding in this area.
.
I
1
.
I
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Barfoot advised that there is full speed ahead on the anticipated
report from Proctor & Redfern Ltd.; a draft report has been discussed at the staff level as to the various
solutions for' flooding in the area and it is anticipated that the full report will be coming in at the end
of March. Councillor Green asked if the City Manager will be arranging a meeting with the Mayor and
Council before that date so that the Council may be briefed and for the Council's in-put into this. Mr.
Barfoot replied that he will'do so.
For the information of the Glen Falls Flood Committee, the Mayor advised that we have gone
forward and taken some steps. Councillor Cave reported that we had a meeting with the said Committee,
along with as many Councillors as possible who could attend that meeting, and we insisted that staff look
into the possibilities of looking so that when we do have the anticipated report everything will be ready
to be tied in, thereby creating a situation that we could start immediately, which will not be too soon;
so, he is hoping that staff is looking into the grant and the City Manager is looking into the method of
allocation of monies that will be needed when we get this report so that we can start immediately and
clear it up once and for all - but we just cannot, until we get this report, see what we can do, any more
than you~prepare for any emergency, such as pumps, sand bags, and what have you - and he hopes and the
Council hopes that this is being looked after. Reporting on the details of the meeting that was held
today, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the meeting was held on February 26th, as indicated by Mr. Barfoot, with
the consultant and Provincial Department of Fisheries and Environment concerning the draft report; the
draft report contains all the salient information necessary to complete the report - the consultant wanted
to take that information and expand upon it and also to include any other information that both the City
and the Province wish to be included in the report; we also went over a number of the possible alternatives
to solving the flood problem; the report in its present form is a draft report; to clarify the next steps
the consultant is now going to prepare the final report and it is going to be in the hands of the Pro~ince
and the City by March 15th but not completed - it will be in our hands for review on that date and it will
be completed by the end of March; the Province made it quite imperative that it had to be completed by
that time; following that he thinks that .the next step, or course, is to review the best alternative and
to examine the best means of accomplishing that by obtaining the money necessary to do the job.
.
I
Mrs. Elsie Wayne stated that one of the main reasons that the Glen Falls Flood Committee was
present at this meeting and that the Committee went to its solicitor, even though the Committee had a good
meeting with the City, was that on February 24th a local developer moved a house in behind the homes on
the Glen Road (behind Mrs. Morris, Mrs. McCutcheon, what have you); when the Committee checked this out
with the Planning Department, it was told that the man said he got permission from the Planning Advisory
Committee to do this an~ that he planned on building four more homes along there; on checking with the
Planning Advisory Committee, the Committee was told by Mr. Zides that the man in question never got
permission from him, and on checking with Mr. Goguen from the Building Department, before that, Mrs. Wayne
stated that Mr. Goguen had no information to give her on this man moving a house in - so, this man had no
building permit and no permission - so, the Committee decided it was time to take some kind of steps in
this matter; in speaking again with I~. Zides the Committee found out that it was apparently 1972 or
perhaps 1973 that this man got some kind of a written letter saying that he could move a house in there.
She advised that the Committee questions that when you have a building permit there is a limit on the life
of that permit and then you have to renew it, whereas this man got permission around 1972, he is moving a
house in in 1973 and then he says he is going to build 3 or 4 more. She noted that this particular
location is on the flood plain - when the Committee came before the Council before the Council said it was
alright to develop on the upper plain as that was not going to hurt the Glen Falls area, but do not let
them build on the flood plain; she pointed out that, now, we are down to the flood plain, and asked: where
do we go from here? The Mayor advised that he understands those permits are only good for six months, and
I
.
~
"...
l/olLse s
.m()Ye~ -C-p
~k", RAf
dJ rea
F/t?t?~/h.1'
I S.T I4rbt?v
:l3r/~e 41L'-
~hor/'t!l
1"76-77
blL'Ftj'd
(!e-VII,/f. J{h6r.
-1116Uft;/I?~ ,.
Ih _rbC'ur
6r/~ e
r,/:le6Jk
~dlV.;lrd .7).
W..;i/6h
Olnd,j'j' .b;/A
I1'J{?I7'fS ,( ..hi
..i4n~/'er
(J. t? IL' Jrt- (:.;/ $ e
rl?~u/ry
s.r76/teemd'.
~45.
;V(;1,'/
"PP(/ee $t17..,
J1k~.,.n
NI(" d5K.l'e>-L
1'1t!. . securl T<
I j7e11l'it1d/,,;;
..:J-Recf- II'n
Pt?//ce ~#
VtlII'I'IrIp;Jtf{
.
I
I
.s:7:1J.;'~~J1.
7J.d6'd F7' 5:.
IVo.6/
. r>p/';'e $IhS.
~s~+ ~
j7l'oj7f/5dd
elosurf?
.....
341
that the City will look into the situation referred to by Mrs. Wayne. Councillor Pye advised that with regard to
the building that has been placed on the lot referred to by Mrs. Wayne, that lot is located at the corner of the
Glen Road and Simpson Drive, and that he had occasion to investigate that area and he found that 'due to the run-
off from the newly cleared area which clearing took place a few months ago, five properties that heretofore had
not known flooding were experiencing ice at least a foot thick through three-quarters of their back yard; he
noted that this is a deplorable situation and that there should at least have been a huge ditch dividing that
property and the five adjoining properties to take care of any run-off, but nothing has been done - he felt that,
certainly, drastic action should be taken in this regard.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Mayor be authorized to sign on behalf of the City of
Saint John the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority budget for the fiscal year March 31st, 1976 to April 1st,
1977.
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the above matter be tabled for one
week and that the Mayor bring in a report for the Council of what the deductible liability amount is regarding
insurance coverage on the harbour bridge policy. The Mayor advised that he will obtain the information asked for
by Councillor A. Vincent.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Edward D. Walsh of 92 Princess Street,
seeking an explanation of what happened in the Common Council's case with Omega Investments Ltd., and posing
several questions in this regard, be received and filed and Mr. Walsh be informed of the action that has been
taken by Council in requesting an inquiry, as set forth in Common Council resolution of February 16th, 1976.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Saint John Policemen's Protective Association,
Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. advising that at a recent meeting the Association adopted a resolution stating that it
believes that a proposed closing of the western Police Station will affect adversely the present level of pro-
tection to citizens in the western part of the city and that it believes that the establishment of a Federal
penal institution within the City of Saint John will substantially increase the work load of the police and
sharply reduce the protection of our citizens, and that the Association has carefully considered all aspects of
the proposed Federal penal institution and finds unsatisfactory answers to several fundamental questions specifi-
cally the work load of police officers, and therefore places on record the Association's official opposition to
such a penal institution within city limits, be received and filed and the Association thanked for this com-
muniction.
Councillor Parfitt noted that the next item on the agenda, which is a letter from the above noted
Association, discusses the proposed closure of police stations in eastern and western sectors of the city, and
asked if the Association does not know that these closures were agreed upon in their signed contracts last fall.
She stated that from discussion with Police Chief Eric Ferguson on the question of the work load of the Police
Department, she learned that he is looking to anything that might mean an extra work load and would do any
negotiating with the Federal Government; she noted that with regard to the medium security penal institution, we
are talking about the year 1979; she stated she wonders, regarding things referred to in the Association's
letter, if the Association would check up on them. Councillor Green expressed the view that the establishment of
such a penal institution will require additional police services. Councillor Higgins noted that with regard to
the penal institution and to the patrolling of the throughway, there has to be very sincere negotiation between
the Federal Government and the Council and also between the Provincial Government and the Council; he added that
he is sure that the Secretary of the above named Association is simply bringing before Council again their
concern about their responsibility with reference to throughway and penal institutions which is the responsibility
of this Council - he felt it is a good reminder, and it is not going to be forgotten. With reference to costs
regarding a penal institution, Councillor M. Vincent advised that a lot of the court work that is done regarding
the Dorchester Penitentiary is done in the City of Moncton and if one checks with the Police Department of
Moncton, you might be surprised to see the increased costs that Department has experienced, not the Dorchester
Police Department. Councillor MacGowan felt that a point of interest, perhaps, that is being overlooked is that
presently in the City of Saint John, in the heart of the city, there is a maximum security institution (the
County Gaol) and a week or so ago - that Gaol was built for 75 inmates - there were 145 - there is no auxiliary
lighting and when we were all complaining about the cold they were without electricity in that building - that
building is so antiquated that the Provincial Government should be requested - the Department of Justice should
be requested - to up-date that and get us a gaol that will house these people properly; her point was that we are
talking about a medium security penal institution but right in the heart of the city there is a maximum security
institution. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that when the decision was before this Council he asked the Chief of
Police for a report, with the support of the other Council members, of the cost of this prison to be located in
the area. He added that we all know that this penal institution is going to go to East Saint John. He stated
that he asked before what the cost would be as an additional cost to us for pOlice security and he was assured by
the Chief of Police that the Council was going to have a report on that matter. Councillor A. Vincent stated
that he still thinks that the City should negotiate for compensation for some sort of police security. He noted
that the requested report has not been obtained as yet. He asked that a check be made to confirm that he made
that request for a report. Councillor Higgins recalled that the Police Chief has brought the subject up at many
meetings. Councillor A. Vincent made the point that we realize that a Federal prison in this area will cost us
more money, and that the only reason he supported it - because he still thinks it was a Federal "carrot". He
added that he does not think it will ever be built.
'~~,
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Policemen's Protective
Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. expressing the Association's deep concern about the proposed closing of
police stations in both the east and the west of the city, stating that the Association hopes that the Council
will be in full possession of all relevant information before it proceeds with any consideration of reduced
service and that the spectacular growth in the east necessitates the continued growth of police service and an
operational centre that can respond to the wide variety of requests from the citizens; and stating that these
comments are equally relevant on the west side where the scattered population is receiving minimal service, and
noting that the Association is on record as opposing the establishment of a proposed prison within the city
limits because of the vastly increased work load with no indication that the police force will be expanded to
I :3.1,':)
I ~....
~
lb//'t!'t!' .5-117.,
1II.e$iern cf-
(?.q~-tem
(pretflPsed, )
~/PPI/7~
II/(J~ seotLr/.'fy
?el7/'t!'n-l-/~;y
C!ouI1. #. r;i7ceh
pt:>It't!e :lJ9,r--
securl'-6.Y,. -f!"e>r
4-fp;1'1/C Me~'y
tJ~ a1l7;;l~
pt-. J ej7"~al/-{
/'Iucltaiir ,ejO.l?-t-
C /'i-y )7Jfr.
6%1? b/h C1re
/'11011"$); c"eel(
ktJtKL/J.7.4'
t:.emt'ili't?$, L
1:i1,{~./"J:m/~S
HI pl'f"'''':!. u m
~t; .ff/:;~tJr;L
C'IIiPl. n;';/'11UI1/TI
J//c:;"n,"" ...ZJwe,lpp-
menr
CtJUJ?,;l, /I!'I7(!<9h
tJ.aI"J'*..t~ a'1ePI/JIf,
lI/p/a~/Pn ..,r
r;lH//?1,?
C/,/ef' t?f"
:pp;'ce
LEGAL
(,(/iI15hm, .s.
.s_/'t-h
Sewer bR7,{--t?;P
~ 'Iff ,5P;;t::-/7!tJr'
meet that need; and requesting that the Association be consulted in the matter of the proposed closing in
the east and west police stations, and recording the official opposition of the Association to such
proposed closing -- be received and filed. .
Councillor Green, for the information of the public, noted that the Police Department is at
present operating out of the fire station on Church Avenue in Saint John West, to represent the western
sector of the city. Mr. Barfoot advised that since there was some storm damage to the western Police
Station there is some Police operation out of the said fire station. Councillor Cave stated this was the
first time he had heard about both the eastern and western stations being eased out; he added that he,
understood that some of the personnel was going to be cut down, and stated that as far as he was con-
cerned, that is it; we entered into agreements at amalgamation, and in no way are they closing down that
police station, as far as he is concerned. The Mayor confirmed that Councillor Cave was correct. Councillor
M. Vincent felt that Councillor Cave has touched on an important point, and stated that he would like:to
see, perhaps, the City Manager through the Police Department bring in some type of a report so that we are
not going to be having the public think that the eastern and'western police stations are closed because of
the Association's letter; he felt that it could very easily come out that way - that the Council has
already agreed to this, or something - so, he thinks that something should come out from the City Manager's
office in this matter, in the way of an up-dating of this information. The Mayor replied that the City
Manager can bring in a report to Council on this matter. In reply to Councillor MacGowan's query as to
whether or not the alarm system that was hooked up to the western Police Department will be still avail-
able, Mr. Barfoot stated he is sure that all these things are adequately taken care of, and any operational
changes will be touched on in his report.
I
Referring to discussion of the previous item, where it was mentioned that everybody knows that
the penitentiary is going to be built in the east of Saint John instead of in the west, Councillor Kipping
commented that either that is gross misinformation, or it is new to him. He stated that he knows what he
knows, but that statement should be corrected. The Mayor replied that we have not heard it, so as long as
we have not heard it we do not have to worry about it - if it happens it would be brought up by somebody
to Council and Council will air it. Councillor Kipping noted that the only problem is, that it was stated
here, publicly.
1
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the City Manager has entered into any negotiations with Atomic
Energy of Canada, noting that Atomic Energy of Canada is very much concerned with the security in West
Saint John, on the way to its plant. The Mayor noted that the City has not received any communication to
this effect from Atomic Energy of Canada. The Mayor noted that in receiving and filing the above letter
from the Association, the Council is looking for a report from the City Manager, as discussed.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that no more building permits be issued in the region or
any part of the region which affects the watershed of the area drained by Marsh Creek until the situat'ion
is remedied.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table one week until
the Council receives a report from the City Manager, the City Solicitor and the Commissioner of Community
Planning and Development.
I
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Davis,
Higgins, Cave, Pye, Gould,' Hodges, Parfitt and A. Vincent voting "yea" and Councillors Kipping, MacGowan,
M. Vincent and Green voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent stated that at the last meeting he asked for a report on the garbage, but
he did not get it at this meeting of Council. He stated that about 29 bags of garbage from outside the
city was packed against the City's "No Dumping" sign, and people are still bringing garbage in from
outside the city and from outside Saint John County, and he is not getting help in this matter. He stated
that the garbage is piling up very high out in the Howe's Lake dump area on the Sandy Point Road. He
stated that he wants a detailed report of the Police laws and what they did in the matter since last week.
In reply, Mr. MacKinnon recalled that he did report several meetings ago with regard to garbage at the
entrance to the Howe's Lake site, and for a period of approximately one month the situation had improved;
however, the problem is coming back again and it is basically a problem of enforcement. Noting that this
dump site is on the city right-of-way, he stated that he believes that, under the Motor Vehicle Act, the
Police have the authority to report anybody leaving garbage at the gates of this dump. The Mayor asked Mr.
MacKinnon have the garbage checked to determine where it is coming from, through any identifiable item of
garbage in it. Mr. MacKinnon replied that it has been checked in the past and it was found that some of
it is coming from outside the city. He added that the matter was referred by Council to the Chief of
Police for enforcement. Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that no action was taken. He asked that a spot
check be put on that dump. The Mayor suggested that we try it, and stated we will get a report on it.
.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
,Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the motion.
Councillors M. Vincent, A. Vincent and Green withdrew from the meeting.
I
Considerable discussion took place regarding a letter, dated January 20th, 1976, from Mr.
Winston S. Smith of 25 Lakewood Avenue, Forest Hills, Saint John East, which requests the decisive action
of Common Council regarding a serious problem affecting his home at that address in that the basement of
his house on three different occasions, all within the space of twenty-four months, has been flooded,
caused by the backing up of the city storm sewer on two occasions, and by the main city domestic sewer
line becoming plugged and backing up in his basement. The letter states that he cannot accept that an
"Act of God" can be blamed on three occasions in this regard, all within the said time span, and that, if
nothing else, surely the City could at least offer a token gesture of "service" by installing a foot valve
or some such device at the end of his sewer line to prevent his home from being regularly inundated.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor inform Mr. Winston S. Smith that
~
r"
(34:3
· Wth5l~mS:
Sm/t-h
Sewer
bdlC/r-U'p
I(}'tf~ ..);,.1 L-/~
.$kmJ"~
7?e;;l/-I-~ -,tbl.
S t?h7hse t
~"''f
'Puolt'c j7UI'-
{/t1SR /and
ISuJ/t'y/s/t1n
:tJy-,1aw
Cf?hlnfU I'?/lfy
1D/61nn/JJ,ff
I1cr
.
.
'J>/<31m. /It:/v/
C'QhJl?7.
{!tlhlm. ~t'.
S, 7: 1J>h~..(IIt"J?
1~t-ee;,1-/l.5.>
/yo.61
.7),,<<.ff S,Udl,
(.fe~/e
pt?//Cf!lt/Qm.;lQ)
VJ!:!/:Jd
U~an /f/9
C'Qh7h7IS.{/'//.
.
I
I
.
~
unless there are any new facts coming up the City is denying liability, and that the City Solicitor also include
in such reply a very brief report of what the inspection made by the Engineering and Works Department revealed at
the time an inspection was made.
Mr. MacKinnon stated that he would assume that the .City's insurance company would have checked with the
Water and Sewerage Department to ascertain what the problem was. Councillor Higgins asked that the City Solicitor
try to combine both of these aspects and make reply to Mr. Smith as the City Solicitor in the above matter. Mr.
Rodgers replied that he will do so.
Read a letter from the City Solicitor advising that on a recommendation to Council from the Planning
Advisory Committee, he was asked to prepare an agreement between the City and the developer, Shamrock Realty Ltd.
regarding development of Somerset Park, and setting out the problem in relation to a proposed subdivision of land
which is a part of a large parcel of land, requiring, under the Subdivision By-Law the providing of land to the
City for public purposes, and whether or not a larger parcel of land in the initial subdivision than is required
by by-law, can now be provided for public purposes in lieu of land for public purposes in future subdivisions,
and advising that his opinion is that this cannot be done in this manner bearing in mind the real purpose of the
Subdivision By-Law that, is, to regulate under specific terms, the subdivision of land. The letter states that
the by-law governs all subdivisions and cannot be applied to one and not another, and that an agreement for such
purpose would be invalid as not only against public policy but against the law, and that the City cannot con-
venant itself out of its own by-laws in favour of one citizen as against the whole of the citizens; and further
advising that, furthermore, the Subdivision By-Law under Section 25 sets out the limits of land which the City
can take for public purposes. The letter states that if the City Solicitor is correct in assuming that in this
particular instance the amount of land to be taken would be greater in amount than that authorized by by-law,
then the City is precluded from so doing if the Community Planning Act is looked to for authority; the City can
only accept that amount of land as prescribed by by-law; if, however, the developer wishes to make further
conveyance through ordinary means in the way of a gift, the City Solicitor is sure some arrangement can be worked
out to the satisfaction of the both parties; however, it would not be for the purpose of relieving the developer
from further requirements in compliance with the by-law when further subdivisions take place.
Discussion ensued regarding the above matter.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above named report from the City Solicitor be referred to
the Planning Advisory Committee.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed the Chair in
legal session of Common Council, when there were present Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
MacGowan and Parfitt, and Messrs. Barfoot, Park and Rodgers.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from Saint John Policemen's Protective Association,
Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., refusing to deviate from the Working Agreement to permit a female policewoman to work on
the Special Squad or Drug Squad unless she meets the requirements of the Working Agreement, be received and
filed:
AND FURTHER that the City Manager be requested to document the City's request for having a female
policewoman placed on the Special Squad or Drug Squad and that the matter be referred to the Human Rights Com-
mission with the intention of obtaining an exemption.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
i!J(? &-A
/ co~rk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the eighth day of
I~rch, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations, and
J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply, of the
Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community
Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and
Renewal Services, of the Community Planning and Development Department,
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, R. H. Stone, Deputy Chief
of Police, and P. Clark, Fire Chief
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
1344
I ,.,
s.:J: II<</"bo<<r
~,..;,tJfe /l'ltJ;~m'
h..,./H?U,. tr/~
-ct1 //s
/If.;}rSh t'Melr
p/61hS re
In.f'rinj"e me 17-1.
p"ocft1r+ *"'"
~t"'- rej?"",t-
;1ft! rttlt, ~ h -
,(I'n.f/e!f -4-1-;1'.
f"(M,,Ldh sett/l'.
';la'yI7lOlr)-et' ~
2Jumpinf
v/tl/at-!'Qn.s ~T-
etUIo/j7 .5 I '.fe 7"-
~url7/n!J'
.2)l?h'J,,//-f/fJ)?
IV". I ,c,' Y'e
S-t~"Qn
En~/l1ee"'infy.-
1J/p"A-s :i?erf.
C3jlif<</ ~u~fe,
c/~~ ~//
deiil/J-tWOll?
6mer,ffeJ1cy
/,~hti J7f
.5: 7: ~7f.:f ~//
fn?j7/oyet?s'
t/;?it?J1If/t?,//~t
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
February 23rd last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
1-
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
March~~s~last, be confirmed.
Councillor Kipping noted that at the Council meeting of March 1st the request was made that the
Council request the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority to meet with Council for the purpose of briefing
the Council on the harbour bridge tolls situation, and that the Mayor mentioned at that time that such a
meeting can be arranged. He asked if the Mayor has been able to take any steps to arrange such a meeting.
The Common Clerk advised that he has been in conversation with the Manager of the said Bridge Authority,
and when the Manager returns to the city on Monday after absence from the city this week, they will
consult together to set up the meeting.
Councillor Kipping, referring to the March 1st Council minutes, noted there was reference to
preparation by Mr. Grey Murdoch of plans of the infringements on Marsh Creek and that those plans exist
now in this city and that the Council can get access to them. He stated that he wondered if, indeed, the
City has been able to get access to those plans, and if there has been any follow-up on that information.
Mr. Barfoot stated that, to his knowledge, there has not been any follow-up, but the staff will look into
that matter further. Councillor Kipping stated that he thinks it would be helpful to the City if it
gathered up all the information of that kind on the Marsh Creek problem and had it brought together into
one place so that when the Council does receive the Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report it will have perhaps
some additional information, as well.
Councillor Kipping noted that the March 1st minutes record also that the enquiry was made as to
whether the City Manager will be arranging a meeting with the Mayor and Council prior to receipt of the
full Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report so that the Council may be briefed and for the Council's in-put with
regard to the draft report from the said engineering consultants. He recalled that the Council members
all agreed at that time that the Council members should be briefed on that draft report, if possible. He
asked if the City Manager has been able to arrange a time for that briefing. Mr. Barfoot replied that he
must have misunderstood - he did not understand that to be a briefing on the draft report, but a briefing
when the report was in. The Mayor noted that Councillor Kipping was asking if the Council can have a
briefing on the draft report. Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply. Councillor Kipping stated he is
wondering if the date could be set so that the Council could be briefed (on the draft report). Mr.
Barfoot made affirmative reply. Councillor Kipping asked if that date could be set this evening. Coun-
cillor Green confirmed that the intent of his request in this regard at the March 1st meeting was for a
briefing on the said draft report. He stated that as a follow-up to that, he would suggest to the City
Manager that the plans there were in the possession of Mr. Grey Murdoch were taken over by Mr. Lingley, of
Murdoch-Lingley Ltd., and that if the City were to check with that office they may find the Marsh Creek
infringements plans for the City.
(Councillor MacGowan entered the meeting)
Councillor A. Vincent stated that approximately four months ago he asked for a report on the
wooden sewers at Haymarket Square and that he is still waiting for that report. He pointed out that they
are about ready to cover up these sewers, and he is wondering when that report will be ready. Mr. Barfoot
replied that he will attempt to expedite that report and get something back for the next Council meeting.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that for two consecutive Council meetings he requested information
about what we are doing regarding the Howe's Lake dump. He stated that the situation there is terrible,
and that he was out there yesterday and found the situation had been improved a little bit, but along with
all the garbage that has been deposited there he found large objects (a refrigerator and a barber's
chair). He noted that he has asked for Police surveillance, and stated he is not getting anywhere re-
garding this problem. He stated that from his personal observation yesterday of those dumping at this
location, he found that offenders were from outside the city. Councillor Kipping added that the said dump
was burning on March 7th, as well. Councillor Davis added that the dump is also burning today. The Mayor
noted that the items referred to by Councillor A. Vincent will be reported on.
The Mayor advised that present at this meeting were students from the Political Science class of
Simonds High School, and on behalf of the Common Council, he extended a welcome to these students to the
Council meeting.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting a report
from Fire Chief P. Clark, detailing the operational changes which have now been completed with relation to
Fire Station Number 1 and the new fire station on King Street East, and advising that his report of
February 13th to Council noted that the matter of demolition of Number 1 Fire Station had not been fin-
alized and further advising that the Works Department has men and equipment available between storms for
demolition of this building, and recommending that the Works Department proceed with the demolition of the
said fire station on King Street East, the cost of which is to be charged to the 1976 Capital Budget, be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, in reply to Common
Council resolution of February 16th last which referred to him and to City staff the Council's request for
a recommendation regarding the lack of proper emergency stairway lighting in the Market Square City Hall
building, a letter from the Executive Committee of Saint John City Hall Employees' Union, Local 486,
C.U.P.E. having been received on the subject -- providing the following information, namely:- a meeting
was held with the owners of the building, Revenue Properties Company Limited, who have reiterated, I, that
the generator which supplies alternate power in the event of a power failure was, at all times
up to and including the initial power back out, fully operational; it appears that after becoming op-
erational at the beginning of the power failure (on February 2nd last), there was a temporary return of
power to the system which under these extreme circumstances caused a very heavy electrical surge which
blew out the electrical panel that operates the generator - this caused considerable damage which resulted
in an unavoidable delay in making the emergency system again operational; the owners have corrected the
situation and the total unit is now fully operational - it is the policy of the owners to start the unit
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
r"
L'/ryr /la//
.C7uJp:./ /
t'/;qh?J&'1"
emerg-tTJ1Cj'
/tjJic-/J7f
I
C}gp/tal
':t:1<<~et-
1(!J?escenr
/ive.
SUI7Jr/Sf?
C't1J?.,fnaci-ol'.
.t -t-,(.
.
.J},J? F..E:
s.J: Major
Wdrter . /
5u,P/'/f
/i.2).:r:
,I.-t-d.
1/J1//-6n1,dt:>. 2.
{!f?!/. SOlVe
G-.il S fX? a
,(dll7C',wsz!e r 3.
A.,;N7",n 414
-TSt-~-t-/
!At il C'/7C1n-
aql/crf- /lss.
. 4.
,,/. 5.
,{prl7ev//Je
t(/es#1*17
l:zndudJriJP
~b/"S~
J'I'J<<,. /he n
v1ed. ~/e$
eo, AI,,/.
I
t/rhCi/J? /
'R€?J7etl.l<5i
4U....../s.;;>,h
. i'fj?'pr."'/~/s
(Fu ndff).<'-I.
3/ ~~r
7 #NR:t-; ~
.....
~345
manually once a month to ensure that it is operational when required; the owners also report that they are in the
process of arranging to have emergency lighting installed in the Council Chamber; the owners have been very co-
operative in all respects in ensuring that the damages to the building caused by the storm have been repaired
promptly, and providing the full requirements needed for safety -- and advising that the emergency power supply
produced by the emergency generator located on the top level of City Hall is capable of supplying emergency power
to the fifth floor level (including that elevator), to the detention cells, to the heating system, to the fire
pumps, to the corridors and to the exit stairways -- be received and filed.
Councillor Kipping stated that he would suggest that once a month is not sufficiently frequent for the
owners to test the emergency power supply in this building, and that perhaps the City Manager could pass this
suggestion along to Revenue Properties Company Limited. He expressed the view that such a test should be made at
least once a week. The Mayor replied that we will take that point up.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
for payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice
regarding the following named capital project:-
Manager, approval be granted
for engineering services,
1.
Crescent Avenue
Sunrise Contractors Ltd.
8-inch Sanitary
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 4
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 4,
dated March 1, 1976
$ 25,200.00
25,997.50
779.93
24,444.00
$ 773.57
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services in
connection with projects that have been undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic Expansion prog-
ramme: -
1.
Saint John Major Water Supply
A. D. I. Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 7,
dated January 31, 1976
$ 15,109.96
$ 737.07
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer
Gaspe Construction
Total work done, Estimate Number 9
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 9,
dated February 18, 1976
$1,463,230.25
1,142,325.55
193,818.75
$ 13,532.68
Lancaster La~oon Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated January 27, 1976
$ 45,556.75
$ 3,416.70
Lancaster La~oon Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 4,
dated January 27, 1976
$ 48,973.45
$ 2,355.85
Lorneville Western Industrial Water Supply
Marine Industrial & Technical Sales Co. Ltd.
Electrical Services for Screen Chamber
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated September 2, 1975
$ 10,409.24
10,409.24
Nil
8,825.00
2,
$ 1,584.24
Councillor Green asked for a progress report regarding when the Lancaster lagoon lift station is
expected to be finished. Mr. Armstrong stated that he was not able to give a definite date as to when construction
would commence as it is still in the design stage, and he added that the above noted invoices are engineering
payments. Councillor Green asked if there are any hold-ups in the preparation of the design plans for this
project. Mr. Armstrong stated that he is not personally aware of it, and that he does not think there is such a
problem or he would have had some comments from the engineers in the City Department on this.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager with regard to Common
Council resolution of February 23rd last which requested that Appraisals (Fundy) Ltd. be invited to explain to
the Council the methods by which they make their appraisals, this request having arisen from the City Manager's
recommendation for payment of invoices from the said appraisers for work on properties in the North End Urban
Renewal Scheme at 31 Water Street and at 7 North Market Wharf -- submitting a letter from Mr. W. M. Geary,
A.A.C.I., the principal of the said appraising firm, which explains the make-up of the said invoices in the total
amount of $3,710.00 -- be received and filed and as recommended in the City Manager's letter dated February 13th,
1976, approval be granted for payment of the following accounts received from Appraisals (Fundy) Ltd. in the
I ~346
~
(//.b.;;)? ~h~";>
~/lffrdJ/ .5d/S
/J ;:e.r,il/S,;;/S
(Fuh"'~) .(-Id
~I W'.;:;/er sr-:
~";trOl-tln
7:a 1/''''/7$ .i-l-L
'1;11. A1 Jrt-. W'~~
A et1J7.;l~-
,4f.;u:..7Jo~/d
total amount of $3,710.00 for professional services rendered as follows in connection with properties
acquired for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme - the Partnership's approval for payment of these accounts
having been acknowledged:-
.
.
Appraisal fee for F-5-1-29, 31 Water Street, Parrtown Taverns Ltd. for period of January 13,
1976 to January 30, 1976. Preparation of interim appraisal and final appraisal, consulta-
tions, investigations, review of financial records, et cetera $ 2,310.00
Negotiation fee for F & L-6-19-20, 7 North Market Wharf, Leonard &
August 5, 1975 to September 25, 1975. Meetings and consultations,
disturbance claims, preparation of counter claims, et cetera
MacDonald for period of
recalculating business
$ 1,277.50
Negotiation fee for F & L-6-19-20 as above - meetings and consultations
October 2 and 6, 1975
I
$
122.50
Councillor M. Vincent stated that when he raised the question at the February 23rd Council
meeting it was not so much the cost per hour as much as the number of hours spent on appraising this
particular building at 31 Water Street. He asked what record, or what procedure does the City staff have
to assist in accounting for the time that an appraiser spends on doing the work - or does the City have
any such procedure. Mr. Barfoot replied that we only have the experience of the Appraisal Sub-Committee
which examines all appraisal accounts - and that Committee examines a tremendous number in the various
capacities of appraisers accounts and if there is an account which appears out of line it is sent back for
further question; the reason for the high cost on this particular one is the fact that basically two
appraisals had to be completed on this particular job because of the lack of certain financial records
when the appraisal was done the first time - they did an appraisal based upon a certain procedure - then,
when the financial records became available, they could complete it by the other method of appraisal.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that was not his question: his question is - other than the Appraisal Sub-
Committee, does any staff supervise the time spent by appraisal companies on any appraisal. Mr. Barfoot
replied that we do not have a man watching over them. In reply to Councillor Gould's question as to
whether the two appraisals were done by Appraisals (Fundy), Ltd., Mr. Barfoot made affirmative answer,
stating that they followed two different methods. Councillor Gould asked if any appraisals were done on
the Parrtown Tavern property by any other appraisal group. Mr. Barfoot stated that he believes it was
mentioned in the correspondence before Council on February 23rd last that there was another appraisal of
the same property, but he would have to check that information. Councillor Gould stated that his reason
for asking was to find out how the Appraisals (Fundy) Ltd. bill compares with the bill from another
appraisal company for the same building, and to find out if they are in line with each other, and if they
compare favourably. Mr. Barfoot replied that he did not have that information. Councillor Gould felt that
by the way he mentioned the Council could obtain a rather better way to compare them, than if there were
two bills and one was quite a bit higher than the other then there obviously is something wrong with
somebody's appraisal. Noting that we have been doing this now for eight or nine years, Councillor Davis
stated that the questions are always the same. He noted that there are standards for buildings - it takes
a certain time to appraise a building of a certain type and within the limits it can be estimated how ,much
this is going to cost; in this particular case, however, there was a financial appraisal done - the books
were taken and examined_and an estimate made of the loss in business and the interruption, and all that
sort of thing; there is also an estimate of how much that would cost - and from the experience of the,
Urban Redevelopment people, this is quite normal - the cost of this appraisal is not much different f~r
any other appraisal of this type; so, he thinks that perhaps the Council should be supplied with some'
costs of other jobs so the Council can compare this particular account. Noting again that there are
standards, Councilllor Davis added that there is nothing exactly like this particular appraisal. Coun-
cillor M. Vincent asked: do the appraisers who appraise our property usually deal with the financial or
loss of business - a stoppage of business - aspect, or is that more an accountant's work as compared to
property appraisers; what is the path on that. In reply, Mr. Barfoot stated that he knows that we have
accountants in on certain aspects of the business disturbance claims. Councillor M. Vincent stated that
his point is that if the appraisal firm was paid for doing financial appraisals on this property, he is
wondering if that is within the terms of their structure as a property appraisal company. In reply, ~rr.
Barfoot stated that all he can say is they did the job that was asked of them and they completed the
appraisals and submitted their bill; whether we could have done it in a different way he thinks is always
open, certainly, to question, but he thinks this is a legitimate bill duly passed by those most qualified
to judge whether we are getting value for our money. Councillor A. Vincent stated that, in supporting the
tabling motion on February 23rd last in this matter, what bothered him about the appraiser's accounts was
that the appraisal was spread out over a twelve-month period, with some of the appraisal periods being for
only half an hour at a time, date after date, or for two and a half hours, and so on, and he does not know
why the appraisal lasted for so long a period; he also noted that during that twelve-month period it took
the appraisers and something like twenty-six or twenty-seven visits for opening the file up that many
times. He noted that this is only a square building on Water Street. He stated that he always understood
that when we are dealing with loss of revenue, and in particular if we are going to go to court, we have
to use a certified public accountant or a chartered accountant or someone who can become a court expert
witness, and he added that he does not think that a certified appraisers are very good with auditors' ,
figures for loss of revenue. He asked if, in other words, we have another bill coming in. Mr. Barfoot
stated that he does not have the answer to all these questions, and he felt that Mr. Buck could be asked
to provide the details.
I
.
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the matter be tabled for another week.
Councillor Kipping noted that the answers to the questions just asked are on the second page of
the appraiser's letter that was submitted by the City Manager at this meeting in the matter" and that the
said letter says something to the effect that there were actually two reports submitted and the necessity
of the first report was due mainly to the reluctance of the owner to reveal' all pertinent financial
records of his operation at that time, and that this report outlines suggested value options based on
depreciated replacement costs, and gave a summary of what had transpired on the appraisal to date. He
noted that the second report was submitted some months later after successfully acquiring all the available
financial records needed to complete a final indication of market value, and stated that he sees nothing
wrong, really, with the Council processing this matter at this time.
I
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with Councillors M. Vincent, Gould, A.
Vincent and MacGowan voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Green, Pye, Kipping, Davis, Hodges
and Parfitt voting "nay".
.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if Mr. Barfoot could answer some of the questions that were raised,
before the vote is taken on the original motion. Mr. Barfoot replied that he does not have the detailed
knowledge to answer the detailed appraisal questions as to procedure. Councillor A. Vincent commented that
on the second page of the said appraiser's letter, it does not clearly state whether the City or the tri-
party group or the appraisers has another bill coming in for auditor's fees, and that is the question he
~
r"
~1~,7.
.
Ten~~~ . J
I Olcee elf(,
t/n/ orm
clp-th/~
P~/,'ee :ZJ~
h"e 2)0/:1:
Mf/I1#t1y
I rel)l:~pt-'
1?e.5eu~
$r,uad
6////J1fS roe
-t-"'.iiJn.s~~d-.,;;-
-N Q J1 '.f-t>
~(7:p/p/
.
/97h
t?af'li-eiiJl
.l3u dfl?-&-
ST/1eetS
{/;,;VRrs/~!/.
/Jp-I?/ tan&-
WQpa ,,/ane
I (#21bl'<# S
/J'/-t-, Ple.;;J~lJ.l
/lVI!? ~cdS&.
/11.;ll'Jj.~~
1?~~ 9 2.
/lye.
lP;.d/h552 3.
Gt?/d€/7
G,.,t11/e'RL
.
I
I
.
~
is asking, and he thinks it is only good business that the Council table the matter or be told - he added that
there is nothing on the said page of that letter that indicates to him that the firm in question is capable of
doing the mathematics of lost revenue - he stated they are not qualified to do that and they are not licensed to
do that. Councillor Kipping made the point that it is not fair to hold up one invoice, waiting for another.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent, M. Vincent, Gould and MacGowan
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, tenders for supplying
Police and Fire Departments clothing be awarded in accordance with the recommendations contained in the submitted
summary of bids.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report of the Fire Department for the month of January
last, be received and filed.
Noting that the above report states that in regard to assistance and rescues by the Fire Department,
twenty-six persons were transported to hospital, Councillor Gould asked if the bills in this regard have been
sent out yet. Mr. Barfoot replied that the bills have been sent out and a report will be submitted to Council on
the collection. Councillor Gould asked what billing procedure is being used at the present time. Fire Chief
Clark replied that the billing is done on a weekly basis. Councillor MacGowan noted that the report speaks of
District 1 and District 2, rather than West, Central and East of the city, and asked for a breakdown of these two
Districts, for the information of Council. Chief Clark advised that District 1 comprises East Saint John, Lower
Cove, and the up-town area over to Paradise Row; District 2 comprises Paradise Row, the entire North End, and the
Western section of the city.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the staff
has been working on the preparation of the 1976 Capital Programme, and it is anticipated that a draft will be
ready for Council's review prior to the end of March, and that, in the meantime, because of the drastically
reduced funds available for operating budgets, if it were possible to start some capital works immediately,
better utilization could be made of men and equipment which are available between storms, and that the following
Capital Budget projects are recommended for approval at this time prior to the adoption of the full Capital
Budget:
Street Construction:
1. University avenue, Candlewood Lane to Hospital entrance - excava~ing and
grading for widening of 4 lanes
$ 75,000.00
Water and Sewer Construction
1. Mount Pleasant Avenue East - supply and install 1,400 feet of 12-inch
storm sewer in connection with road improvements
$ 50,000.00
Marsh Creek - Rothesay Avenue - reconstruct 250 feet of 30-inch storm
sewer behind 331 Rothesay Avenue
$ 15,000.00
Harding Street - sewer outfall - construct connection and storm
over-flow chamber
$ 10,000.00
4.
Golden Grove Road - construct 270 feet of 12-inch storm sewer at
McAllister Drive intersection
9,000.00
$
be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Gould asked if it is not true that the 1976 Capital Budget must be approved by the end of
March, 1976, in compliance with a 1975 Council resolution to this effect. The Mayor confirmed that this is
correct. Councillor Gould asked if the said Capital Budget will be done by that deadline, as the said 1975
Council directive suggests. Mr. Barfoot replied that it will be very close. Councillor Gould suggested that we
make sure that we live up to our motion of 1975 and hold extra meetings until it is done. Councillor MacGowan
expressed her aversion to approving partial budgets because we never know exactly what we are doing when we
approve three or four items and those items may not be what we really feel are the most urgent when we look at
the capital works programme, and we may have to cut out other capital works programmes because of this. She
stated she feels this is a wrong way of doing it, and that it worries her that we do this piece-meal - she does
not think it is good business to do so, at all. Councillor Green asked if the proposed work on the Marsh Creek
behind 331 Rothesay Avenue (reconstruct 250 feet of 30-inch storm sewer) is intended to help relieve some of the
pressure there, or responsibilities of the City - or what does the City Manager have in mind regarding the
purpose of this particular expenditure. Councillor Green stated that he is completely in'favour of doing what we
can to facilitate relieving the matter of flooding there. Mr. Barfoot advised that there are some bad local
flooding conditions along Rothesay Avenue and this proposed work is at the Ziebart waterproofing location where
there is a lot of ponding across the road and it is due to a bad sewer in back of the property, there; this
proposed work would reconstruct that section and relieve a bad local problem in that area of Rothesay Avenue. He
added that this was recommended as part of the scheme recommended in the original Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report
which we are following, in this case. Councillor Green asked if it is Mr. Barfoot's intent to get at this
particular item in the Capital Budget under way as soon as possible. Mr. Barfoot replied that same is the intent
of this early approval of the said preliminary Capital Programme. Councillor A. Vincent maintained that 250 feet
of 30-inch storm sewer cannot be put in at the said location on Rothesay Avenue for a cost of $60.00 per foot.
Mr. Barfoot stated that he has not seen the detailed estimate regarding this job. Councillor A. Vincent stated
that he was merely seeking information on this item, and was not wishing to hold up the matter; he added that he
would rather approve more money for the job, and if the job does not use up all that approved amount, that is
fine. Mr. Barfoot explained that these estimates are made up for cost of material, cost of iabour, special
conditions such as pavement replacement and what have you, that might occur in that area, the difficulty of
working behind buildings or around other features - these jobs are looked at and measured up, and then estimated,
based upon our experience of what it cost us for a similar job - and that is why we have this particular estimate
of ~15,000.00 - he does not think that the size of the pipe and the length are the only factors, as the Council
is aware, in doing a job. Councillor Parfitt stated she would like to have a clearer picture - for example, how
much is the City going to borrow on capital projects this month - to what limits - and have everything, that the
Council can sit down with the staff and perhaps the staff can advise Council,because the priorities might be
different. Councillor Kipping asked if the sum of $15,000.00 is the final figure for the 250 feet of 30-inch
348
zen/era~
~,,,., t'b1?5'zfr.
~Tp(,
.2)en1p//.tfpy!
:l..'{ t?- .:l ~ 4
c~_/?/6~ ~
g/ :lJ/7/~eil/17
C/-ttj /J? !JI"
h.6~.2. ~~D"~
C/fy (!t?s-l-$
C/aim to
,Fm(J'~ellc'y
lf1edsa/'d's
Or~*n/';?dl-c/P,
I'e p{<<I??_~t!'s
J'I~/"$
(! tI' $I! :;
l!arbPU/7
~r/;tje '
Ih:5Jtrah(!'e '
[' d'ed"Uco-C/b/e.
s..T pp/J C>~d?~ hS
Prrolec-t.. 1'9 sspC'.
/V'e>,6/
i--I/r/J1.f. f?p/;c
r~ %/jC<f"2)~
ret"l'u/-cs
(,Ia. f? n
~,6/e P .3~)
~
storm sewer.
feet.
Mr. Barfoot replied that that is the best estimate we have, at the moment, for the whole 250
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
.
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, and by Mr. R. E.
Thompson, Chief of Rehabilitation Services, Urban Redevelopment Office, the bid of Grove Construction Ltd.
in the amount of $6,773.00 be accepted for the demolition of 220-224 Charlotte Street and 81 Britain
Street, providing that proof of the necessary insurance coverage can be provided:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the City Manager and Mr. Thompson in the above matter, advising
that the above named properties are presently being purchased by the City of Saint John and immediately
title has been transferred to the City demolit~on will be carried out, be received and filed.
I
Councillor Gould asked how the tender call was worded regarding the above noted demolitions:
were tenders asked for on the individual properties, or as a group of properties. Mr. Barfoot replied that
he will have to obtain that information. Councillor Hodges recalled that there had been a court case
involving 228 Charlotte Street, he believes, and he asked if that has been cleared up. It was noted that
any problems that may be encountered regarding the transfer of these properties to the City is a problem
for the Legal Department to deal with. In reply to Councillor Hodges' question, Councillor Green stated
that there is no problem whatsoever, and the property transfer is alright.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, glvlng a breakdown
of costs incurred to date by City forces, arising out of the storm of February 2nd, 1976, which total
~112,937.65, and advising that an estimate of the damage to the Courtenay Bay causeway has not yet been
finalized, and the same with parks and beaches, and stating that damages to insurable buildings are not
included - and further advising that there were reports of damage to 24 City-owned buildings involving
roofing, flashing, windows, and frozen pipes -- be received and filed.
.
In the above matter, Mr. Barfoot advised that a claim has now been submitted to the Emergency
Measures Organization for this work, for that amount of money, basically, and there will be a further
claim submitted. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he asked for an itemized list of what damage was
done to City-owned properties, and he stated he would like to know what damage was done to the West Side
fire station. He stated that he is convinced that there was damage done to some buildings and the City
has not even got around to find out the damage, yet. Mr. Barfoot advised that there was damage done to
the Police Station on Manawagonish Road (to the roof, two ceilings and walls) but this is all insurable.
Councillor A. Vincent asked what damage is listed to the Prince William Street old City Hall. Mr. Barfoot
replied that we have not got estimates on most of this dam?ge as yet. Councillor A. Vincent interjected
that half the tower is off the old City Hall and it is still leaking, and he is wondering when we are,
going to start repairing it - he added that these are concerns to him, and he presumes they probably are
concerns to this Council, as well, that we should make minor repairs; every time it rains, the rain goes
through the boards that are left on the portion of this tower that remains. He stated that he would like
some assurance that he can have a list of the properties in question, and he would also like to know an
estimate of cost of temporarily repairing the said City Hall tower. The Mayor replied that we will have
that information for Councillor A. Vincent. In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's point that he is concerned
about minor, temporary repairs being made to stop the water coming in the said tower, the Mayor'stated
that once the adjusters have seen the damage in this regard, it can be dealt with.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, in reply to the
question raised at the March 1st, 1976 Council meeting as to whether or not there was a $500,000.00
deductible feature concerning claims with regard to the harbour bridge insurance policy, advising that the
General Manager of the Harbour Bridge Authority has informed the City that policies covering the buildings,
office contents, and motor vehicles are subject to deductibles ranging from $25.00 to $250.00, and that
the policy covering Bridge Property Damage and Bridge Use and Occupancy providing coverage to $22,000.00
is, however, subject to a deductible feature of $150,000.00 and not $500,000.00 as contained in the
query -- be received and filed.
.
Mr. Barfoot advised that there is a $150,000.00 deductible on the main bridge property damage
and bridge use and occupancy - you would have to have major damage in order to collect on that policy.
Noting that the insurance rates have 'gone up considerably since we started insuring the harbour bridge,
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to have an itemized account of the money, the insurance
from the time the bridge was built - he noted that we have never had a claim - any claims we got we paid
the first ~150,000.00 - to him, that is not good business; he also wants to know why our insurance has
increased. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that this is from the Bridge Authority. Councillor A. Vincent maintained I
that the said Authority is our Authority - we established them - and we have the majority of appointees on
that Authority among the appointments made by the City, the Province and the Federal Government - it is
our Commission - the Harbour Bridge Authority was set up by an Act initiated by this Council, and he
maintains that it is therefore our Authority. The Mayor replied that we will get the information by next
week.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and Pye voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, in reply to Common
Council resolution which requested a report with reference to the request made at the February 23rd last
meeting of Council by the Saint John Policemen's ,Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. that the
hiring policy for the City pertaining to the Saint John Police Department be made public knowledge to the
citizens of the City of Saint John -- advising that the submitted report from Mr. D. J. French, Director
of Personnel and Training, details the present requirements as approved by Council and the procedure in
hiring recruits, and gives a breakdown of recruits hired since 1974 by place of origin - and further
advising that the Council has approved the policy of hiring trained recruits; for instance, the Council
resolved on September 9th, 1974 that in accordance with the recommendation of the Chief of Police, which
is concurred in by the City Manager, the new class of recruits for the Police Department, plus the present
probationary constables, for a total of 20 candidates, be trained at the Atlantic Police Academy in
Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island; and further advising that the said Police Academy is a professional
training school set up for the purpose of training municipal police departments and provincial agencie~ in
.
~
r"
.
I
I
.
I
,
I
I
fI/"'/h~
e..O//cy re
. pp/tc-e.2)e.
Police ,th;.
.7Jej7Y- rew
eA/e.,c
C','-&. t11 ,.,
S,[Jbj/(j
Prdedj.fls.
/1'0,6/
~
349
New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island, and that entry into the Saint John Police Department is
certainly open to qualified residents 'of Saint John who are willing to, acquire the necessary training -- be
received and filed and a copy of this correspondence be sent to the said Union.
Councillor MacGowan made the suggestion that if we were to send brochures about the Atlantic Police
Academy to our high schools to try and interest the students, and to let them know that there is this Academy
available and that funds are available for their education, it would seem to be a good way of getting the young
people interested in becoming policemen. Mr. French replied that we have not in the past sent the brochures to
the high schools, but we had the Police Department to the high schools to lecture to the students and tell them
about the standards of the Police Academy; this is done every year. Councillor MacGowan felt it would be worthwhil.
to also get brochures out to these young people informing them about the Police Academy, adding that this was
just a suggestion.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if, in recelvlng and filing the above correspondence from the City Manager,
the Council would be reaffirming any previous policy or any previous statement or stand it may have taken on the
hiring policy. The Mayor replied that if it were received and filed, the Council is accepting the report as it
is written.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he has always supported the training programme in Charlottetown, but
does think that we should try to hire Saint John men and women that are prepared to take the following course at
the Atlantic Police Academy and sign that they will go and that they will pick whatever salary is paid by Man-
power, or whoever pays it. He stated that he does not think that we should just "close the door", and that he
would like to see this matter tabled until the Council can meet with the Chief of Police and ask him to consider
hiring these people as outlined by Councillor A. Vincent's suggested procedure outlined above. The Mayor felt
that we are all in agreement to that and that they understand the problem, and that the Saint John boys and girls
should have priority if they will attend the said course. Councillor A. Vincent replied that he understands that
the Chief of Police is only hiring, and the Police Department is only hiring if a candidate comes from the said
Police Academy, and stated it is his opinion that we should agree to hire from that college - fine - but then if
anyone wants to go they should be able to have the chance. Mr. French advised that Manpower will not pay if the
person becomes an employee of the City of Saint John, so we must have them come in to the office, send them to
Manpower where they are selected from Manpower, and then sent over to the Academy. Mr. French noted that Coun-
cillor MacGowan's suggestion was that there be a little more publicity from the Personnel Office of the City in
interesting prospective candidates from Saint John. Councillor Parfitt spoke in support of encouraging people
from the Saint John area to take advantage of the police course at the said Police Academy. Councillor Gould
advised that he is in agreement with the present policy of hiring people who come trained already from Atlantic
Police Academy. Councillor Green stated that he wishes to support the Chief of Police and that he believes he
has ever since the Chief was hired, but he wished to stress the point that we should take great pains to en-
courage our own young people to be given the opportunity to go to the said Academy and be trained, stating it is
his feeling that they would be more interested in the welfare of their own city by coming from this area and
showing enthusiasm for their own area, that they would like to be trained for a police constable; he feels that
maybe with more pUblic relations that we should encourage these local young people, boys and girls, that by
following the procedure outlined by Mr. French and going to Manpower, and so on, they can get this training and
be given a favourable reaction as far as being hired. Noting that the Academy is booked in advance for a year in
these courses, he stated his concern is that those local young people who would like to take the training cannot
get in, and that we are restricting the hiring of our own young people. He stated that he wants to support the
Chief, but he thinks we should also give our own young people a chance in this end, as well.
Councillor Davis recalled that this Council decided some time ago that it would be best if the recruits
to the Police Department had some previous knowledge of police work, and stated he feels that this Atlantic
Police Academy is probably alright, but he does not think that we meant to restrict their eduction to this one
Academy, and stated he thinks that would be a bad policy. He noted that the way this is worded, is that it
"requires" all applicants to have a certificate from that one particular academy, and he stated he thinks that
that is probably something that the Council should correct. He stated that, in his opinion, other than that, the
policy is perfectly alright, and it is perfectly logical way of doing it. He noted that if there are a couple of
local boys who are interested, certainly have not hastened to enroll in this academy, according to the report
that is before Council in the matter, because the 27 spaces that are reserved for New Brunswickers are never
filled. He added that if there is a sudden demand from local potential candidates, we should know about it and
make the proper reservations and have them attend the Academy; he felt they will certainly be hired when the
vacancies occur. Councillor Hodges felt that the problem is the person coming off the street who has no police
training and wants a new job immediately, and he noted that Councillor Davis has stated that we have not looked
into angle of it, and perhaps that is where we are remiss, and this is what we should do. He added that Coun-
cillor Davis has not suggested how we are going to do that, unless we are going to change the whole policy which
we set up in the last year. Councillor Pye expressed the view that the local men should always be given the
preference, wherever possible.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he does not think there is any question as to whether we do, or do not,
support the Chief of Police, and he noted that it is a policy that the Council sets and not a directive ,of
staff - so he does not think it is a question of supporting, or not supporting, the Chief. He added that,
obviously, the question as it relates to local people is self-explanatory -- naturally, we would all want our
local people hired. He stated he would like to find out when the policy was set, and who was affected by it;
that is, the previous policy that is under discussion, that was set by Council; he wants to know if it referred
to that group of 20 people or whether it referred to the hiring policy in the future of the Saint John Police
Department; he noted that the September 9th, 1974 Council resolution with reference to policy, clearly states
that it refers to that group of people and it does not refer to the future hiring policy of the Saint John Police
Department. At this time, Mr. French read the September 9th, 1974 Council resolution, namely, "RESOLVED that in
accordance with the recommendation of the Chief of Police, which is concurred in by the City Manager, the new
class of recruits from the Police Department plus the present Probationary Constables for a total of twenty
candidates be trained at the Atlantic Police Academy in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island.". Councillors Green
and Davis noted that the resolution refers to twenty candidates only and was a one-shot matter. Mr. French noted
that the question that is raised is: did the said Council resolution establish a policy or not. Councillor M.
Vincent felt that it did not establish a policy when it speaks of twenty people only, and that regarding that
twenty people that may have been the decision or the wishes of Council for that group, and that it then becomes a
matter as to whether this is going to be the policy the Council is going to adopt, which is why he asked the
question as to whether this was going to be a reaffirmation of any previous Council resolution. He felt that the
Council would be highly advised to consider having the Chief of Police, the Deputy Chief of Police, the City
Manager, and the Director of Personnel and Training and perhaps the Executive of the Union meet and go over this,
and then after they have thrashed out the various points on it, then bring it back into Council and consider it
as a policy.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until a meeting is held
between the Chief of Police, the Deputy Chief of Police, the City Manager and the representative of Saint John
Policemen's Protective Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. regarding hiring policy for the Police
Department.
35"0
~
C',iy St1h~I'-It1
h1drsh t'1"t?e.f
.//ood/J7!!
/I1t?rdlIOl''' u /r1
on blaff- 'p'f?r-
mit-s I"e 6//,f-
aOl?dru(!t!1' on
/17 GI€";, F.,;;,I/s
.;J /?e?a
fl. 13. r;,' /berl; q.
C-Ien ,c;.,//s
f'rl!l'pe~t{ ~Wl7el'.
I 'P/,;/f1I1. /lLV/5. t"o~
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors MacGowan, Davis, Kipping,
Parfitt and Gould voting "nay".
,
Consideration was given to the legal opinion, dated March 4th, 1976, from the City Solicitor
with reference to the request made to Common Council on March 1st, 1916 in a letter received from Mr.
Adrian B. Gilbert, Q. C.', solicitor on behalf,of the representatives of the property owners in the area of
Glen Falls that the City forthwith stop all buildings being constructed under present building permits,
and that no more building permits be issued to anybody regarding the said area until the flooding sit~ation
is remedied. The City Solicitor's letter containing this opinion advises that while the Common Council
cannot by the exercise of discretion grant or refuse a buiding permit, the Planning Advisory Committee, by
virtue of Section 34(3)(g) of the Community Planning Act, may prohibit the erection of any building or
structure if certain conditions exist; that it is the City Solicitor's opoinion that the said Section
cannot be utilized by the said Committee in a broad, sweeping fashion so as to prohibit the erection of
any building or structure on any site where it would otherwise be permitted under the Zoning By-Law
without first providing the opportunity to the land owner to be heard - in other words, the Committee
cannot give its opinion and thereby arbitrarily and adversely affect a large area and many sites in
advance - that is, property owners must not be deprived arbitrarily of their right to use their land;
that, however, it is his opinion that Section 34(3)(g) can be utilized by the Planning Advisory Committee,
if the said Committee decides to have, as its policy, all applications from property owners in the Glen
Falls area for building permits submitted to the Advisory Committee by the Building Inspector before the
building permit is issued -- the application and the particular site in question, can then be examined to
assist the Advisory Committee in arriving at its opinion, under the said Section as to whether the site is
"marshy, subject to flooding, excessively steep, or otherwise unsuitable for a proposed purpose by virtue
of its soil or topography" -- if the opinion of the Advisory Committee is that the site is unsuitable for
the proposed purpose "by virtue of its soil or topography", and'such an opinion is arrived at in good
faith, the Advisory Committee is empowered to prohibit, "the erection of any building or structure on any
site where it would otherwise be permitted under the by-law" (the said Section 34(3)(g) reads as follows,
".....a Zoning By-Law mentioned therein shall divide the Municipality into zones, prescribe the purposes
for which land, building and structures in any zone may be used, and prohibit the use of land, building
and structures for any other purpose, and may prohibit the erection of any building or structure on any
site where it would otherwise be permitted under the by-law, when, in the opinion of the Advisory Committee
or"Commission, the site is marshy, subject to flooding, excessively steep or otherwise unsuitable fora
proposed purpose by virtue of its soil, or topography."); that apart from the Planning Advisory Committee's
role under Section 34(3)(g) of the Community Planning Act, it is the City Solicitor's opinion that a
solution to the Glen Falls problem must be found in the technical and engineering area from a physical
improvement point of view -- it is difficult to foresee even what legislative changes can be asked for
from the Province in the way of Community Planning Act amendments, when one considers legislation dealing
with zoning, building regulations, and property rights are always a compromise of conflicting interests.
The City Solicitor's letter notes that Mr. Gilbert's letter on behalf of the residents of Glen Falls area
has only been examined from a legal standpoint as it relates to the request that no other building permits
be issued and that stop work orders be issued on existing construction, and that Mr. Gilbert's letter
contains other requests which are technical in nature and which the City Manager will, the City Solicitor
assumes, be commenting upon. The City Solicitor's letter concludes by stating that he is not qualified to
say one word as to the technical problems that might exist surrounding this matter; but if the Common
Council believes that action has to be taken to meet the needs of the Glen Falls residents afflicted by
the recent storms and floodings, and having regard to preserving a proper balance as it relates to the
rights of other property owners, it is the City Solicitor's opinion the Common Council should act, not in
the role of a legislative body, but in its administrative role, through technical advice and recommendation
from the City Manager and other expert consultants, deemed by the Council necessary to achieve the desired
solution. The said letter from the City Solicitor also discusses the regulations contained in the Zoning
By-Law and the Building By-Law with regard to regulation of the use of land.
When asked for his comments, Mr. Rodgers advised that a complete answer to the question that was
put to Council on March 1st last is contained in his letter of March 4th, 1976, and that the matter dealt
with in his letter is the request put forward by the property owners with respect to no further building
permits be issued in the Glen Falls area for construction and that stop work orders be issued on construction
that is presently taking place, and that his report deals with that only, and, really, the answer to that
is that Council does not have the authority to do it. He stated that there are other areas touched on and
maybe the Council members might have some questions in clarification.
Councillor Kipping stated that the City Solicitor's letter of March 4th was quite revealing to a
good many of the Council members. He noted that the motion that was proposed at the March 1st, 1976
Council meeting, was not voted upon, namely, "That no more building permits be issued in the region or any
part of the region which affects the watershed of the area drained by Marsh Creek until the situation is
remedied." and that in order to do that the Council would have to perhaps request the Planning Advisory
Committee to suspend the law and he is, not sure that the Council should give any direction to the said
Committee. He stated that, for his own part, since he made the said motion, which was a limited motion
(he added that since that March 1st Council meeting, he learned through contact with the public that this
motion was rather widely misunderstood). He stated that it was not his intention to st'op any construction
that was under way - he could not support that kind of action; however, his purpose in making the motion
at that time was simply because he thought that the Council should not aggravate a situation which is
already very aggravated and very serious to that the Council might refrain from issuing any building
permits for a limited period of time until the Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report is in, the problem is defined,
and the remedies are under way - then, Council could go ahead and say that the building permits could now
be issued because the project was "on track". He stated that because of what the City Solicitor says in
his above named letter, that it is not possible for Council actually to do even that and in the circum-
stances he thinks the only thing he can do is withdraw the motion that was made on March 1st because it
is, in the circumstances, an illegal motion -- the Council does not have the authority to limit building
permits in any case. He stated that, in any case, with the approval of Councillor MacGowan, the seconder
of the said March 1st motion, he thinks that motion can be formally withdrawn, if necessary, and the
Council should think about doing something else.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the City Solicitor,
dated March 4th, 1976, submitting a legal opinion with reference to the request made on March 1st last to
the Common Council in a letter received from Mr. Adrian B. Gilbert, Q. C., solicitor on behalf of the
representatives of the property owners in the Glen Falls that the City forthwith stop all buildings being
constructed under present building permits, and that no more building permits be issued to anybody re-
garding the said area until the flooding situation is remedied be received and filed and a copy of same
be sent to the Planning Advisory Committee for the information of the Committee.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he feels perhaps the City Solicitor in his letter of March
4th, 1976 covers a three-fold area in that he has told the Council that it does not have the authority, to
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
,~35J
.
I
I tl-/en ~/h
, " .t/re6J
lYJt1mt-pr/~
on 6/./;1-,Pr!!.
171/-15 'rk,bJ
t!()l7stn~d-/Q.
.
I
IJ'/dN;h
e,.ee/r
.f/t?fJL; I?f
.
I
I
fI.a!l~rJe
Sf. WQ~I?
Seh/I!!!~S'
5..T ~n.
!/QS'p' S6~
. /Jf.;;r:>A
C'"eeA
lil....
put a moratorium or a stop on the issuing of building permits. He asked for confirmation that that is one, clear
point, stating that he just wants to put the points ln three separate areas, and he was asking if that was the
first one that the City Solicitor was clearly saying. Mr. Rodgers replied that in dealing with the request - and
one request was that no further building permits be issued - under present regulations the Council cannot use
that discretion and say "no". Councillor M. Vincent noted that the City Solicitor in the said letter is pro-
viding a second step in that there is a possibility that Council can change the zoning; he stated that he thinks,
from his conversation with the City Solicitor, that the change in zoning could cause the people in Glen Falls
more problems that they presently have - he asked if that is what the City Solicitor is saying. Mr. Rodgers
replied that the Council can re-zone; whether it causes more problems or not, he does not know, but he thinks
that the Council should be aware that when the re-zoning takes place and new regulations are enacted the ap-
plicant will then have to comply with those regulations, and once he complies, you still have to issue a building
permit. Councillor M. Vincent asked the following question: even after the applicant does comply, can the permit
then still be issued. Mr. Rodgers replied that it has to be issued. Councillor M. Vincent noted that the third
area, from reading the City Solicitor's said letter, is that the City Solicitor is suggesting that the Council
cannot direct the Planning Advisory Committee - it is solely a Planning Advisory Committee decision as to what
the Committee might want to take action on. Mr. Rodgers replied that it is an opinion of the Advisory Committee,
and he says that the authority that has been given to the Committee is very unusual because it has been an
authority that really places a Committee in a position of suspending a law that has been passed by a legislative
body - the Council - and for that reason, he is saying that for the Advisory Committee to arrive at that opinion
it cannot do it in a broad, sweeping fashion by saying, "in our opinion, such and such an area is subject to
flooding and no further permits shall be issued", but, instead, it can say as a policy that all applications from
individual owners for building permits must come to the Advisory Committee, and then, based on the information
the applicant puts forward or any other people who are opposing the issuing of the building permit put forward,
then the Advisory Commitee can come to an opinion as to whether the site is subject to flooding or other reasons,
and the permit shall not be issued. Noting that, earlier in this meeting of Council, there was the request for
information to be obtained by the City Manager on the report from the Province of New Brunswick. He asked if
there is any word on any further delays, or whether that report is still expected to be available by the end of
-March. Mr. Barfoot replied that, to his knowledge, that report is on schedule. Councillor M. Vincent explained
that what he is saying is: he does not think that the people in Glen Falls are trying to stop progress or stop
developments - he thinks that perhaps they may have seized on this area as a way to try to encourage the Council
members to take some positive steps of action for them; he stated he cannot believe that the Glen Falls people
want to bring the builders or developers any hardship, at all; therefore, he thinks that for the Council simply
to have the motion in question withdrawn and not offer anything further as to what is going to happen is not
really good business; and he does not think that any of the Council members wants to stop development out there.
He felt that the next question the Council has to ask itself is: when are we going to meet the Province, which
was asked several months ago. He asked: if that report is delayed, is it the wishes of this Council to go on and
then meet with the Province. He stated that he would like to have the answers to those type of questions
now that we have been told what we can legally do, and cannot do, in relation to a moratorium on construction,
and that he can only raise them under this item.
Councillor Davis stated that notwithstanding the fact that the report has been delayed, and probably
delayed for engineering reasons, this Council can do quite a bit before it receives that report - the Council
knows pretty well what that report is going to say in general terms - the Council also knows that it is going to
cost a certain number of millions of dollars - we do not know where we are going to get those millions, and we
should be working on that; he thinks that would be a lot more constructive than moratoriums or things of that
nature, but we are not working on that now; perhaps staff is, but the Council is 'not, he added, and he would hate
to blame engineers for delaying our actions. He noted that we could be doing this simultaneously, and that he
has felt all that that is probably what we should be doing - that is, exploring the different ways of getting
funds so that we can get the water out there faster than it is getting out, now. He noted that the moratorium
that was asked for was simply to prevent the water from filling in there faster, while our job is to get the
water out, faster; so, he thinks that is what we should be working on, really, and he does not see why we are
not.
Councillor Kipping stated that if that is the actual sum-up of the situation - that we should be
working on the problem of getting the water out of there faster, and he is inclined to think it is - then there
is really not much we can do without the financing that we know is needed in order to remove some of the structures
or modify them, so that the water will get out faster - but, in the meantime, it seems to him that what the Glen
Falls Flood Committee essentially wants is to make sure that we are not "asleep at the switch" which, he has to
admit, it has looked that way in the past - we have not moved fast enough - they know that the rainy spring is
still coming and that the rainy fall is also coming, and we have got to do something - and that was what was
behind his making the motion to perhaps not issue any further building permits; something tangible has got to be
done regarding this flooding problem; he believes that the only thing we can do is what Councillor Davis says _
now that we have had letters from very powerful interests in the city he thinks we might see that some action
will take place a little faster than it did, previously. He noted the letters that have been received at this
meeting of Council from the Saint John Board of Trade, et cetera, and stated that now, he thinks, we will not be
allowed to "sleep at the switch" and the Glen Falls Flood Committee has probably achieved its purpose by getting
that group to come to life and let us know which end is up on this matter. Councillor Green recalled that at the
meeting that was held a few weeks ago with the Glen Falls group, that group came up with certain suggestions, as
did 'the Council members and members of City staff who were present; he added that he takes exception to Coun-
cillor Davis' suggestion that we are not doing anything; he, recalled that he himself several months ago had
suggested the use of pumps with a low pressure head on them, and so on, and he stated that he will be awfully
disturbed if the City Manager and the staff are not exploring all the realms of where we can obtain the financial
responsibilities to achieve this, and he hopes that when the anticipated report is brought back at the end of
March there will be suggestions as to where we can obtain the money to do the job, and he will be very disap~
pointed if we do not have something of that line along with it.
Councillor Parfitt advised that there is another obstruction now in the Marsh Creek: the shack of Mr.
Cook that Councillor A. Vincent was interested in having removed from the Provincial Government property on
Rothesay Avenue, has been thrown into the Creek along with the wheelbarrow.
In addition to Councillor Kipping's remarks, Councillor Davis stated that he would hate to think that a
letter from the Saint John Board of Trade would influence him more than a letter from Mrs. Elsie Wayne _ it just
does not.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that the reason he kept asking for a report about the wooden sewers at
Haymarket Square is that part of our problem is that the Saint John General Hospital sewer connects and dumps on
the upper side of the Marsh Creek, so he is told; he would like the City Manager to look into that and, surely,
we could get the Department of Health, or someone, to at least put that sewer On the lower side of the said Marsh
Creek bridge. He stated that, also, he would like to know if the Federal Government has any interest in some
land down there, and if it does, why the City does not approach that Government to clean up its own land. The
Mayor replied that the City Solicitor knows about this - that it has been discovered that the Federal Government
owns some land there. Councillor A. Vincent stated that those are the two points he wants to make clear: one _
he understood that the Hospital (sewer) was going to run out into Courtenay Bay and there was some decision of
cost and they changed it, it is still dumping into Marsh Creek - he stated that he learned recently from an ex-
Deputy Mayor of the City that when he was on the Council and they tried to have it changed and it was supposed to
352
J1far.5.1 ae'tf'k
~/e>b,L/Pf
$RH/er
;P,.,dpl"+
1?~t:I.,8R/'h L-I-,t',
,,~,;;C-
bl-kn k//s
.R rt?a
lI1'r.,;rlt?r/~m ~
b/dff- ?erm/i-s
S. T ::ZJd. T,..,..,f.
l!1al'~4 Creek
.f!/DOa/ ".7
~
be changed within a short time and to the best of his knowledge it was not changed; thirdly, he wants to
know if the (aboideau) gate is on the wrong side - are the gates still there, or are they off. In clarifi~
cation of this matter to Council, Mr. Barfoot advised that the sewage from the General Hospital runs into
Marsh Creek and now it happens, to run in above Marsh Creek because years ago when the gates were at
Rothesay Avenue the tide came right up to Marsh Creek and all the sewers discharged above the gates
because if they discharged below the gates the tide would come up into the houses along City Road _ so,
all the sewers which were laid one hundred years or more ago all discharged above the Marsh bridge _ there
are no gates on that structure now and the water flows straight through but because the holes are small it
will tend to build up there in a storm. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understood that through
negotiations and during Mayor Teed's time - during that administration - that there was some money negot-
iated and talked about when they tore down the old Prince Edward-Clarence-Erin Streets and put in the new
sewers that way and up where the New Brunswick Publishing Company is, and, so on, that there was big mains
and main sewers but they were supposed to be connected with the General Hospital - that was part of the
money given to the City at that time - and if it is not done, Councillor A. Vincent stated he thinks we
should do it because he does not think it is a very healthy situation to have a sewer from a hospital,
even though it is upstream, running into that location mentioned. Mr. Barfoot recalled that there was a
scheme at that time to run a sewer from Marsh bridge right down to where the new causeway is and the City
has an easement reserved for that purpose but, to his knowledge, there never were any funds made available
for that job - it was a lot cheaper in those days than it would be, today. Councillor M. Vincent stated
that he would like to have a report on it.
.
I
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the Mayor and Council would agree to instructing staff to make
arrangements for a Council-Cabinet meeting if the anticipated report is not received by the end of March.
The Mayor replied that he thinks that is fair, and agreeable.
I
Councillor Pye noted that certain members of Council seem to entertain the idea that building
permits cannot be refused in this instant, but according to Section 34(3)(g) referred to in Mr. Rodgers'
report the last line indicates that a building permit may be refused if the topography of an area is found
to be unsuitable, and he pointed ,out that the topography consists of the surface features, meaning that if
the area indicates that by erecting a building there, by stripping trees, bushes, et cetera, a run-off is
going to result, you are naturally going to have trouble in the area below - if it is only a foot below
there is going to be a run-off unless that is taken care of - so, under that section the Planning Advisory
Committee can definitely prohibit the erection of any structures. He further noted that the next five
items on the agenda of this meeting deal with letters of opposition to the restriction in regard to
building permits, and he noted that 'they all, among other things, are very much in sympathy with the
plight of the Glen Falls residents, but the people of Glen Falls are not interested in sympathy, he
pointed out - they are interested in concerted action - action that is conducive to results, and, based on
this, he wished to submit a motion. Noting that there was a motion already made and which was being
spoken to by the Council members, he stated that he would therefore submit a recommendation, namely:- That
no additional building permits be issued in the Glen Falls area as requested by the Glen Falls Association
until the Board of Trade, the Automotive group of Rothesay Avenue, the Saint John Construction Association,
the East End land holders, and the Saint John District Home Builders Association unite with the Glen Falls
Association and exert their combined pressures upon the Provincial Government in an effort to induce the
said Government to take immediate steps to correct the flood threat in the Glen Falls area by immediately
dredging the Marsh Creek and establishing the three reservoirs as recommended in the Proctor & Redfern
Ltd. report of 1974.
.
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Board of Trade advising
that it has been the Board's opinion that any solution to the problems of flooding in East Saint John
should be based on the Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report; that the Board has attempted to gain further knowledge
of the problems and have met with engineers familiar with Glen Falls and from this background the Board
feels that any actions taken before the final report of the consultants is evaluated would be premature,
and that a complete moratorium of construction would 'appear to be overkill and could have detrimental
long-term effects on future growth, and that decisions must be based on fact and thorough investigation,
and until this information is available, such action should not be taken; and advising that the Board is
concerned, as are all citizens, for people suffering in this part of our city, and the Board also has a
concern for people who have invested in property in the total area, and that there are individuals who
have invested life savings in their homes and indiscriminate action could affect their property values --
be received and filed.
.
At this time, Councillor Pye proposed to introduce as a motion the recommendation he had made
above, and the Mayor advised that this proposed motion can be dealt with when other items on the Council
agenda have been completed.
On motion of CouncIlor M. Vincent I
~~~~-7~~~ Seconded by Councillor Gould
C'tt''7tf"../ /,,,<<~ RESOLVED that the letter from Lawson Motors Limited, Central Equip-
7i-i- Pl'PYI"~~';; ent, Tri-Province Leasing, D & J Motors, Atlantic Auto Parts, Fairweather Tires Ltd. and East Side
i)1~ ~~~~e>Jr.S Motors, advising that they are totally in favour of doing everything in their power to help with the Glen
~k1nrf/,"/1<<-tf6 Falls flooding problem but strenuously oppose any building "freeze" in other than the immediate Glen Falls
~,-,zfs, N/I""" looding area, be received and filed. C
71 res ,(-t-H.,' ,.6q,
~/'P{e ~~~PJ-S Consideration was given to a letter from Mr. Wallace S. Turnbull of Palmer, O'Connell, Leger, I
/?/ ~ // Turnbull & Turnbull, Barristers, advising that he has been retained by a group of landholders and business , 'd
crr)fJ7 ,-~//~ men in the East End of the City of Saint John and that he requests an opportunity to appear before this ___
~('e>e>~/)?j7 meeting of Council. The letter stated that it is his understanding that at the March 1st Council meeting
a delegation was heard from the Glen Falls area requesting the City to impose a "construction freeze" in
t~"!,~ce~ the East End of the City, and that he further understands that the Council deferred a decision on this
~ ,..,~~,,/ request pending a report from the City staff, and that he also understands that such report may be avail-
~~~ t"~,,~A able at this meeting of Council, and that very shortly the Council will receive a report from Proctor &
,(.~ ::;.e-lit ~ /;.:: Redfern with specific proposals for correcting the flood situation. The letter states that the group Mr.
0/'.,:;;, lot';.'? ff Turnbull represents have every sympathy with the residents of Glen Falls and the recurring problems which
~p~ ~ not only they, but all persons in the said East End have recently encountered with respect to flooding,
~p"~r;~~ p,,' and advises that, apart from the legal restrictions on the City, it is his submission that the imposition .
~/J l)e;oJ?7/'~~ of a construction freeze will not solve or in any way alleviate the recurring flood problem, and that it
f6tjl'r is his group's opinion that steps must be taken immediately to prevent the flooding and this can only be
accomplished by Governmental action. Noting that there has been a slowdown in commercial and industrial
development recently in Saint John, the letter states that to further restrict commercial, industrial and
residential development in the said East area is, in his opinion, and his clients' opinion, a negative
step in the development of the city, and, further, will not have any beneficial effect on curing the Marsh
~
r"
.
I
!J1ar.5h
I..... ~::A-~//s
"c/tJ,d . ,
IYl pn;J.corlf,(
tJl1 p/d4;
8/Y'mrt:"5
WO//aCd 5.
7ie;>h.l~//
.
I
.
SJ:a
l1.ssoc.7nC'.
Ills". ~ (/,.~#iJ
:J}~(lelo"p "7-dn
/Is St;?e. P,
S.Tq.~/'d.
I9SSl?c.
S~Olmro ck
1?~~,! f.-hI.,
I St' ~r#s.~
1(~~I?#r.
~(pmaCbid,.,
7Jlalr??~
~.;affh,,/)IC~"
.
.....
;~35:3
Creek flood situation. The letter states that the group which he represents are as concerned as the residents
of Glen Falls in exerting as much effort as possible on those who have the responsibility for preventing the
recurrence of the flooding and it is their opinion that this problem can only be resolved by' carrying out the
necessary flood control solutions and not by delaying such action through the restriction of any further develop~
ment in this area; and further states that since the receipt of the said Proctor & Redfern report is imminent,
it is their view that the City must give top priority to ensuring that sufficient fundsa are provided by all
levels of Government to cure the flooding problem rather than imposing restrictions on development which can
only have the effect of maintaining the status quo which does not provide any solution to the existing residents
and business establishments in the area; and further states that unless the flooding problem is cured by pro-
viding the necessary run-off facilities, those already suffering flood damage will continue to do so with or
without a restriction on further development. It was noted that Mr. Turnbull was present at the meeting.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that ,Mr. Turnbull be given permission to speak.
Mr. Turnbull advised that he appreciated the opportunity, but in view of the action the Council has
taken he thinks that the interests of all concerned would be best served by his not speaking, other than to
point out that it is not just residential tenants who suffer damage in flooding but also those businesses, and
they themselves are very interested in seeing that that action is taken to cure the problem, once and for all.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above noted letter from Mr. Wallace S. Turnbull be
received and filed.
Prior to the above motion, Councillor Davis asked Mr. Turnbull's oplnlon on a thought he has had on
the appointment of a commission consisting of business people and residents down there to handle this entire
affair - to by-pass Council. In reply, Mr. Turnbull stated that he really has not given that much consideration;
he stated he understands there is a historical precedent in New Brunswick for the creation of marshland com-
missions - in the Tantramar area, in particular; he noted that it may have some desired result, and that his
initial reaction is that it is often that you create a commission to defer the solution to a problem further on
into the future and that the best action that can be taken will be armed with the evidence that he understands
will come from the Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report is to ensure that those levels of government who have the
responsibility for ensuring the clean-up get it done; in no small way does he think that there have not been
participation by Governments in the creation of a substantial portion of this problem and it is going to be the
trick of this community and this Council, because the Council, with all due respect, are the ones who are the
most easily available to the people being influenced, to band together and see that this thing is cleaned up;
if, ultimately, a commission should evolve - fine -- his initial reaction is that a commission might just merely
be the postponing of deferring to a commission the solution which he thinks the Council may be getting -- it is
the getting of the money to carry out the job that is going to be the important matter.
Read a letter from the Saint John Construction Association Inc., registering their concern in regards
to the proposed curtailment of construction in the Glen Falls watershed, and advising that they would appreciate
an opportunity to discuss this proposed curtailment with the Council at the earliest possible date as it has
considerable implications with regard to the building that is presently going on and further developments that
are proposed for this area, and further advising that the Association feels that before any curtailment is
initiated by the City, the City should be in receipt of its consultant's report, which it is understood is due
later this month; and offering the Association's assistance to the Council with regard to assisting in any way
possible in reaching a mutual and satisfactory method of alleviating or correcting some of the past problems.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the Council ask if any person was present from the said
Association and wished to speak.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that membership from the Association was probably present at this meeting
but without authorization to speak. No person from the Association was identified to speak on its behalf.
Councillor M. Vincent, with the consent of Councillor Kipping, thereupon withdrew the motion, to which question
had not been put.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above noted letter from the Saint John Construction
Association Inc., be received and filed.
Read a letter from the Housing and Urban Development Association of Canada, Saint John and District
Association, consisting of Shamrock Realty Ltd., Scott Bros. Ltd., Rocca Construction Ltd., Lloma Construction
Ltd., Blair Construction Ltd. and Eastbrook Ltd., advising that these members are active in the production of
housing in and around the Glen Falls area and recognize the urgent necessity of alleviating the effects of
flooding in that area of the city; that they feel strongly that stopping construction in the area would be a
great disservice to the city on the whole and would not solve the flooding problem, as it now exists, in the
said area and that it is their opinion that all governmental efforts should be directed towards ensuring a
permanent solution to this immediate problem; that in this regard, they, the undersigned members of The Saint
John and District Home Builders Association, fully support the residents of the Glen Falls area in their con-
ention that the present situation requires immediate governmental action, but, however, governmental action in
he form of a "construction freeze" would not be beneficial to the residents of the City of Saint John or result
',n any solution to the flooding problem; that Mr. R. McKinstry would appreciate the opportunity to address
Council in this matter.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that any spokesman for the above named Association who may be
present and wishes to speak, be authorized to do so.
Mr. B. Elliot of Shamrock Realty Ltd. was present and advised that Mr. McKinstry was unable to be
present due to illness. Councillor M. Vincent, with the consent of Councillor Kipping, withdrew the above
motion, to which question had not been put.
13'-4'
b
~
c,no,. P!te
h/al'.$h C'reekq.
tiJ/e" ,c-H//S
+,/Qb~/hj'
!J1pm./".pi H#l 0';'
J/';~, ,Pt!r,..,/~s;
tJ/f?n /i!tlls.,gre..
.5'.:7: ~d. 7Pa4'le/
,/.aw~;, 11I~-"Snl
e~~/
Gl/e" ~//s
,P,.QPRI't-!f ~hlP.
s,:r.c?"Ji'drad,
/9s.s~~. Int:!.
Hfi'me+ {/,.~~
~vf?4p 4s.5~.
tJa~" S'..:T.: 'if- :z;/~
/lss~
Pro//, Glt?v6-.
Cp/77/77/7!CR€
Whole
:Jj/I/ -/fi'r /~s
/a~ure
"PenS/Ph P/<5Jn
Pe-l- I.t/ 1m ..{''''O!or
e;///(! e""';F/t1!1~
-te> jlu!,ehase
sept/lee re
flensiP#$ -,
~e5~il7li~L .6'1 ,1, e
Il/m,z{,. t'17b(JJ ~,z,z.
-il?/s J}(J(Jk)
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Saint John Board of Trade, the Saint John Construction
Association, Inc. and the above noted Association, be thanked for their letters, and their interest. 'The
Council members agreed that this notation will be added to the letters of receiving and filing that will
be sent to these organizations. Councillor MacGowan felt that a copy of the letters from the foregoing
organizations should be sent to the Planning Advisory Committee.
The Mayor expressed thanks to all those who participated in submitting correspondence to the
Council in the aforegoing discussed matter, concerning the Glen Falls area.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that Councillor Pye be permitted at this time to place
on the agenda the proposed motion concerning the Glen Falls area.
Councillor Pye advised that his proposed motion is as follows:- That no additional building
permits be issued in the Glen Falls area as requested by the Glen Falls Flood Association until the Board
of Trade, the Automotive group, the East End land holders, and Saint John District Home Builders Assoc-
iation unite with the Glen Falls Association and exert their combined pressures upon the Provincial
Government in an effort to induce the said Government to take immediate steps to correct the flood threat
in the Glen Falls area by immediately dredging the Marsh Creek and establishing the three reservoirs as
recommended in the Proctor & Redfern report of 1974. Mr. Rodgers advised that his opinion on that is that
most everything in that proposed motion is proper except the part where no further building permits be
issued. He added that the motion can be put and it can be passed unanimously, but it has no effect. In
reply, Councillor Pye pointed out that under Section 34 it states under many situations the Planning
Advisory Committee can reject applications in the form of their permit - it says when the site is marshy,
subject to flooding, excessively steep or otherwise unsuitable for a proposed purpose by virtue of its
'soil or topography; he felt, therefore, there are four situations in which building permits can be re-
jected - so, you cannot say, under no consideration can be building permit be rejected. Mr. Rodgers
replied that that is a decision of the Advisory Committee, not the Council - and it is an opinion. The
Mayor noted that there was no seconder to the proposed motion.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, March 1st, 1976, when there were
present Mayor Flewwelling, and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan and
Parfitt, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
1. That in regard to the petition signed by 52 members of staff who became employees of the City of
Saint John through the act of amalgamation in 1967, stating they wished to acquire the right to purchase
past service for pension purposes to the date of entering the service, 'and requesting that the Pension Act
be so amended, which petition was referred by resolution of a Committee of the Whole session on May 21st,
1974 to the Board of Trustees of the Civic Employees' Pension Plan for a report and recommendation -- the
following recommendations contained in a report dated February 27th, 1976 from the said Pension Board be
accepted, namely:- (1) that employees contributions be established on the basis of their salary at the date
of entry to the Standard Life Plan; (2) that employees have the individual choice of purchasing the pension
enefits for all or any part of their service as an employee of the County of Saint John, the City of
Lancaster or the Parish of Simonds; (3) that the date of December 31st, 1976 be established as the date by
hich employees must have exercised their choice under condition (2) failing which their right to choose is
forfeited; (4) that interest be charged on arrears of contributions at the rate of 6% per annum compounded;
(5) that required legislation to amend the Pension Act be sought.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
Chairman.
8th March, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the re-
commendation contained therein adopted.
Noting that the above named 6% is a low rate of interest, Councillor A. Vincent asked what effect
the above recommendations will have on the Pension Fund and why the rate is 6%. Mr. Park replied that ,the
effect on the Fund of recognizing additional service for pension purposes is that additional costs are
incurred and the recommendation is that the costs be borne between the employees who so elect and the
balance of costs will be payable by the City of Saint John, depending upon the extent to which the em-
ployees involved elect; as far as interest is concerned, it is only equitable between other existing
participants in the Pension Plan that if that service is being recognized because an employee who is so
requesting has had the use of money in the intervening time from the period that is being recognized until
the date on which payment is made, that he should pay interest for the money that has been in his pos-
session over that period of time - that is the reason for charging interest in a situation like this.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understood these people had an opportunity to join the Pension Plan of
the City in 1967. Mr. Park advised that the service that has been recognized for this group up to the
present time at their request that was concluded successfully in 1972 was for the recognition of their
service which had been already recognized for their pension purposes; what is now asked for is that these
employees have the opportunity of picking up a waiting period that each one of them had served prior to
being admitted to the former County Pension Plan - a period of approximately three and one-half years, in
most cases.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of Trustees of the Civic
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
r"
'Pens/t?n
. .J:t~dmdh.
WI'71. t7. 2)01'"
~ .,/tV.Kle
s~ft~fIf;
.:J).;Jv /5,
G?C"~Al!"h' ,(~IV/
/9. ,"'5t?/?,
/l/eXClhMr i9.
/!1acJ}Q;/.il/'
I
~hh. /Tfiv/s
C',m.m
/lssent- 6-0
SUb-~"'-j7.k
1? t?~/ Jj;;'nf,
,- IY///k'.[f!l?///J'/e
I S.c",/fe /-1-. .
/Jlpk.Lnvd
",ed '(M,
7/u,l//t! ~t.t."-
'pOse Y..,h4
.
I
~Hnr :PC:
;J1"J//e ~
Parle
S. T lIPus!)?
ammo
.
S,:r /lePUSI).,
{'tlmln.
.5'../.7:13,
/I"S?-
I~I> hpdsl'n
oit:'t'O~r>?Q 'oW
:l38 -c~i:f~:z>
~.t,.veI'S/ /II'
L'"uh, /I.
lI/'nC'~nT
SJ: Sh/,r
lou/lalt!:} ~
:lJJ..!f .ftpek
~-t-/.
.2J"!f a't?t::; A-
eKfGlns/p,n
,cettC. Go vt-.
(/)? /-t !/
Oemlml'#te
.
.....
""-b-
.;Y:J' ,
Employees' Pension Plan advising that the following employees will reach the compulsory retirement age in 1976,
namely:- William G. Damery, Works Department; Percy W. Kierstead, Works Department; John E. Davis, Water and
Sewerage Department; Peter D. Goguen, Planning Department; Lewis A. Thomson, Real Estate Department; Alexander A.
MacDonald, Maintenance and Supply Department be received and filed.
Councillor Hodges called attention to the fact that Mr. Kierstead is a civic employee who devoted his
energies to his job and that in carrying out his work as a raker with the Works Department he strained his heart.
He expressed gratification that this man is now due to retire and will be able to receive some enjoyment in life
that he has earned. Councillor MacGowan expressed the view that all the above named employees have given years of
faithful service to the City, and that they are going to be.missed. This observation was concurred in by the
Mayor and other Council members present.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, ad-
v~slng that the Council has already re-zoned the property off University Avenue and Royal Parkway for Millidge-
ville Estate, Phase 5 and Alpha Investments and has entered into a sub-division agreement for this proposed sub-
division, and that the Committee now recommends that the Council consent to the plan submitted, which sets out an
extension of Royal Parkway which is to be a public street and sets aside a parcel, designated "p.L.6", as land
for public purposes be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission, noting that
the Cedar Point Mobile Home Park is being operated at a loss to the City based on capital cost recovery and that
it appears the proposed recommendations from staff as to effective operation of the Park have not been fort-
hcoming, since the Commission brought this matter to the attention of the Council in early 1975, and that the
Commission believes it can effect policies that will enable the Park to be operated at full recovery of costs to
the City without loss, and advising that the Commission requests the City to lease the Park to the Commission at
the same rent as is predicted as profit from the Real Estate report of the City Department for a trial period of
one year, be received and filed and the request be granted and that the Cedar Point Mobile Home Park be leased to
the said Commission for the same amount of money as they are getting now.
Discussion ensued during which Councillor Parfitt expressed the desire to have more information con-
cerning the above proposal. Councillor Green advocated that the Park remain under the operating basis as at
present, namely, by the City staff, in the Real Estate Department, adding that he could not agree to the Park
being administered by the Housing Commission which was set up for the purpose of bringing in new housing and
necessary housing and low-cost housing, or whatever it may be, for the city, as he does not believe the admini-
stering of a mobile home park is any requirement for this body. The Mayor stated that he understands that one of
the things the Housing Commission wants to do is to expand the Cedar Point Mobile Home Park. Councillor Green
commented that it cannot be done unless a tremendous capital cost is involved. The Mayor noted that they would
have to finance that. Councillor Green stated that if we feel that way, he believes a full report should be
obtained from the City Manager and the Commissioner of Finance to find out the cost, because you are heading for
trouble if you expand the Park. Councillor Gould raised the question as to what effect the Anti-Inflation Board
would have on increasing the rents at this Park, noting that the rent could only be increased to a certain
extent, and that this rent increase would probably not cover the difference - therefore, how could the Housing
Commission get any more a soluble operation than is there, now. He asked if an eight per cent increase in rents
cover the deficit of operating that Park. Councillor Green made negative reply.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the Council receives
information as to what the deficit is regarding the Cedar Point Mobile Home Park, what is our intention, and
are we going to spend there.
"nay".
Question being taken, the tabling motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and M. Vincent voting
Read a letter from the Saint John Housing Commission, advising that it is understood that the former
Saint John Tuberculosis Hospital is now vacant and that the Commission recommends that the Common Council explore
the possibility of using these premises for housing 'accommodations. Councillor M. Vincent proposed a motion,
which was seconded by Councillor Gould, that the Housing Commission be authorized to explore the possibility of
these premises being used for housing accommodations. The Mayor asked what the chances are for keeping these
premises for any length of time. Mr. Barfoot stated that his understanding of this matter is that this land is
probably going to be used for industrial purposes and part of the building will certainly be used for the dive-
rsion of Bayside Drive in connection with the dry dock expansion. In regard to how soon the building will be
demolished, Mr. Barfoot stated that he believes there will be some work done very shortly on the road and a
portion of the building will have to be torn down in that regard. Councillor A. Vincent noted that it is a well-
known fact that during Saint John Unity Days that we committed our co-operation - and he would hate to read this
in the local column - he would hate for Mr. Irving to lose $64,000,000.00 - but it does show up in the paper -
the Federal Government wants to make the announcement - so, knowing that the paper will not print it - that if we
do not do this the dry dock will not get the loan of $64,000,000.00 - "which you know, and I know" - has been
approved - and the Federal people have been here and realizing the local paper will not print it because if they
do the Saint John Dry Dock will not get the loan - it has to be up to the Minister to make the announcement - and
he is saying that we agreed, in principle - and there is a committee of the Saint John Unity Committee still
working on this - and that the dry dock is going to be expanded 300 feet and take the nurses' residence and the
road has to go on the corner - the nurses' residence goes this spring and the road has to be built before the
dock can come in 300 feet - and it is a well-known fact - and he thinks that we should not kid ourselves and we
should tell the Saint John Housing Commission that we are not going to---- there is no place for housing, anyway,
between the oil refinery, a chemical plant that has just started, plus a hydro (plant) - twenty-five years to
forty ago that was the place because the air was, so fresh out there that tuberculosis patients were put out at
that hospital, but now, they have a pulp mill on one side of them, and it is a key industry location and it is no
place for a hospital and it is certainly no place for senior citizens houslng or any kind of housing. He stated
that he us supporting the dry dock expansion at all costs. Councillor Green felt that all the Council members
know what is going on here as far as this location is concerned even though it has been "behind the scene" and we
know that we have made representations for the closing of that, and so on. He felt that this matter should not
be before this Council today, whatsoever and stated he is amazed that it was brought before Council and that he
felt somebody should have withdrawn this item from the Council agenda - he thinks that the City Manager should
have withdrawn it, knowing what is going on. Councillor M. Vincent explained that the intent of his proposed
motion was to prevent the lengthy discussion that the Council has just had on the matter, and yet grant the
Housing Commission the right to find out what we have been talking about; he felt that it would have been re-
solved at that point, had that motion been handled in that way. 'Councillor Davis stated that he does not know
a56
~
J},,~ ,( pc;.k
~}!pah.5/ ph
2Ja~S/t:t'e,:Z;h
K/Yl?r$/tPl?
s: :T.t$Ie..# S/ h 9
to/??;.., .
5.J; T;23~ .9'e>S/~
/'P;. -fOUS/A,!!
~CCQhJh'" A!';;;7f/o.
'Pel-It-/OJ'? fffJ/77
S/1/'//ih,yffJl? 1M.
~ t er ~ sel9t?
serVIces
C!a.p/~/ l<<ttI~
peI/I-/bh -!Ib",
51". C'/''':le;.s o-P
,(PC!h ,{Qh?fJhd
1////61
:Bu s S~.s~4''''" ~
ssrv/de
CI~f/?r.d"s/' ~"
~I1S'p'prln-h't;"
Cbmm.
/fJ.IrlmRIL7i1ltt
/l6I11R9' 5CA&t)~ /2
SL'eelt' // m/r.;-
Sch'N~/ er~SS-
wd/kf~~J?
IY/II/, R:7-lJ /1 Y/!?
..llo.I'j ~~ RL
(/IJ/l/er5/ Iff /111I
TI'.il~"~~ S~f"e,"..!/
Cbnon.
W /71. /Vl/n fern
:jJu d' rf'!!~
~(,{-E-6ack$
anything about a $64,000,000.00 loan to the dry dock; he knows that the Hospital will be cleared out,
probably in the next three or four weeks, he knows that the nurses' residence is going to be repaired and
retained for a year or more - and that is all he knows. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he does not
have any information on this matter, either, like Councillor Davis, but that he would withdraw the pro~
posed motion now, because the matter has been already discussed. Councillor Gould consented to the
withdrawal of the motion.
.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above noted letter from the Saint John Housing
Commission be received and filed and the Housing Commission be informed that there are other plans for
that area, and that the possibility of using these premises is very slim.
I
The Mayor advised that we will get the information that is available (pertaining to the dry dock
expansion and the amount of premises at the said Hospital that will be required in that regard) and will
give to the Housing Committee what we know we can give in that connection; we cannot do it from here, we
have to do it by going through what available information is on paper.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from residents of Shillington Road, re-
peating the request previously made by them on October 27th, 1975 to the Common Council, for extension of
water and sewer services in their area at the earliest possible date (Which was referred by Common Council
resolution of November 17th, 1975 to the committee on Capital Budget for a recommendation), be referred to
the committee on Capital Budget.
I
Mr. Barfoot advised that the above water and sewer services extension has been estimated and
will be in the list which is presented for the Capital Budget Committee's consideration.
On motion of Councillor Cave
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the petition from the Senior Citizens of The Loch
Lomond Villa, expressing the opinion that the City of Saint John should either subsidize the bus system of
City Transit Limited or take the bus system over completely, be received and filed and referred to the
Transportation Committee.
-
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the M. Gerald Teed Home and School
Association, requesting that the speed limit at the Boar's Head Road-Millidge Avenue intersection be
lowered from 40 m.p.h. to 30 m.p.h., and that a school cross-walk sign be located at the Daniel Avenue-
Millidge Avenue cross-walk, and advising that the children from the University Avenue and Candlewood Lane
area are experiencing great difficulty in crossing at the cross-walk at University and Millidge Avenue as
the cars are not stopping, be received and filed and referred to the Traffic and Safety Committee for ,a
report.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. William M. Mintern of Saint John
East, commenting on the City's budgetary cut-backs in the following essential services: some street
maintenance and repairs, relief firemen when the Fire Department already faces a manpower shortage, cut-
back in the summer lifeguards, extra policemen during the summer months;, and stating that the City in
spite of such budgetary restraints keeps the taxpayers of this city saddled with unwanted and unnecessary
services, such as: the payment of close to $45,000.00 to Central and Nove Scotia Trust to collect rents on
City-owned properties, the Plumbing Inspection Department which cost the City between $100,000.00 to
$150,000.00 yearly in wages, automobiles, printing, et cetera; and stating that the said Plumbing In-
spection Department cannot fully justify itself and that in the light of the recent adoption of the
Provincial Plumbing Inspection services the taxpayer cannot longer afford the luxury of this Department as
it is a complete duplication of services already available to the citizens by the Province; and stating
that the City claims it is losing money on the 50 Princess Street property, yet it supplies a complete
elevator services including elevator, and that this cannot be justified, and further stating that it cost
approximately $10,000.00 yearly for an elevator operator, and that an investigation into this will reveal
that there is not a real need for an operator there; and stating that he feels the above named items are
but a few 'services that could be cut, and that he feels the Common Council should look into possible over-
staffing of various departments in City Hall -- be received and filed.
.
I
The Mayor noted that, from previous discussion with the City staff, the figures given in the
above letter are not correct. Councillor A. Vincent contended that there is nothing in the above named
letter that is accurate, whatsoever.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay". He
stated it is his view that when a letter such as the above is received, containing irresponsible figures,
that the writer of the letter should be called in to substantiate his information. Noting that Councillor
A. Vincent has a point, Councillor Davis stated that so far as everybody is concerned, the facts in Mr. I
Mintern's letter are correct - we can simply deny them - but the best thing to do would be to reply to it
and give him the correct figures, and make that public, not private, but refer it to the next Council
meeting for an answer and have the answer on the agenda of that next meeting. Mr. Barfoot advised that
two incorrect figures were given in Mr. Mintern's letter: the figure given of $45,000.00 is actually
$4,500.00, and the Plumbing Inspector's Department which costs around $50,000.00 a year is sustained, in
part, by the plumbing inspection fees. He stated that it is the intention to bring in the plumbing
inspection fees which will pay the majority of that cost. Councillor Kipping enquired about the answer to
the question raised regarding the cost of elevator services in the building at 50 Princess Street.
Councillor Davis commented that that building has to come down. The Mayor noted that the elevator op-
erator in that building is a member of the Corps of Commissionaires who is there part-time. Councill~r
Davis felt that the foregoing discussion has served as an answer to Mr. Mintern's queries. Councillor .
Gould asked if the services of the part-time elevator operator at 50 Princess Street is worth $10,000.00,
part-time, and added that that figure seems like a lot of money, and that he would like that point cor-
rected, also; he asked if the said elevator operator is, in fact, part-time. Mr. Barfoot replied that he
will have to refer to the report which the Council had previously on the operation of this building, which
details the cost of that operation. He stated that his recollection from that report is that the said
operator is there part-time.
~
,..
;3;>;7
.1?e-honln
./plI;, pau
_ 'Rea/-t~,(-t.
P!.rlnn.I9Rt'Vls,
(!e?mm.
1-- /JftJJ//E' '!Ph!.
.IV.ilJ? T
/IIl?/spn
P/0lJ?h,4d'n'
C' ~?)??_.
I. ' IJ1 <<!tP J'S
MWR/?lt9~
(kb, .:2-
&-c P J'fh? )
CVt?e1h-u..,P
ff ~ '&:/
s?fJ-1eet-s r
. //Her
I
.
I
1
.
~
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application from John Paul Realty Ltd. for re-zoning of
approximately 34,000 square feet of property on Sand Cove Road, off Wallace Court to permit the erection of a 6-
unit apartment building thereon, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that
the necessary advertising regarding this proposed re-zoning be authorized.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the application from Mr. Ivan T. Nelson of 1867 Manawagonish
Road, for a temporary permit for a mobile home, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and
recommendation.
At the request of the Mayor, the Common Clerk read the following submission from the Mayor:-
"One of the observations, made after the Groundhog Day disaster here in Saint John, was the degree in
which all citizens co-operated, not only with the municipal and governmental agencies, but more importantly, with
one another.
This spirit of togetherness is never far below the surface but it is a shame that it takes a disaster
to make it manifest.
Today, as Mayor, I would ask the citizens of Saint John to co-operate, again with one another, to
simply clean up our city and with the initial momentum, keep it clean.
This has become, in this time of spending cut backs a responsibility of every citizen. The daily rounds
of the men in the jeep and trailer, and the constant patrol of the man with the broom and barrel-on-wheels, will
be few and far between.
The onus for cleaning up the city now depends to a great extent on the individual merchant and home-
owner.
In the past, the attitude about litter was that 'they' would be along eventually to clean it up. At
the present time this nebulous 'they' has become the very real 'you'. If we can display even a small degree of
the neighbourly unity which we showed during the recent disaster, our neighbourhoods could shine. We have all
heard and many of us have seen the remarkable cleanliness of European cities particularly those in Holland. Is
it, that we do not have as much pride in our surroundings? I do not think for a moment that is the reason. We
have simply become dependant on the City work force to do it for us.
Spring is rapidly approaching and the melting of the ice is starting to show the debris left by the
storm and also the overabundance of sand that has been used this year because of the cut back in salting.
I am asking you to make the effort to clean up the dirt and debris in your own area and encourage your
next door neighbour to do the same. City trucks will be available to cart away any accumulation of dirt and
debris when they are in your section of the city.
While these seem like Spartan measures they are not original. There was a time not many years ago when
these methods were standard procedures. Each homeowner and merchant was responsible for shovelling snow and
cleaning their own frontage. It is my understanding that it was very effective.
I might mention that the City received a 'considerable amount of criticism when our austerity programme
was first announced. Now, although it is of little satisfaction, cut backs and diminished services in education,
hospital care and social assistance have been widely reported.
So we are all in this together and maybe the diminishing of service, that we generally take for granted,
will give us the incentive to hearken back to an earlier time when individual effort was considered a matter of
personal and family pride."
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
z;rj;
~erk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the fifteenth day of
arch, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations of
the Engineering and Works Department, D. French, Director of Personnel
and Training, C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, M. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy
a5R
~
Prt?(!/ai?7~ -t'-/tJn
..Lnt-ern.;;rl/ o~
J)e Malay Wet!!':
F/nal?<:' ia /
S-!-,;;;;/'/emt?nt OS
($<</}" #. (//'l7eet"
!VprPf#lJ? I~I? m
1-/.;) if .f' ",.
;t(oc/(wl1'tfld
~rk ,f,;;,rJ7
C'/i!/ ft1~r.
A/t't?/?se rt!:
Stffw,r /i"l7e..s
M.hdt?r CA/, 1?
7fr.dcKS
G//bl!"rl- s-t-;
Thl'Ptlf), w.;)y
/Jf/J7/~er ,4'e.:;>II.
:Bill f'Qr ~ey/s-
/.;nful"'e re
F/Y'e .Pe;:d;
P<i/n,;,mea/c
~f"".dilnlne
/J1 t' 17,.~lt'r s 0 -r
,,(~/$/~/ vt!?
/l$S~n?b&
P/a1117. //,(v/s. ~
/t5senr -t-o
su.J-R'/I/_ p/~h
1tJ/11/~6'Y//le
,I; S -1-.;) ~ e s
C'/,,./S'lf6Pher.,.
"?ola~'1s C'f?t€,.-ts
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, of the Community Planning
and Development Department, P. Clark, Fire Chief, and R. H. Stone,
Deputy Chief of Police
Captain Nelson Gillispie, Public Relations Officer of The Salvation Army in Saint John, offered
a prayer which opened the meeting.
The Mayor welcomed to the meeting members of the Ulster and Marco Polo Chapters of the Order of
DeMolay and noted that the young men of this Order are working to prepare themselves to contribute to our
community in the future through good citizenship and leadership. At this time, the Mayor read a proposed
Proclamation pertaining to the Order.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that March 14th to 21st, 1976, be proclaimed International
DeMolay Week.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
.
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave I
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that at its
meeting of February 23rd last, the Council tabled for further information on market prices, sales and
supporting appraisals the recommendation to purchase the Forrester Green property at 23-25 Mill Street,
and that this information has now been supplied to Council, which supports the settlement figure, and
recommending that this matter now be taken from the table and the original recommendation approved,
namely, that approval be given for the acquisition of the property known as 23-25 Mill Street (F-6-11~12)
from Mr. Forrester Green for a figure of $40,000.00 free and clear of all encumbrances and to include any
and all claims of any nature whatsoever, and this settlement to be subject to the normal adjustments for
any outstanding taxes, water rates, et cetera -- be received and filed and the recommendations adopted.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Green voting "nay", stating that he .
feels the price is too high.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for December last, be
received and filed.
Councillor MacGowan pointed out that Item Number 6988 of the above report, regarding invoices
passed during December, in the amount of $296.52 (room accommodations for men attending meeting in Freder-
icton) is not explicit enough in its description of the expenditure. Referring to Item Number 6620
($281.86 - car allowance for September and October for M. W. Patriquen of the Recreation Department)"
Councillor MacGowan expressed her concern as she felt this to be a much higher figure than other car
allowance figures for a two-month period. Mr. Barfoot replied that he did not have with him any deta~ls
as to why this cost should be such, but he can obtain that explanation. Councillor MacGowan questioned
the figure of $530.00 (Item Number 7116) paid to the Receiver General of Canada for heat supplied to the
old Post Office building (City-owned 115 Prince William Street) during the month of October, and felt that
the City cannot afford to heat places at such a high cost for the month of October - she added that the
cost per month for heating during cold months must therefore be quite high, in comparison to that figure.
It was pointed out to the Councillor that this building is occupied in part by the City's department
responsible for painting highway signs, and in part by the Saint John School of Marine Technology.
Councillor A. Vincent, referred to Item Number 6869 (payment of $1,072.50 to Norman VanWart for supply of
hay to Rockwood Park barn), stating he does not recall this material ever having been processed by the
Council by tender award. Mr. Barfoot explained that about two years ago the Council approved a policy
that quotations would be called for items under a cost of $5,000.00 (tenders would be called for those
over $5,000.00 in cost) before the material was purchased. Councillor A. Vincent asked if Mr. Barfoot is
satisfied that Mr. VanWart's is the low of three or four quotations, and stated that his information is
that it was not. Mr. Barfoot replied that he can check this out. Councillor A. Vincent asked that this
information be supplied to the Council members at the City Manager's earliest convenience.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
City of Saint John now has a 60-inch storm sewer pipeline and a 36-inch combined sewer line under the
Canadian National Railways right-of-way at the Gilbert Street arterial, and that these lines have been
constructed under the direction of Foundation Engineering Company of Canada in conjunction with the Saint
John Throughway (the location is described by the Railway as Sussex Sub-division, Mile 86.14 - 86.43); and
further advising that permission for the underground construction is granted by the said Railway through a
licensed document, which should now be executed, and that this document has been examined by the City
Solicitor for form -- and recommending that authority be granted for the execution of the said document by
the Mayor and Common Clerk on behalf of the City, and that the first year's rental of $30.00 be paid ~- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, the Common Council request the Minister of Health of the Province of New Brunswick to introduce
the necessary legislation at the present session of the New Brunswick Legislature for the implementation
of the Paramedic Programme of the City of Saint John Fire Department:
AND FURTHER that copies of this resolution be forwarded to the seven Members of the Legislative
Assembly who represent the City of Saint John.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that, as recommended in the letter dated March 11th,
1976 from the Planning Advisory Committee, the Common Council assent to the Millidgeville Estates Sub-
fiivision plan of Phase IV off University Avenue, which provides for the laying out of Christopher and
Polaris Courts which are to be public streets and the setting aside as land for public purposes of parcels
P.L. 3 to P.L. 5, inclusive, which are a combination of open space, stream right-of-way and buffers, and
I
.
I
I
.
....1
""'"
359
/9>se. 770
st(.J-d/y,;t:iA
. Pub~'d j9U
{/Qse /ahd
PI.a~?rQto}(:(
~I'e.;g
7:5Jl1t.;/ W.;m
::Dr.
which also provides for a Parcel "X" which is located more or less centrally - this is to be a private playground
to serVe the residents of the area and it is intended that access strips to this private playground be shown from
Christopher Court and Polaris Court, and this will be done before the plan is approved - and which plan also
shows Tantawanta Drive which is a private street at this time, and which will be made public when necessary
because of future development or if required by the City as a road extension from Somerset Street to University
Avenue in keeping with former City plans -- and as noted in the said letter, Parcel "E" on the extreme left hand
of the submitted plan, is not likely to be developed for sometime and may be the subject of a future application
for re-zoning for a small office or other business use.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I C'/v/e L ~f?'
7Jeaur, Ce.
7~;mfl'n~ t1v.
a<<;rb
TI'W.,c;q1: ~-
J?eI,~e C'~/
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification
Committee, requesting that the matter of motor vehicles parking illegally beyond the curb, especially on grassed
areas in various sections of the city, be brought to the attention of the appropriate civic officials and that.
the provisions of the Traffic By-Law, which prohibits such parking, be strictly enforced, be referred to the
hief of Police for any necessary action regarding this matter.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
I
!1Iett/S meLt:-
e/' /~ ens'
c3U/i-ude
to/U<9rL d 'I.
(/.;;Ic/r tJ~
civ/c fir/de
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification
Committee, advising that in light of the City's present budgetary restraint programme, the Committee has decided
that its main goal this year will be to improve the attitude of the citizens of Saint John to a more positive
attitude toward our city, and, realizing that this desired "positive" attitude cannot be achieved without the
full co-operation and assistance of the news media, the Committee therefore requests that the Council arrange a
meeting with representatives of the. various news media to ascertain how this can best be achieved, be received
and filed and the Council arrange a meeting, to be held within the next two weeks, with the representatives of
the various news media to work out this solution.
.
Councillor MacGowan advised that a study was made recently and that it was reported to us that one of
the greatest handicaps or drawbacks in the City of Saint John is the attitude of the people; that the above named
Committee does not have very much money to work with this year, and so the Committee decided that its aim is to
try and do something about the attitude of the people. She noted that we spend thousands of dollars to try to
promote our city and we try to encourage industry and tourism, and yet, we, as a community, do not speak with one
voice, extolling the advantages of our city - we have a negative approach and this negative approach, as far as
she is concerned, is our doom. She cited instances of this attitude. She pointed out that we must work together
for the betterment of our community. She stated that the Committee, having set the above programme as its chief
aim for this year, is initiating a programme in the schools with a positive approach: "What can I do for my city;
Why am I happy I live in Saint John; What I like about Saint John" -- and she added that the Committee is open
for suggestions from citizens - only positive suggestions, and that this programme will only be successful if we
have the full support of the media. She stated that at the last meeting of the Committee it was felt that as a
first step in civic improved attitude that the Committee would request Council to meet with the media - the
press, the radio and television - for a frank discussion of how we might work together to kindle civic pride,
without which no community can succeed.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification
Committee, requesting that the provisions of the Traffic By-Law pertaining to truck routes in the city be strictly
enforced, and that such truck routes be clearly designated, be referred to the Chief of Police for study and any
implementation.
I
Councillor Kipping suggested that the words, "and further, that the Chief of Police be requested to
provide up-to-date instruction on the interpretation of the by-law as it applies to truck routes, to appropriate
staff of the Police Department", be added to the above motion, stating that the by-law as it exists has not been
clearly interpreted, recently, in his experience, with respect to the truck hauling problem on University Avenue-
Millidge Avenue-Kennebecasis Drive, and an interpretation was given by an officer of the Police Department which
turned out to be quite erroneous. Councillor A. Vincent felt that an interpretation in this regard should come
from the Legal Department, rather than from the Chief of Police. Councillor Kipping noted that the problem is not
the intrepretation by the Legal Department of the by-law, and that he checked that through, and the by-law seems
clear enough to the Legal Department and to himself, at the moment - but, the Police at that time (the incident
above referred to) who were asked at that time by another City department, gave an interpretation which turned
out to be the wrong interpretation. He stated that all he is saying is, that there should be up-to-date instructiol
on the interpretation provided to the Police Department - his purpose in bringing this point up at this time is
to notify the Chief of Police, if he has not already been notified, that there is an incorrect interpretation
being made of that particular by-law at this time. Councillor Higgins expressed the belief that the above motion
meant that: to study the by-law and to enforce it. Councillor Kipping replied that he would say it does assume
that, but it turns out that the assumption is not the worthwhile one.
.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
/I1/;"/5~er
.?Us7!/G'e
...Lnfuit'!f
Ire IY/////q
VI//e ~STa~
thvt?It1,ome.
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Minister of Justice of New Brunswick in
reply to Common Council resolution of February 16th last which states that a request be made to the Lieutenant-
Governor-in-Council for an inquiry under the Inquiries Act, Ch. I-II, R.S.N.B. 1973 on the grounds that the issue
relating to certain false amounts presented for payment to the City with regard to the development of Millidge-
ville Estates, so called, in 1972 and 1973, does concern the conduct of the public business and also includes a
atter of public interest -- advising that he is unable to agree with the said request for two reasons, which are
cited in his letter, and that it is his view that the allegations should be investigated and that the ends of
justice will be best served by a normal police investigation rather than publicly examining and weighing al-
legations, some of which may be true and others totally without foundation -- and assuring that he is prepared to
request the assistance of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in investigating these allegations if that is the
wish of Common Council -- and asking that he be contacted if the Common Council considers it advisable to request
the assistance of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in this matter -- be received and filed:
'7? {". M. -p
ti~ dV~~ AND FURTHER that the Minister of Justice be informed that the Common Council wishes him to obtain the
e~s ~~ assistance of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for an investigation into the facts and any allegations arising
~.;;IJ.nf~/lPr . out of the recent hearings of the Omega-Lanthier-City of Saint John suit.
.ctJU'"..~e.ase Noting that the above is a very serious matter, Councillor Higgins stated he feels it would be ap-
propriate to have the motion approved as it is presented at this time, or to have it referred to the Legal
Department for the proper wording of a motion, at a meeting with Mr. D. Gillis, Q. C. Councillor Kipping asked
if the above motion is satisfactory, and noted that if the Council were to ask the Legal Department to word it
this would mean the loss of a week in proceeding in the matter. Mr. Rodgers stated that if it is Council's
~
I "0
~36"
~
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Glen Falls Flood Committee,
asking for copies of correspondence written by the City Manager, the Commissioner of Engineering and Works
or any other City officials in regard to obtaining monies to implement the Proctor & Redfern Ltd. anticipated
report on the problem of flooding in the Glen Falls area, so that the said Committee shall be kept informed
~ ~ ~ et!'~ of what is being done by the City to obtain the required finances to put into operation the corrective
''Ia/''$, I" measures required in the Marsh Creek; noting that at the recent meeting held on February 11th with the
..,c/f7,~ (;'11.176/',,/ Council and other civic officials, Councillor Davis made a similar statement (to what he stated at the
e~l"r~~oJ?~e~ March 8th Council meeting, that there were many things the present Council should be doing with the
problem of flooding in the Glen Falls area at this time and that the Council should be seeking avenues to
o~ "')1 obtain the said monie~) and the Mayor had eight items of which he was to follow up and see that they were
completed and the Committee was to receive reports from that meeting, but has not received same to date;
and advising that if the City hopes to obtain funds from the Provincial and Federal Departments to im-
plement the Proctor & Redfern Ltd. report they must start now to seek the funds, and that the Committee
would ask that the City Manager and other officials be directed at this meeting by the Council to start
just such action as this -- be received and filed and the City Manager be instructed to forward to the
Glen Falls Flood Committee all corresondence and information he has, up to date, regarding the said
matter, and that the Common Council members, as well, be provided with copies of such correspondence and
information.
A/..2llls$'pf!. rr{;
1?Wf/slt?rttllynrse.
S,X t'"ha,gkr
.lJus serf//t:"e
~~!I /~l'7s/-i- k
7rdI1Sj7(),,-fodl (J Yf
C'om.m.
f1.Qr/. C tJvt.
6- rans,p." ,..-fanf/o
sh~~ !/
(;,kJ? ,LOi//S
F/f7~ C:.__.
p,.ot!~br4-7?ed
~-f-d. ref)(7PC-
1'm,PIt?P7~ n~-I/tl
(}/-t y /J1 fro
wish -- he recalled that Mr. Gillis suggested two alternatives to Council - the request of the inquiry
under the In~uiries Act, and, failing that, asking the Minister of Justice to consider asking the Roy~l
Canadian Mounted Police to investigate the allegations -- the Council passed a resolution asking for an
inquiry, and the above letter from the Minister is the answer to that resolution, and the last paragraph
of that letter points out that if Council wishes he will request the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to:
investigate the allegations. He stated that, in his opinion, if that is the wish of Council then the
resolution that is before Council is satisfactory.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Chapter of the New
Brunswick Association of Registered Nurses, expressing concern that the recent change in City Transit
Limited bus schedules has had an adverse effect on members of the nursing profession (this being a 24-
hour, seven days a week occupation involving shift work) who do not own cars, and on all persons who work
shifts, and suggesting that further consideration be given to all suggested changes in bus schedules, be
referred to the Transportation Committee.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that the absence of bus service on Sundays and between midnight and
the early morning hours present difficulties for elderly people to get to church on Sunday, who cannot
afford to pay for transportation by car, and stated he thinks that the City has to take a look at our
transportation system and supply transportation for the elderly and for people who work at hospitals and
are engaged in other services after midnight. He stated he feels that the time has come that the Council
will have to look at the legal contract the City has with City Transit Limited, to, (1) supply trans-
portation, and (2) decide what we are going to do about it. He stated he thinks that we should instruct
the Transportation Committee to do something (regarding the bus service). During ensuing discussion, it
was noted that the Provincial transportation study is due at the end of March, and Councillor Kipping felt
that when that study is received, the Council would undertake a comprenensive review of the existing bus
system and of any new systems which ought to be tried in Saint John in order for the City to have a modern
and effective transportation operation - he thinks that, meanwhile, it might be possible that the Council
could negotiate with City Transit Limited for trial runs on some of these things -- that is, start negot-
iations again -- the company has already negotiated out some runs but in view of the feed-back we are
getting now which is pretty specific, he thinks that perhaps the Council could negotiate' something back
in, in the meantime - but, certainly, he thinks that the main problem will not be solved until the said
study is in and the Council can take it from there. The Mayor replied that the Council appreciates these
points.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Councillor Green stated he was hoping that the Council would have a meeting with the City
Manager before the end of this month, to be informed regarding what his total plan is. He stated it is
his feeling that, no matter what is included in the recommendation from Proctor & Redfern Ltd., and that
he sees it as a long-range plan, and it being a long-range plan that the residents of Glen Falls are not
going to get any immediate remedies to assist them in any "flash" flood -- therefore, he wants to know if
the City Manager has explored the possibility of obtaining a loan of pumps, because he feels that is going
to be the only quick remedy in case of a "flash" flood, to help the people in that area, as an immediate
remedy. Mr. Barfoot replied that the matter of pumps has been explored and figures have been obtained by
the consultants on a pumping solution to the flooding in the Marsh Creek. He added that the figures
showed it to be very expensive and a somewhat ineffective method of flood control. Councillor Green asked
that such information be available for the said meeting, by the end of March. The Mayor noted that this
will be done. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he had asked two questions:- one was whether the City
Manager could confirm that the Saint John General Hospital sewer is dumping on the inside of the Marsh
bridge, causing a problem, and the second was: does the Federal Government own any land on the Marsh
Creek. He noted that we need the information regarding these two important items because he understands
that if there is Federal land there, there are Federal funds available, immediately; further, it gives the
City a better lever if the said Hospital is dumping in behind a company building just 500 or 600 feet up
from the bridge on the inside of the Marsh Creek by an open sewer into the Creek. He asked for this
information for the next meeting of Council. The Mayor replied that he will have this requested infor_
mation. Councillor Higgins noted that there are many misinterpretations of the Marsh Creek Sewerage
Scheme and he suggested that if might be better, also, for the Council to know exactly what lands and
homes and businesses that looks after. He noted that there is still a large volume of sewage that is
still being dumped into Marsh Creek from the One Mile House site in the direction of Russell Street, in
that area, and he noted that we are talking about a scheme involving billions of dollars if we ever want
to get our sewerage under control. He therefore asked for an up-dating of what is covered by sewerage
projects in the City of Saint John, and what is left to be done. Councillor Davis advised that, at the
meeting of Council of March 8th, when he stated that he felt the Council could be doing quite a few things
before the engineering report came in he was not referring to small items, at all - he was referring to
major items such as, what funding is available, and he added that the only information he has on that is
the information he received from Mrs. Elsie Wayne. He noted that the Council has to know who owns what -
is the Creek a problem of the Province - is it a problem of the City - he thinks these should all be
determined, and this is what he was referring to; he added that there are lots of outfalls, there - the
Hospital does empty into the Creek - he does not think the removal of that would contribute very much to
the rectification of the flooding problem. He noted that we have several major engineering jobs such as
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
JI"""
.
I
I
EIs/e YJ4!fH
. GW-I? N//s
F!DQd' Com;.,
htnl'SJCreeA-
7/t?pL /
(1pml"o
-f'uhd$
"Prpv.4- I6d.
t:!-P~s.
IJ1.Anh<<'eN,
uP.
I
Funds re
MOll'S;' c;.,
~/Q"" coni-.
~'~!/ #.ffr.
36l
the Marsh Creek bridge, and we have the railroad trestle which should be done - he does not know why that has not
been done yet - all he knows is that the Council just simply has not discussed this matter but has left it all to
the City Manager - the Council becomes concerned with these things at Council meetings, and that is it. He
stated he does not think that the Council should give the impression that the Council itself is working very hard
to clear these matters up, because he feels it is not, and that is what he meant when he said that either one of
the Council Committees or a special committee, or something, should be meeting to line up the "battle" - he noted
that it is going to be a long, hard "battle", and that somebody should start getting the logistics together and
the Council should start acting - he thinks that is very important, and that the Council ought to be doing it,
right now, and that is what he meant by his remarks at the March 8th Council meeting on the subject.
Councillor M. Vincent, stating that he could not agree more with Councillor Davis, recalled that in
December of 1975 and in January of 1976 he moved on both occasions that Council commence meetings with the
Province for the purpose of looking at ways of getting funds, exploring possible Federal Government approach
routes, and trying to do up some of this work in preparation for the engineering report so that when it was
available the ground work for, hopefully, the implementation would well have been done. Noting that no meeting
has been held with the Provincial Government, he pointed out that he moved at the March 8th Council meeting that
if the Council did not hear from them by the end of March that staff be instructed to arrange the necessary
meeting with the Provincial Government if the report was not ready. He asked if the City Manager has received
any further information on the said report, as to whether it might, or might not, be on time for the end of
March. Mr. Barfoot advised that he has received the draft today of the final report and he certainly anticipates
that the report will be ready by the end of March. Councillor Parfitt stated that she learned from one of the
Provincial Cabinet Ministers yesterday that he would like to have a round the table discussion with the Hon-
ourable Horace Smith, the Honourable Fernand Dube and pursue what can be done through the Honourable Jeanne Sauve
at the Federal level what funds can be had for this Marsh Creek job.
It was noted that Mrs. Elsie Wayne, Chairman of the Glen Falls Flood Committee, was present and wished
to speak.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that Mrs. Wayne be heard.
Mrs. Wayne ,advised that, this week, she typed a letter to the Honourable Fernand Dube, to Brian Barnes,
to the Premier of New Brunswick, to Mr. Jellinek, the Director of Community Planning, to the Honourable Barney
Danson, who is head of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation funds coming in here; she told them our
problem and she asked Mr. Dube to write to her, to let her know just exactly what he was doing in his Department
to obtain funds - and she sent him copies of all those letters that were submitted to the Common Council on March
8th last which stated that the writers wanted government participation; the Committee members this evening are
going to try to see Mr. Michael Landers, Member of Parliament from Saint John, and see if they can arrange a
Federal-Provincial-Civic and Glen Falls Flood Committee meeting - they are trying to arrange this meeting for the
Council. She stated that she would like the Council, in the meantime, to be doing something concrete to open
these doors that are needed for the Glen Falls people. She urged that the Council and City staff, and the
writers of the letters to Council on March 8th regarding the Marsh Creek matter, get behind the Glen Falls people
and that all parties join together and become united, because if that is not the case, she does not foresee us
ever getting the funds that are required.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as requested in the letter dated March 11th, 1976 from the
Glen Falls Flood Committee, the Common Council direct the City Manager and other civic officials to start action
to obtain funds from the Provincial and Federal Governments to implement the anticipated Proctor & Redfern Ltd.
report regarding the Marsh Creek flooding problem.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
/l. t:. 11I011'W10 RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. A. G. Warwick Gilbert of Gilbert,
. ~I;I~~~ McGloan, Gillis & Jones, Barristers, advising that they have perused the City Solicitor's letter dated March 4th,
~~~~c~ 1976 regarding Glen Falls flooding, written by him apparently at the Common Council's request, and submitting the
G;I'/;' v:-JQI7t? following comments:- as Mr. Rodgers points out, the Planning Advisory Committee by reason of Sec. 34(3) of the
~tfS ~~~/' Community Planning Act and the reference to that power by its incorporation in the City Zoning By-Law, has the
~~ 1'9d: ::: power to prohibit the erection of buildings on sites which are marshy, subject to flooding, excessively steep or
,-/~ ~.~ ~~. otherwise unsuitable for a proposed purpose by virtue of its soil or topography; should the Advisory Committee
~ ~~ Q~~ decline to exercise their authority, then the Council ought to amend its Zoning By-Law, and if necessary, its
p~ ~~~ Building By-Law so as to prohibit the construction of any further buildings in the Glen Falls area - in the
~Ph:IJ. ~' I? interim before the amendments were enacted, it would be necessary for Council to prohibit for a six months'
~./ 'I' / (). period any construction in the area - this is provided under Sec. 71 and Sec. 81 of the Community Planning Act;
I /?/~/'~~~/~ in addition, the Council will no doubt embark forthwith on a programme of eliminating obstructions in Marsh Creek
~/eJ? v/$ itself and the establishment of storm sewers before the spring run-off; if the City fails to both prohibit further
~C1r$~~~ construction and remove obstructions as well as establish storm sewers, it shall only compound its liability to
~~ the Glen Falls property owners -- be received and filed and referred to the City Solicitor.
;<pn/)?'!JJy
19~/~~ On the question, Councillor Pye stated that in view of the past reluctance, apparent reluctance, of the
~~~~~ Planning Advisory Committee to deny building permits in the Glen Falls area, he would move that our Zoning By-Law
be amended ... The Mayor interjected, pointing out that there was a motion already on the floor and that Coun-
cillor Pye would have to propose his motion later in the meeting.
I
.
lrl....
Councillor MacGowan stated that this is basically what she would like to know - Mr. Rodgers has a
letter - can this be done - can we change our Zoning By-Law Or Building By-Law so Council can make the decisions
to prohibit building wherever it deems it necessary. Mr. Rodgers replied that there is not much he can say
beyond what was said at the March 8th Council meeting in this regard, pointing out that at that time he outlined
Council's authority under the present law and that he said that Council can change the law and once it is changed,
then the owner has to comply with the new regulations and when he meets those regulations he is entitled to a
building permit; the question of the fact that the Advisory Committee seems to have more powers than the Council
is the matter of looking at legislation that was enacted by the Province which states that the Advisory Committee
can, if in its opinion such land is subject to flooding or marshy, et cetera, prohibit or otherwise permit it.
He referred to the sentence in the above letter, "Should the Advisory Committee decline to exercise their auth-
ority..." and stated that it is not a question of the Advisory Committee declining to exercise their authority _
it is a question of the Advisory Committee coming to an opinion, and if that Committee comes to an opinion that
the land is subject to flooding it has a duty, then, to prohibit the construction of buildings. With reference
to Sections 71 and 81 of the Community Planning Act, he commented that that is something entirely different,
again: those sections refer to if Council takes steps to amend the Zoning By-Law, Council can prohibit cons-
truction under the present law until the new law becomes effective - that is what Sections 71 and 81 allows the
~362
~
/t'! OI'Ol t~r/ K/71 e;>/7
bU!, ~erl7l/-6s
C/en ~//s.vl'
~/6't?dl-?~
/I'l"'ir$4 Crl!'i!'.f
//t't'//df
{I~J71m. *'79JY!9-
WOY'~
S/P{eH/4/k
/YI/(ehdle/ at's.
(4<<"ye /17c-o
1J1/~f;ael t'1"t',S,
I'rom fr/c7rk7)r.
$. 7: 'lJO//ci!'l??l!'h S
?/7"p~d, 11 sSpt:'.
/v'.M
J)e'pY- ;Pp~~e
OJ"e-P
C/'/ff tl"fPok
t'/~!I J1f ff r.
S..T ~f?;''t!eP1el?'
?,..,ieci-. IJsspC.
No. hi
"?oj, l!e 2Jttpt.
6-10l,h'/shn;en.
E'st-..7bl/shme'fi
Council to do - in other words, prohibit construction under the present zoning law while it takes the
steps to change the law - once the law is changed, then the new regulations are in effect and all the'
owner has to do is meet those regulations and the building permits are then issued as of right to the
applicant" under the new regulations; so, Sections 71 and 81 are not sections to authorize the Council to
prohibit construction indefinitely. Councillor MacGowan felt that the Council could do it for six months.
Mr. Rodgers stated that the Council could do it for six months if it was taking steps to change the law.
Councillor MacGowan stated that her point is that perhaps this is what the Council should be doing so it
can have a "freeze" for six months; she added that, however, we could then be in a worse predicament than
we are right now, that if they met the requirements they could build whether we wanted them to, or not;
she noted that, basically, Mr. Rodgers is telling the Council it would be better to leave it in the hands
of the Planning Advisory Committee. Mr. Rodgers replied that whether the Council takes steps to re-zone
or not, it is not interfering with that Committee's authority to deal with the matter from the point of
view of examining it to see whether, in the Committee's opinion, construction should be prohibited or not;
and, again, Sections 71 and 81 is authority for the Council to prohibit construction whilst taking steps
to re-zone - in his letter to Council on March 8th, he said that Council can re-zone if it so wished - the
Council has that right but the Council should recognize that the re-zoning is not the solution if the
Council expects it to go on and prohibit construction indefinitely - the Council cannot.
.
'I,
Councillor Pye advised that the right-angle turn at the intersection of Michael Crescent and
Mark Drive causes motorists to decelerate their cars to a speed of low gear when entering Michael Crescent
from Mark Drive, thereby rending the ascent of the steep incline of Michael Crescent virtually impossible I~
when the said roadway is glazed with snow or ice, and that he would therefore propose the following
motion. He noted that the said situation has caused immeasurable hardship to many of the residents of
that area throughout the winter months as they have had to park their cars at the foot of the hill and
walk a considerable distance up the hill in winter time just because of the structure of that turn.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the Common Council ask the Commissioner of Engineering
and Works to consider and submit a recommendation and report to Council on the proposal for removal of the
eastern 35-foot section of sidewalk of Michael Crescent which adjoins Mark Drive and the conversion of the
area in question into a curving roadway at the junction point in order to facilitate the movement of
traffic from Mark Drive into Michael Crescent during the winter months.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Policemen's Pro-'
tective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., noting that Deputy Police Chief Ronald Stone will be leaving
the Police Department as of April 2nd, 1976 on retirement, and advising that the Association is concerned
about this important position being vacant and asks the Council what the Council's position will be in
respect to filling the position of Deputy Chief; and advising that the membership of this Union, as well
as all members of the Police Force fully support the senior applicant with the necessary qualifications
from the City's own Police Force to fill this position, and further advising that the Union's members are
absolutely opposed to filling this position with a retired member from some other police force who would
already be drawing a very substantial pension from another police force with which he has retired, and
expressing the hope that when the time comes that the Union members be placed above outside applicants,
and have the Council's backing for them at that time, which would be appreciated by the Union -- be
received and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent, speaking in favour of the content of the above letter, stated he feels
that, surely, in the City's Police Department among the senior level of ranking officers there must be
somebody who would be suitable to fill Deputy Stone's position when he does retire, and he added that he
hopes that every effort will be made to fill that position within a rank within the Saint John Police
Department rather than going to any other police force. Councillor MacGowan suggested that the motion
include that the above letter be referred to the Chief of Police and the City Manager, as well as being
received and filed. The Mayor noted that it will be so referred, for their information.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Policemen's Protective
Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., requesting that the Common Council provide to the Association the
Establishment of the Saint John Police Department, and advising that the Association has on two occasions
applied in writing to the City Manager for the Establishment as referred to in the 1975-76 Working Agree-
ment between the City of Saint John and the said Union and that the City Manager has relinquished a
statement pertaining to the Police Force, but the Union is asking for the Establishment pertaining to the
Police Force, not a statement . be received and filed and the information required by the said Assoc-
'ation be given to it.
During discussion which preceded the above motion, the City Manager was asked what information
has been given by him to the said Association, and Mr. Barfoot replied that the Association has a copy of
the report of the Council Committee on the Organization of the City which contains a proposed organization
for the Police Department; the Association also has a copy of the current strength of the Police Depart-
ment by rank. When asked if, in his opinion, that information constitutes the Establishment of the Police
Department, he stated that the Establishment is basically something which Council has to approve along
with the Establishment of every other department in the City; there is a difference between what the Davis
Report (so-called) has indicated at the City organization and what has been possible to implement this
year as the strength of the City organization because of budgetary restrictions; he is not altogether sure
what else the Union could have beyond what has been given to it. Councillor A. Vincent felt that, in the
name of good labour relations, the City Manager should meet with the committee of the Union and ask them
what they are really looking for (in the above mentioned letter), and give it to the Union.
Following the moving of the above motion, discussion ensued, during which Councillor Davis asked
if that Establishment is finalized, and added that if it is, he, too, would like to have a copy of it., He
added that he does not recall the Council ever having adopted that Organizational Report in that respect
as final - the Council adopted certain portions, and new positions have not been adopted by this Council,
so the Council would have to go over that Report again. The Mayor observed that we will have copies, and
the Council will go over it again to make sure that the new positions are either accepted or not accepted
by the Council. Councillor Kipping asked if there is a definition of "Establishment" in the Working
Agreement under discussion, so that the Council knows exactly what they mean. Mr. Rodgers replied that
there is no definition, as such, and stated that under the clauses, the employer shall semi-annually
provide the Union with a copy of the current Establishment. He added that the City of Saint John has no
current Establishment, as such; it is in stages, as noted by Councillor Davis. Councillor Kipping pointed
out that whether it is defined or not, the City does have a current Establishment, and it has to have one
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
r"
.
['e?KJ1, /l. t'n-
eeJ?'C
1tlltee 2)9>
I. {7pfe.'s"J? Co,
p,//ee ti'06t.
~-A er:..",eau
:Prov, fJvvt:
1? e, ft'/ ' -p
(Y6!f /i!.fr,
I. l(ecPve'Y.,
slt//en "ffd#L:
t/n.FPljJ/re
,{pp//st-.s'
.-155.9.C. Q-r
Prime ,,(f/n/c
i-er
FeL ~vt:
Obserl/iilhC
ff 11'13
I
.5:.7:-&170/-
fn;lI'It'/~
{/n/pJ1,~. g
7hnt-iJ.'tf
t/n /()Y) /j.e,
$111,17$
t/17/pn liilb~
~lfsl-dl!e
~'nt-, M
. 7Pur/s~
/t "!en;/ ~t(/fe
t'PUJ?, II. 0hM
{/IJIP}J /.IIb~
I
B6~3
"0 -, I
, -
because it has so many bodies working. Councillor Higgins noted that it is the Establishment as of March 14th
that is to be provided to the said Association. In reply to Councillor MacGowan's question as to the number of
personnel on the Police Force at present as compared to the number of 180 that was in the last Establishment that
she can recall the Council approving for the Police Department, Mr. French advised that the present number is 193
approximately, and the 193 personnel are approved.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to place on the agenda the following question: are
there active negotiations going on to share the cost of the load of extra Police service to Coleson Cove - and
now that it has been mentioned in the Legislature of New Brunswick - Point Lepreau being investigated - are we
getting paid for it - what is the compensation. He stated that since last August he has been mentioning to the
Chief of Police that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is encroaching on the City Police Department's territory
and that the said Mounted Police force is doing some work here - he knows that the said Federal police force has
some rights under Customs and smuggling and security of Canada, and so on, but he does not think they have the
right to investigate theft or vandalism, and so on; if the City's Police department is doing extra work, is the
City receiving extra revenue, he asked, and has the City entered into a contract. Mr. Barfoot replied that he
cannot answer that. Councillor A. Vincent asked whether any meetings have been held since he made his request
first, in August. Mr. Barfoot replied that there have been no meetings held by himself concerning the policing
of Point Lepreau. Councillor Hodges asked what is the status of Coleson Cove, in Lorneville. Mr. Barfoot
pointed out that it is within the City of Saint John, and Councillor Hodges noted that there would be no extra
fees required in that area. Councillor A. Vincent then asked: have the City Policemen left New Brunswick to
recover stolen goods. Mr. Barfoot noted that this would be Police business and in pursuance of their duties.
Councillor A. Vincent stated it is his feeling that, to protect the taxpayers' money, the City Police Department
should not be ,involved in Point Lepreau, and that he knows they have been.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the New Brunswick Branch of The United
Empire Loyalists' Association of Canada, advising that pursuant to the Council's request of December 15th, 1975,
a form of Resolution has been adopted by the said Branch and has been forwarded to the Prime Minister of Canada,
and asking for the endorsation of the Common Council of the said Resolution, which reads as follows;- "Be it
resolved that in recognition of the significance of the year 1783 A. D. to the historical development and cul-
tural heritage of Canada, that year marking the cessation of hostilities between King George III, the Sovereign
of the lands now comprising Canada and the American Colonies, which had become independent, and also marking a
nation-wide influx of those persons who had remained loyal to their Sovereign, commonly called United Empire
Loyalists, to the lands now encompassed in the Dominion of Canada; And in recognition of the fact that because of
the United Empire Loyalist, the colonies of New Brunswick and Upper Canada came into being; And in recognition of
the beneficial effects of the Loyalists on the Country as a whole, in maintaining a spirit of anti-republicanism,
in maintaining sense of loyalty to the Sovereign and in engendering a love and respect for fundamental rights as
found in our laws and constitution; And in gratitude for their political ideals, of calm reason, lawful reform,
and trust in our political system that have been the base for the development of our Nation: The Federal Govern-
ment is hereby urged to initiate steps to ensure that fitting observance be conducted and recognition given in
1983 to mark the 200th bi-centennial of the termination of the American Revolution and arrival in Canada of the
United Empire Loyalists whose arrival subsequently led to our Canadian Nation." -- be received and filed and the
requested endorsation granted.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Typographical Union, No. 85,
advising that it has come to the Union's attention that the tourist promotion pamphlet "The Key to Saint John"
was printed by Keystone Printing, which is a non-union shop and that, therefore, the said Union objects to the
Council giving City business to Keystone Printing, and advising that the Union feels that the City's printing
should be done by unionized shops especially as there are representatives of Labour on the Common Council, and
that although Keystone's bid may have been lower this could be due to their paying lower wages through not being
unionized, and advising that the said Union encourages the Common Council to support the Allied Label by having
the City's printing done in a union shop -- be received and filed.
Councillor Parfitt, referring to the above noted letter's contents, noted that the bid of Keystone
Printing was $1,739.00 lower and asked if it is not the City's policy to give the contract to the lowest bidder,
all things being equal, such as quality, et cetera; she further advised that, having enquired, she learned that
the wages paid by Keystone Printing are not lower than those paid by the unionized firm, and she asked if, since
the said firm pays City taxes and creates employment for 23 people who also pay taxes, this firm does not have
the right to get some of the work. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he was given the reply by the City
Manager, at the time the work was awarded regarding the printing of the tourist literature in question, that the
request would be made that the Union label be placed on the printed material, yet he knew when the City Manager
ade affirmative reply at that time that Keystone was not a union shop and would not be able to comply with this
request. Mr. Barfoot replied that the request was made to have the Union label placed on this printed material,
but, of course, Keystone Press were unable to place the union label on their material; he added that he apologizes
for the fact that he did not tell Councillor A. Vincent at that time of this fact.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
JI/,.B ././ UP/" RESOLVED that the notice from the New Brunswick Liquor Control Commission
~~ro~ ~~ that the application of Golden Lion Limited for a beverage room license for premises lo~ated at Woolco Shopping
~ Mall, Loch Lomond Road, Saint John, N. B. will be heard at a public hearing of the Licensing Board on March 19th,
^'9'upr J' 1976 in the Hearing Room, Head Office, of the said Commission, Wilsey Road, Fredericton, N. B., be received and
//'eeJ1ee~fI~ filed.
1f7u,It:ten 'Xt'p,
,(~;t.
.
....
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's request for information on what stand this Councilor the previous
Council has had officially on record relating to liquor license outlets in shopping malls in this city, Mr. Zides
advised that on July 2nd, 1974, Council enacted a change in the Zoning By-Law which does allow a tavern or a
cabaret in the building or a portion thereof in a shopping centre provided that this does not have direct access
into or from a mall or retail area or a hallway or a retail similar area within the shopping centre itself. He
stated that with regard tO,the partirular building at the Woolco Shopping Mall, this proposal has a major ingress
and egress from the parking area by a set of stairs to the second floor above the shopping centre _ that is, it
is separate from the actual shopping area. Councillor MacGowan stated she feels that the proposed establishment
of this beverage room is a poor move and that she feels this Council should be taking a stand opposing its
establishment; she added that there is enough traffic out there without having a beverage room to add to that
roblem. Councillor Higgins pointed out that any Councillor who may wish to make an individual representation in
redericton regarding this application, as a citizen of the City of Saint john, has that prerogative. Councillor
. Vincent asked if the said proposed operation of a beverage room has been passed by the civic departments. Mr.
Zides replie~ that, so far, what has happened is: the building extension itself has been passed - the applicants,
of course, are aware of the new regulations - they have not come to us with a firm plan for the use of part of
364
~
Seconded by Councillor Green
'lr.;Jye/ t!?Kj?t!?175 RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approva,l be
~ $. ~3r.hS' granted for a travel expense advance of $3,000.00 (United States of America fundS) for Mr. E. S'. Kearns,
~.~ ~ ~v~ Promotion Officer, Department of Economic Development, for Port Promotion and Business Development in
~f'~' ~J? . Central and South America, and that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the said tour, with a
jPp~ ~;-O)?r~/PI1 representative of the National Harbours Board, has been approved by the Saint John Port Development
~ .5uS1'l't!'SS J- Commission, be received and filed.
t/el/~ Ip.fJ'!l.e'I1('
s.,J: Jbn- .P'Vt!!/.
o,mJ?'l .
e/t~ 4f5r.
;1/.13. ,Lli/UdY'
(!"htro/ a.nN'"
~/~eepr //el!!'.hG
cl,IJpl/'c. '
11/..$ .I ,d'~t? ~
11. /I. tT.~.
,.(/?Upr
d~1f/et-$
C',<<n. 1}e
b!I.n F.ii//s-
~,.Sh CMeK
//f?,dlJ7g _
:JY.IIIJ'l'.er/??/ 't-S
m~yb/tor/ltJ?1
p/.iih}1.IJ,InS -~
;Z"n/171{ ~-~
:llwUlh.5 'o/-~'-"
that second floor. Councillor MacGowan expressed the view that the Council has a definite responsibility
to the citizens of this area to protect them from so many taverns, and that if it was wrong in the Fa~r-
view Shopping Plaza (which the Council at that time opposed) then it is wrong in this particular locaiion.
She stated that she will vote against the motion because she wants action in this regard.
.
Councillor MacGowan voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor MacGowan proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the Common Council take
strong objection to the above application and that the Council send in its objection in this regard to the
above noted application hearing.
On motion of Councillor Cave
I
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the notice from the New Brunswick Liquor Control
Commission that the application of N. B. Lodge Number 46, R.A.O.B. for a club license for premises located
at 119 Germain Street, Saint John, N. B. will be heard at a public hearing of the Licensing Board on March
19th, 1976 in the Hearing Room, Head Office of the Commission, Wilsey Road, Fredericton, N. B., be re-
ceived and filed.
Councillor Green asked how many liquor outlets there are now on Germain Street. Mr. Zides
replied that he can obtain that information. Councillor Green asked if the Planning Advisory Committee
has seen the above named application, as yet. Making affirmative reply, Mr. Zides advised that this is a
case of a club which located before the regulations - that was, the Press Club - when the Press Club left
the owners of the property were in constant touch with potential operators and the 'Advisory Committee
sought a legal opinion as to what to do about it and Mr. Rodgers suggested that this would be a question
of the Planning Advisory Committee deciding whether or not this was still a non-conforming use because the
regulations changed things around, and, when a non-conforming use ceases for a period of four months it
cannot renew without the Advisory Committee making a ruling in its favour; in this particular case, the
owners, who happened to be solicitors were able to give the Committee quite a complete package of two-way
correspondence with other people who were professing interest in this property, and so, the Advisory
Committee very recently made a ruling in favour of the club going into this property. Councillor Green
stated that he knows that many residents of the Germain Street area are upset over the actions late at
night and over what is going on there - windows being put out and people being accosted on the street, and
so on - and he made the point that another club in that area would not help the situation. Mr. Zides
advised that the premises at 119 Germain Street is right next to the Union Club on Germain Street.
Councillor MacGowan commented that if we want to be practical about it, we just cannot afford so many
outlets, and that it is costing us too much money to have police to try and keep these people who are
driving under control; she pointed out that from the reports at least sixty per cent of the accidents are
because of alcohol. She commented further that Germain Street in that area used to be a beautiful area
before all these clubs, and that property values are depreciating, and we just cannot afford so many of
these clubs, and that as such, if you are not concerned about life at all, certainly we should be con-
cerned about what it is doing to our city. Councillor Higgins noted that there should be concern about so
many of the homes being turned into rooming houses, as well. Councillor M. Vincent stated that there is a
club on Union Street, that, as far as he is concerned, is located in a very bad place for one, and that
there was a fire in it recently, and he is wondering how the club got permission to repair the building
after that fire and be re-established so quickly. Mr. Zides replied that he did not know anything about
this matter. Councillor M. Vincent asked if Mr. Zides could, in conjunction with the City Manager, bring
in a report on the Club X.L. at 144 Union Street as to its condition after the fire sustained, and where
it was damaged enough to restrict the issuing of a building permit to have it renovated, and the fact that
it was open, he believes within forty-eight hours after the fire.
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the item that Councillor Pye had previously re-
quested permission to introduce, be now placed on the agenda.
Councillor Pye stated that in view of the past apparent reluctance of the Planning Advisory
Committee to deny building permits in the Glen Falls area, he would move that the Zoning By-Law be amend-
ed, and, if necessary, the Building By-Law, sO as to prohibit the construction of any further buildings in
the Glen Falls area. There was no seconder to this proposed motion. Mr. Rodgers pointed out that his
report to the March 8th Council meeting says that Council has the authority to re-zone, but in re-zoni~g
the Council has to provide some use to the owner of the land. He stated that he takes the proposed
resolution of Councillor Pye to mean that it is a re-zoning to prohibit any use, and if it is to prohibit
~nd not regulate, the proposed motion is not legal. The Mayor, noting that there was no seconder, stated
that the motion was not accepted.
.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager regarding port
promotion expense, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
I
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understood that the above expenditure was going to be fifty
er cent recovered from the New Brunswick Fundy Royal Commission, and he asked for confirmation of that
information. Councillor Davis advised that this is part Port and part Industry, and the Industry part of
the said expenditure is ninety per cent recoverable, he believes. The Mayor advised that a check will be
ade to obtain the answer, tomorrow; he added that we would have to have some information as to what Mr.
Kearns was requested to do in the way of Industrial promotion. In reply to Councillor Kipping's query,
. Barfoot confirmed that Mr. Kearns is the only one going to Central and South America, as above mentioned,
from the Department of Economic Development. Councillor M. Vincent asked what Mr. Kearns' duties will be
on this Port and Business promotion tour, and what the breakdown will be of cost-sharing for this tour,
and whether the $3,000.00 is fifty per cent of a total cost of $6,000.00, or whether it is the total cost
.
~
r"
.
I
365
of this tour. Councillor Green explained that two additional shipping lines are coming to the Port of Saint John
and this tour is a follow-up with some of the goods and so on, so we would have a complete circuit between South
America and the Port of Saint John. He added that if everything works out as anticipated, it appears that we
will be looking for additional sheds at the Port, very soon, and that it would be detrimental not to follow up on
this Port promotion matter, which is really a follow-up from last year. Councillor Higgins received confirmation
from Councillor Green that the said tour expenditure is within the budget of the Saint John Port Development
Commission, and that the Commission (whose budget was cut back) regards this tour as very important and that it
is within the Commission's budget. Councillor Hodges noted that this promotional tour is a "must".
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee regarding purchase of
203 Sydney Street, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
/ ;( d RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that 203
",.en ,~~ Sydney Street which is owned by Mr. Basil Votour, is included in the lands necessary for the implementation of
I~ . .:to 3 cS' 'tKI'?t? the first phase of the Neighbourhood Improvement Plan in the South End, which is the assembly of lands for new
~~ housing, and that negotiations with the owner of this building (which suffered extensive damage by fire and is
~Q1S/i'&le>~~ incapable of rehabilitation) and his legal representative have resulted in a settlement figure of $2,500.00 with
'.f L the City arranging for the demolition of the building and clearing of the site, and requesting the Council's
~€~I7~~tzl'- approval for the acquisition of all Mr. Votour's freehold interests in the said property, free and clear of all
hf?P~~~~~ encumbrances, for the said amount of $2,500.00 -- be received and filed and the request complied with.
l'l1e~ .:'/ptd,
~vt: Councillor Cave asked permission to place a matter before this meeting.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
.
1
eo<<-n. C'ave
Co~n.
/r1pj?/I1.f
{/J?lpn -r
Dpunel/'
foe /;rt-/OJ7-
sh/p
{'pUI1. /1,
V/ncen"C
(1f?I17h7,
WhQle
. LEGAL
C/t
SO%/~flr
~pY"?"'/~
-C/O)? tlf!
/E7 .1/e>c,f..Si
I ?rp'pi?r~/e.
Jipj,., .f'~
/l!lenc/es
;,(~d,
e/I'I ~n
t/rb~n
1(el1d<</<</
l.Lryin/f tl/I
e'++/ce ~It&.
7 S- J)f?CK.5l .
If. C". :z;,v/nf
Fe~. ~"vt:
{1QUI1. /I,
1//Y7CBl'1r
. /fI';U"kdt Sf'.
f!/vie t!l7n
C'f?hJj7/ex
Oil ylJ/jr.
....
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that Councillor Cave be given permission to add an item to the
agenda at this time.
Councillor Cave stated that he wished to bring to the Council's attention the fact that in the March
9th last issue of the Evening Times-Globe a news item appeared with the heading, "Kipping Says Council Leans
Towards Unions" and that in that item Councillor Kipping is quoted as saying that there is an obvious empathy and
unconscious desire of Common Council to give Unions what they want, and is also quoted as saying that the Council
did not foresee the effects of giving drastic wages hikes to employees and as pointing out that bias in favour of
Unions may stem from the fact that eight members of Council have had a past affiliation. Councillor Cave stated
that he wants to know from Councillor Kipping, and he demands it, who the eight are. He noted that the said item
further quotes Councillor Kipping as saying that he did not dismiss the facts of life, that there are three sides
to every story, nor mind on the truth that such a situation is not unique to Common Council, and that on Council,
personal attitudes of course come into play, and that he believes that Council is not conducive to good problem
analysis or decision making, and that people sitting around the table must take a global view of each situation.
Councillor Cave stated that he understands there were names mentioned (by Councillor Kipping), and he added that
he does not want his name mentioned any more, or he will be coming looking for Councillor Kipping. Councillor A.
Vincent asked to be placed on record as saying that he belongs to a very honourable and well-known Trade Union.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillors Cave and Davis withdrew from the meeting.
Following a Committee of the Whole session, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed the Chair, in
legal session.
Consideration was given to a letter, dated March 12th, 1976 from the City Solicitor with reference to
Common Council resolution of November 24th, 1975 which authorized and instructed the City Solicitor to commence
expropriation proceedings under the Expropriation Act for the acquisition of the fee simple and all rights, title
and other interests of fifteen listed properties on Dock Street, North Market Wharf, South Market Wharf, Water
Street, Smythe Street and Mill Street, by the filing of a Notice of Intention to Expropriate with the Expropr-
iations Advisory Board and causing the same to be served on the respective owners listed in the said resolution.
The letter states that the City Solicitor has been working on this matter in preparation for the necessary
hearings before the Expropriations Advisory Board, and that the City Solicior understands since the said re-
solution was adopted, that some of these properties have been acquired through negotiation, and he believes there
may be others close to negotiated settlement, and, also, he understands that the property on Dock Street belonging
to John Searle Agencies Ltd. , was intended to be on the list but was inadvertently omitted. The letter advises
hat, in view of the foregoing, and before proceeding any further in this matter before the Expropriations
Advisory Board, the City Solicitor is recommending that the Council refer this matter to the City Manager for an
updated resolution and in particular the inclusion of the Searle property if the City wishes it expropriated.
Councillor A. Vincent stated it is his view that the Council should have a meeting with Mr. David
Carter of the Federal Government and with some other people, and that the Council is making a mistake in going
ahead with expropriating the Irving Oil office building (75 Dock Street), and he felt that if the Council were to
handle it right it could get that property as a gift for one dollar and the Council can use it as a lot of money.
He stated that he knows, from conversation with Mr. Irving sometime ago, that the said building has sentimental
value to him (it is the original head office building of the oldest and only Canadian-owned oil company in
Canada, namely, Irving Oil Company), and he also knows that the Federal Government has said that we have in Saint
John the only Canadian all-owned oil company office building, and it is therefore the oldest one. He suggested
that if the Federal Government is interested in it, let us pursue that avenue, and he added that if the said
Government is not interested in that building, he is willing to change his view in the matter. He expressed the
view that if the City expropriates this particular property it will have to take Mr. Irving to the Supreme Court
of Canada and this would take two or three years - therefore, why does the City not let Mr. Irving give it this
property. Councillor Kipping suggested that if there is a possibility that the Irving building can be saved and
worked into the design of Market Square development and that it has some national significance, then let us go
after it because it means a lot of money to us, and perhaps the City staff could investigate whether there is any
significance to it, or not, before the Council goes on with the expropriation matter. Mr. Barfoot advised that
he will attempt to get the information from whatever Government department that might be interested regarding
this property, and that he will be reporting that information at the same meeting that he will be reporting the
recommendation for the Notice of Intention to Expropriate. He noted that the implications of leaving this Irving
building there would be to re-design the proposed traffic movement in that area which may require some major
368
t/r~J1 ~ehe~
/5"" 2)'04' S~
1'1'~f?ef'tie.s
kX,PYo ~r i6rC/o.
Irl/ilul ~i/,(z
,P!"o ,P"fo fltJ 7 ~
:J}PCK $"e';
.7PhJ7 Se.wrle
/&enc/e$ ,(t-d.
~I7CIr St-.
w/;{e J7 //15
changes in what proposed, and stated that, therefore, he thinks this should be checked out before the City
decides that any move should be made to retain this service station property (75 Dock Street). Counc~llor
A. Vincent stated that if it is the Council's wish, he would ask I~. Irving in the next few days if he
would like to give this property to the City for the sum of one dollar. He noted during further dis-
cussion, that the Federal Government is not interested in an operating service station at this site, 75
Dock Street corner, but the building if retained has to be almost like a museum, he understands. Coun-
cillor Kipping noted that a few years ago the Council talked about honouring Mr. K. C. Irving and the'
possibility of doing so by naming a major building or street or monument or something after him, and that
the retaining of the said building would be a way of doing this, even if the Federal Government does not
think this building has historical significance, and that it would also be a way of obtaining it from Mr.
Irving, at no cost, if the Council can do it the right way - that is, not get itself fouled up by declaring
that the City is going to expropriate it when the City really, perhaps, should not do that, unless it
knows that it has to do so. Mr. Buck noted that if Dock Street is to be widened to six lanes, which has
always been the intention, this Irving building goes, whether it has historic interest or not, because you
cannot widen Dock Street to six lanes without this building.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week
pending information on the Irving property at the corner of Dock Street and North Market Wharf and, also,
the inclusion of the Dock Street property of John Searle Agencies Ltd. on the list of properties involved
in expropriation proceedings under the Expropriation Act for acquisition of same.
Mr. Rodgers asked if this
expropriation because of intentions
of Dock Street has never been given
of an Urban Renewal plan.
property (the
to widen Dock
a firm policy
Irving property at 75 Dock Street) is on the list for
Street. Councillor A. Vincent noted that the widening
by the Council. Mr. Barfoot commented that it is part
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he asked Mr. Buck a couple of times for information about
outstanding deficits and so on, in the form of a list, and he is getting it from Mr. Buck, but there are
missing places, and he would like to know why he cannot get an up to date list of all we owe regarding
these Market Square-Dock Street property acquisitions. He stated he understands the City owes Corbett
Construction money for repairing the Searle building and our insurance company denied it, and they are
/If.;11'ket SfC/~/e. going to sue us, and so on. He states that he wants to know the whole picture. Mr. Buck replied that the
~e)1zf,.e--2?p~ Urban Redevelopment Office has provided Councillor A. Vincent with all costs which legally have been
..-1 incurred in that area, in the view of the said department; he recalled that the last time Councillor A.
'p~jP~~~ Vincent made the request, a copy of the information was provided for all Council members. Mr, Buck stated
~~/~/~/'~;";) that there is an item in dispute here: when the building next to the Searle building was involved in a
t?Q~n.l?, ~1?~)1 fire, Corbett on the instruction of Searle re-did the parapet on that building - Searle has always con~
tended that it was the City's responsibility but the City has never accepted that responsibility - it was
damage that occurred as a result of a fire next-door. Councillor A. Vincent asked if Mr. Buck is sure
that he (Mr. Searle) was not told by the City's Building Inspector; he added that he (Mr. Searle) has
witnesses and Councillor A. Vincent has an affidavit in this regard. Mr. Buck stated that he is saying
that the Urban Redevelopment department has never accepted the responsibility there. He added that in the
City's negotiations with Mr. Searle for the purchase of his building on Dock Street, the City has told I~.
, Searle that the City had valued the building before the damage occurred and the City's negotiations with
Mr. Searle are taking that into account. He added that the damage to the Searle building was caused by
the firemen when the fire was being put out next-door and the City considers that to be insurable fire'
damage; to his knowledge, that is the only property negotiation in that category, in that area, that is,
it is the only one that is outstanding, to his knowledge.
~JJ7 Seqr{e
/l,fenc/f?S /...'-t.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
on Clerk.
?
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I-
I
.
~
,..
.
1
I
.
I
{'UUJf,/1. /{J?,
IIfJwes ~
",{Uh/j7ln:t
1Ia!f"'~/;}d-
.f,led)'e
{'(/("7de~
5ewe)'S
:J)eat-h
J)".Je:>lm
7Jeltt-scl;
(/, ;v. 23.
T 't9-pj:~,.,
e/JJ1P1,?/'op.-
~hl?
S. T~7>
IIU5Ai~ 7&
.7Jj/.:li-held,
,(bt.
c~/H/ck~
o~t.~) ,( -CP(o
S.J:TnPh
/1/Prk-S .( If'.
lJ,18"dA'N
I Mj7l1ff
:JJ1a", -' nsr--
-6"r
CP/t!;$PI? ave
/"'5I'dltms
7echhlf!GI/<11-
P5)>et:."F/ on
. :J)ep-.
.
lll....
0..' ~'...
0U'&
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-second day
of March, A. D. 1976, at 4.00, o'clock p.m.,
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, S.
Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner
of Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department,
D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, and A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, of the Community Planning and Development Department,
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, C. Nicolle, Director of
Recreation and Parks, R. Jackson, Deputy Chief of Police, and G. Baird,
Commissioner of Economic Development
The Reverend Ivan Rayner, Pastor of Douglas Avenue Christian Church, offered a prayer which opened the
meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by ~ouncillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on March
8th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on March
15th last, be confirmed.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he was promised two reports, but he has not received them, as yet:
one of these reports is the dumping by leading citizens at Howe's Lake; the other report is regarding the wooden
sewers at Haymarket Square. Mr. Barfoot replied that he was absent through illness this past week and has not
been able to complete either of those two reports - however, they are in the process and action has been taken on
the dumping at Howe's Lake by various means, and he will give a fuller, written report at the next meeting.
The Mayor referred to the recent death of Dr. John Deutsch, noting that this was a great loss not only
to the University of New Brunswick but to the citizens of New Brunswick and the City of Saint John, as well. He
commented that Dr. Deutsch was well-known at the University of New Brunswick in Saint John and wrote the final
report that would help us expand this branch of the University in Saint John.
The Mayor spoke in commendation of the Saint John Dry Dock Huskies Team which has just won at Dunedin,
Florida, United States of America, the North American Tug-of-War Championship, and felt that the Team should be
congratulated from the Common Council, the Team having done an excellent job in representing Saint John, in
having won the Canadian and North American Championships.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted
for payment of the following invoices, namely:-
D. Hatfield, Ltd. dated February 19, 1976 $ 3,408.80
D. Hatfield, Ltd. dated March 3, 1976 $ 3,610.40
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. dated February 28, 1976 $ 2,791. 33
Saint John Iron Works, Ltd. dated February 28, 1976 $ 2,619.00
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report for February of the Division of Technical and
Inspection Services, including Plumbing, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent asked when the Council will be considering increasing the staff of the Technical
and Inspection Services Department, in view of the fact that the City is not giving the service that it is
supposed to be giving. He added that there is a provision in the regulations that unless large projects, such as
Brunswick Square, the General Hospital and Coleson Cove, are serviced, that they can ask for, and get, their
building fee back. He stated that he would like a report for the next meeting on how many times the City Building
Inspector has visited Coleson Cove.
(Councillor Hodges entered the meeting)
Councillor A. Vincent noted that the City received a large building permit fee regarding the Coleson
Cove project, and that it is very clear that unless it is serviced (with inspections), at the end of the job the
City must return the permit fee. Mr. Barfoot replied that he would be glad to give a report on the number of
inspections at Coleson Cove.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for
engineering services, in connection with the following named Capital projects:-
o
I ~36S
~
C'.8/?/f-.;z/ ,P}"oJ 1.
'(.dff!"W,e-i:( /lV'e,
'PC1U//n' S~/J
~.s1fb;.,aIr rrl/.
Se_,. qf' ~~/-
n?~ 17
tJf!t'#;, U/t9deJl#..~
(J,n-:;qf,.c.ed: ~-cd
~,.t!'nOl$
IYe>cra C;n:dl'llt<::"~
,.(~~
lO~ks .2)r.
G;.nneH- 7C~
~~all;( ./, ;t?~17
C'p, ,(-td.
.:z;. "7jJ. E E;
/.;;;;<::". ./ ~ 9e?e>17
.//~7f S&r/-/pl7
w: 1/ C~I?da/A
/lssPt!,
M/I"e>~ e~t:'.
Ce>//. Sewer
~;t'"~/s /!ssQC',
.L-t-~.
~Jfj.s'pe' &'nst;.,
L-t-~.
CalUseWdY
/1. 2).:r. Lt-~.
(;?Q";(.:ttilbl r
71rwlnff ..(~L
(lr.;we/ ,P/~5
bpnd$
7hpma:> a~r.
/I1sry //e1rr/s .
heL /(/,*,DHhoI'
.Hsl?)7h S-&ee/e
(;!i?",,t!fe.ilr '!JdJI,!
-<-6/.
Lakewood Avenue, Pauline Street and Westbrook Avenue
8-inch Sanitary Sewer and Watermain
Ocean Westway Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 6
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated March 18, 1976
.
$ 123,687.75
126,132.41
3,783.97
107,212.55
6,
$ 15,135.89
2.
Community Arenas
Rocca Construction Ltd.
Building three arenas
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 13
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 13,
dated March 18, 1976
$2,913,949.00 I
2,959,495.80
90,732.87
2,862,210.93
$ 6,552.00
$ 76,812.50 I
93,917.50
2,817.53
79,829.87
$ 11,270.10
3.
Myles Drive and Garnett Road
Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 4
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum r~commended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 4,
dated March 18, 1976
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved
invoices for engineering services regarding projects that have been undertaken under the Department of
Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
.
1.
Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering Services
,Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 5,
dated Feb~uary 27, 1976
1,932.84
$
$
51,329.30
2.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector System
(a) Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 52,
dated March 3, 1976
(b) Gaspe Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 10
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 6,
dated March 18, 1976
3.
Courtenay Bay Causeway Approaches
(a) A. D. I. Limited
Engineering services for western approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 44,
dated January 31, 1976
$ 184,306.62
$ 435.39
(b) Goodyear Paving Limited
Engineering services for western approaches
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 13
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 13,
dated February 17, 1976
$1,285,044.50
1,329,250.12
41,897.50
1,102,644,16
I
$ 159,808.46
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Acting City I
Manager, the following named amounts which have been suggested by the Works Department be approved by
Common Council regarding the following named three gravel pit applications for 1976 which have been
processed and approved by the Planning Advisory Committee:- (1) Graham pit - application of John Colwell
of Thomas Construction, on behalf of Mrs. Mary Harris - to provide a bond of $2,000.00; (2) Kirkpatrick pit _
application of John Colwell, on behalf of Fred Kirkpatrick - to provide a bond of $1,500.00; (3) Joseph
Steele pit. , off Mabee Road - application of Joseph Steele - to provide a bond of $4,500.00:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the Acting City Manager in the above matter, advising that the
amount of the bond for each of the above named pits is a guarantee for the rehabilitation of the pit, and
that in connection with the Joseph Steele pit application, a bond is now held for $2,500.00 for a former
operation by Goodyear Paving and that since that company is no longer involved in the operation of the .
pit, Mr. Joseph Steele should now supply the above named bond of $4,500.00 for the 1976 operation, as
recommended by the Works Department, this being a new over-all bond for the total operation of his pit
be received and filed.
~
r"
.
C'. /J/, :J?,
7?a//w~y
~"PS$/~S
l!Ie/ll/Js~'"
ktfd]dJ"
lId/'IUld!/
I $pu-J" //J7e
1f<mn./l~n$,
1 ~m.hr.
/J1a6//e"
7Je?U!l!CJ S
Ae7Jlanc
.
t?fe.J//e ,(~
hdh T
/JIelSPh
I
~",.6/k Hne.
II/f'
;V",PlbeIW
. etl'lslr. Co.
I
~!P~"'htf ,J?
, /"eH d ~ee6-
/,e ,pu;'Pp::;e
/ahd
t11. 23. &s.s/d
$~-dlv.
I
4.s-seht- 'If"
s&-l6-~v. ~
lI1ar/pl1
5<<b-li/1/.
lYt?rp/s 1?L
.
~
38.~
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that the
Canadian National Railways has made a request for approval to construct two level crossings on public roads for
the McAllister Industrial Park which will cross the Old Black River Road and Whitebone Way and that Common
Council approval is required before the Railway can obtain authority from the Canadian Transport Commission, and
further advising that the Department of Economic Growth of New Brunswick, in co-operation with the Saint John
Fundy Region Development Commission, has arranged with the said Railway to have the spur constructed and the
Commissioner of the Department of Economic Development of the City of Saint John recommends approval, and further
advising that the plans showing the proposed crossing and a sketch submitted by Neill and Gunter, showing the
proposed routing of the sewer in Grandview Industrial Park, have been examined and approved by the City's Senior
Project Engineer -- and recommending that the Canadian National Railways be granted Council approval in order
that the Railway might obtain authority from the Canadian Transport Commission authorizing the establishment of
pUblic crossings at these two locations -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, regarding
the application by Mr. Douglas LeBlanc for a temporary permit to place a mobile home on a parcel of land adjacent
to Mr. Bradford Hersey's home on Anthony's Cove Road, advising that the Department of Health found this property
to be unsuitable for a septic tank but agreed to a total retention tank subject to its proper maintenance, and
that Mr. LeBlanc informed the Committee that it is his intention to acquire a permanent site elsewhere in the
general vicinity but that he needed time to do this and he also explained his present difficult housing situation
and his urgent need for an immediate location -- be received and filed and as recommended therein, Mr. LeBlanc
be :,gi ven temporary permission for one year to locate a mobile home measuring 60 feet by 14 feet on the said
Hersey property on obtaining a building permit, and that because of the poor soil conditions for on-site sewage,
Mr. LeBlanc be advised that extensions of this time period would not be granted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, regarding the
application made by Mr. Ivan T. Nelson for temporary permission to locate a mobile home at 1867 Manawagonish Road
about 700 feet east of the Western Division Police Station, advising that the Committee recommends that Mr.
Nelson be granted such temporary permission, subject to, (1) building permits being obtained for the mobile home
and for the proposed modular home, (2) a permit being obtained for the demolition of the existing burned dwelling,
and (3) the removal of the mobile home from the property when the modular home is ready for occupancy but in any
event wi thin one year from the date of Council's approval -- and also advising that the said area is zoned "RF"
Rural in which a mobile home may be permitted, and that in his letter to Council, Mr. Nelson stated that the
proposed mobile home will be placed on a lot which consists 'of an acre of land and that his reason for making
application was because his home was burnt during the February 3rd last blackout and as his wife has a heart
condition and cannot go up and down stairs and as he is partially blind, they find it inconvenient, and they
would like to have a temporary permit for a mobile home as they fully intend to rebuild within the year - and
also advising that the lot on which Mr. Nelson wishes to place the mobile home is the Same one on which the burnt
house is located, and he proposed to place the mobile home behind it and to then demolish the burnt building and
to replace it with a conventional one-family dwelling which would be a modular home which he intends to buy from
the same company from which he would be buying his mobile home and the mobile home would be traded in on the
modular home -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, ad-
vlslng that at the Common Council meeting of January 27th, 1975, the Council accepted a recommendation of the
Advisory Committee that permission be granted for one year to Northern Construction Company to place a temporary
office building on Galbraith Construction Company land on the northern side of Ocean Westway about 1,600 feet
west of the Lorneville Road intersection, and that the company used two mobile office buildings, which it joined,
to make one building, and that at that time, the company felt that, within the year, it would have been able to
determine the location and size of a more permanent office within the city limits; and advising that the company
has now applied for a second one-year permit and gives the following reasons: due to the slump in the construction
industry, it is rather difficult for the company to now decide to move to a more permanent location, although
this is still contemplated as soon as the volume of work shows reasonable increase - at the time of the application
last year, the manager of the company stated that there will be no warehousing or repair shop activities on the
site, consequently, no deliveries by truck will occur - the building was to be occupied by six or seven office
personnel only -- and advising that the Building Inspection staff find the state of occupancy to be in good
order -- and recommending that the Council grant temporary permission for a further one-year period -- be received
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the Common
Council accept the sum of $496.00 in lieu of land for public purposes from the Mr. M. B. Cassidy Sub-division,
and that the letter from the said Committee, advising that Mr. Cassidy is sub-dividing his lot at the corner of
Pauline Street and Loch Lomond Road (1597 Loch Lomond Road) and the Property Management Branch estimates that the
market value of the vacant lot is $6,200.00 which means that the sum of $496.00 is payable in lieu of land for
pUblic purposes, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising that
the Marion Bennett property is situated on the westerly side of the Norris Road and tentative approval was
granted last fall for the severance of a 100-foot lot from it for subsequent conveyance to Mr. David McLean, and
that recently, the surveyors, Murdoch-Lingley Ltd., advised that the Norris Road right-of-way is legally only 33
feet and not 66 feet and a widening strip is therefore shown for vesting in the City; and further advising that
the case at hand is a relatively minor 270-foot-long street widening, and that, however, the City Solicitor and
the Planning Department felt that it would be proper to obtain Council's assent, and the plan was therefore taken
to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and the Committee recommends that the Council assent to
the submitted plan -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
3~to
~
?/ahn.l9~y/s-
C'P",.,....".
II/tilJ?.;:P"~ ~~p
Si?J? ,.enstt'd
, tX~YI?/e.~~el7~
p/al7, )Pe:>/5-P7 )(
I9ve. I'(?-,;{onmff.
oS: :T ~~ a....".-
Sand Zbve ~
hS~. s/te '
;y, ff}.//sf- Cb~?
s.:r I/$ff' {'pm..,.,.
~~-/aw re
d 4ep,l??~ 1'/ ,(Ci-!-/'P.
s-#-<<>>(;(_rd
t!"I7-t-rQI ert= IV?h
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that the plan that is submitted be substituted for the Manford Thompson development plan which
was filed relative to the November 13th, 1975 re-zoning of the former Speedway Express property on Molson
Avenue and that the said property was re-zoned from "I-I" Light Industrial to "RM-l" Multiple Residential
classification for the purpose of erecting twenty town-house units in accordance with a plan filed with
the Common Clerk, and further advising that the re-zoning is subject to the conditions that (1) the site
be so graded so as to ensure drainage away from the adjoining properties, (2) the site be suitab~fenced,
and (3) the whole development be appropriately landscaped; and further advising that Mr. Thompson, after
consultation with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, has found it necessary to revise his plans,
and is requesting that a revised plan be substituted for the one now on file - and that the plan now on
file with the Common Clerk shows twenty lots each approximately 20 feet in width running from the Molson
Avenue street line to the rear property line, and the new plan shows the same number of lots but twelve of
these will be off an internal private street - eight lots will have frontage on a small private street
which will be parallel to Molson Avenue - a common plan area will be provided and developed in the no,thwestern
corner of the site - the new plan is considered to be an improvement over the plan now on file -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the above named change in the Manford Thompson development plan I
in any way contradicts the recent decision the Council made on the amount of square footage required per .
building lot in the city. Mr. Barfoot stated that he did not have that exact information; however, he
noted that the Advisory Committee's letter states that the new plan is considered to be an improvement
over the plan now on file, and he felt that the change is the usual type which usually comes about as a
result of actually adapting the plans to the site conditions.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission,
advising that it has come to the attention of the Commission that some thirty acres of land presently'
owned by the New Brunswick Housing Corporation between the Dr. W. F. Roberts Hospital School and the Co-
Operative Housing section of land on Sand Cove Road is deemed unusable due to lack of storm sewerage, and
because it is felt that such land should be considered as prime land for housing due to its location on
roads with water and schools accessible, and that present information indicates a limited use is proposed
for such land, the Commission recommends that the City enter into communication with the New Brunswick
Housing Corporation to determine if the land can be used for housing and under what conditions -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission,
advising that it has studied the concept of accommodation standard control of rent as requested by Common
Council resolution of November 12th, 1975, and it has caused public notice to be given and it is the
conclusion of the Commission that the public is not averse to the concept; and noting that the Province
will not be implementing the proposed Residential Tenancies Act in 1976 and the need for accommodations
standards has not lessened; and recommending that the City seek the necessary legislative authority at
this session of the Legislative Assembly in order to allow it to enact such a by-law if it deems it
;p.rQper..,. and further advising that the Commission is continuing its study on the wording of a draft by-
law and will report further -- be referred to the Legal Department for study and a report.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Historic Sites and Events Com-
mittee, noting that some twenty cars utilize City-owned land on the south side of Magazine Street (whiCh
f.1j~pr/'c oS'/~~ is part of the Fort Howe site) as a private parking lot, and that while long range plans call for the
~k'".ents' Cp,p,;". beautification of the area by curb and grassing and planting flowers, it is, felt that for the present, use
of the land as a parking site would not be contrary to City plans, but, however, that use of the site by
Fpl"t- /!Qwe S/ residents of the Fort Howe Apartments as a free private parking site is not in the best economics of the
/1Ja.f".;lz/ne $tf: City; and advising that the Committee feels that this site could produce some $2,000.00 revenue which,
17.-;-).(/'J7tT ~ could be used to further beautify and maintain the Fort Howe site, and that, at the same time, it is not
,-~ ~ /. out of the way that persons using private parking on City property should pay for such use; and recom-
~h 3~~~/J7Jr mending that the area in question be considered to be a civic parking lot and that the City lease parking
~.~~Ir/~~~ space lots to persons wishing to use the same in that area and that the income of such monies be allocated
~/~hl7.I.9~IS. to the Fort Howe operations of maintenance, upkeep and operations payment for guides in the summer, be
(!t7mnr. referred to the Saint John Parking Commission and to the Planning Advisory Committee. '
CPH,? /r1',Pp/h5
O/pf t!17f!j,L/.;:;A
s~/e PI"
ren&a/
.
Consideration was given to a letter from Councillor Kipping, noting that the former City Hall on
Prince William Street and other City-owned properties in the immediate area, have presumably been avail-
able for sale or rental for approximately five years, and stating his belief that the Council should
request from the City Manager a statement of what contacts have been made, by whom were they initiated,
and what firm offers have been received for any of this space during this period.
I
On motion of Councillor Kipping
I
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that a statement be provided to Council of what contacts
have been made and by whom were they initiated, and what firm offers have been received for any of the' old
City Hall (on Prince William Street) space during the period it has been available for sale or 'rental __
that is, that a report be made to Council on what interest has been shown in the past five years, ap-
proximately, during which time this space has been available for sale or rental, to show whether or not
the land at the said location has been in demand and what the City has been doing about these demands, if
any.
Councillor Davis supplied the following information regarding the above noted subject: the Land .
~aJ?~ ~~~. Committee has been in constant discussion with the Department of Public Works in Ottawa to try to do
,ce~ Gt?V1!. /V'o. something with that block on the east side of Prince William Street, between Princess and Duke Streets,
-2?e?~ because it is probably the last block in the city with a good number of old buildings in it - the final
""~ // ,~meeting will be held probably at the end of this week or the first of next week; Mr. Lingwood's report'is
?p,.,~m. ~.P/~~ done, the architect's work is done, and we have heard that they are going to retain the second floor in
~
,....-
371
.Jh $.m, .511:
b/&dk
0/.<< C'/~~
//a/~ e7f~.
I
1 S.;J:;z;,.<<~d:
'?eMrA-s L&t
Gr.iJhLv/eu/
>>ut'_st-. ";lJ0l
~H aI1:i1"t-ee1
p..,t: /c:>.-~ r.
'Ec1,,/r m-i-/
.
{lVldh. /I.
0'ncewt
I
(;epJ"l~e ;z::
0' Cpnne //,
tl.C
Wa/t-er
.:l3ec/ret-C-
/fe-zPh/J,1
.
/JkL~<<
'pt'I?/tedl.
1
I
(In. ~'ff//re>
,{O?j,">tG '
/1$5(;1C'.
. hpl/d-:lb.
7(,;/(pI J:
S~ef1heh
.....
the Post Office building as Federal offices so it will not be available to the New Brunswick Museum, and we also
have heard ,that they feel that the use of the old City Hall buildings on the corner of Princess and Prince
William Streets - that group - could best be put to something in the nature of a Labour' Temple with restaurant,
et cetera - that is actually "in the works" - that is the only serious enquiry we have had - on a remodelling of
those buildings, they have engaged their own architects, and it looks quite favourable; the heat was turned off
in the buildings a couple of years ago, unfortunately, and it has caused some damage but it was nothing that is
irreparable - the buildings are now being heated; the feeling at the moment is that the Heritage people in Ottawa
are very serious about this block and that it will be retained as it is; the revenue to the City from the lease
of these properties has not been determined as yet - we have not really gone into a lease rental or a profit-
sharing discussion, at all - but, the plans as they look now are nearly exactly what Mr. Angus is looking for,
Mr. David Carter of the Department of Urban Affairs supports the conception, Mr. Len Herriott is of the same
mood - so, it looks as though this is the year that something might just happen on that block; but, up until now,
he thinks it is quite clear that people have not been eager to rent the space on Prince William Street; but right
now, there is a genuine effort on the part of some citizens in this city to make good use of those properties and
public use for exhibit space, restaurant space, meeting space and office space. He stated that he hopes that in a
couple of weeks we will have a much fuller report.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd., advising
that as part of the development of Grandview Industrial Park, the company raised money by issuing debentures and
when these matured, the funds were borrowed from the Bank of Montreal; that as security for the loan, the company
sought and obtained loan guarantees from the New Brunswick Industrial Finance Board and from the City of Saint
John in the amount of $500,000.00; that subsequent to sales of land in the Park, the bank loan has been reduced
to $161,000.00 and further land sales are in the works to the extent of some $77,000.00 which will have the
effect of reducing the loan to about $85,000.00; that the company still owns just over eleven acres in the Park
valued at approximately $170,000.00; that the Finance Board and City guarantees have expired and the Bank wishes
the City to renew its guarantee over the outstanding amount and that in view of the foregoing, the company asks
that the Common Council authorize a guarantee for the said $161,000.00 to the Bank of Montreal -- be received and
filed and the request complied with.
Councillor A. Vincent asked what the rate is in regard to the above matter, and if it is a prime rate.
In reply, Mr. Park advised that this is to take the place of something that becomes time-expired; it was origin-
ally done jointly by the City and the Province because the company can now foresee the closing of its operations
with almost the whole of its land fully disposed of, it appears that in the not-too-distant future, with the loan
having been reduced as much as it is, that it will very shortly be wiped out altogether - and that is the reason
the company is not applying once more jointly to the Province and to the City but now is only looking to the City
because of the small amount involved; it 'is simply a matter of giving a guarantee in the event that the company
is not able to repay the loan itself; as far as we can see, on the strength of the past experience and what
is presently on hand, there is not too much likelihood of the City being called upon to make this guarantee good;
he does not have information regarding the borrowing rate and whether it is a prime rate, but it can be obtained
from the company. The Mayor stated that he believes that Councillor A. Vincent desires that information for next
week.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that with regard to the letter from Mr. George F. O'Connell,
Q.C., which advises that on April 14th, 1975 following the submission of a brief in connection with the proposed
Beckett Sub-division development at the Martinon By-Pass and Acamac Backland Road location, the matter was to be
referred to City staff for a report, and that it was Mr. O'Connell's impression that much of the opposition to
the said development may have been based upon the feeling that in the absence of other development in the area,
the development of the Beckett land was premature, and which states that it now appears that with the proposed
prison development in that general area, that reasoning is no longer applicable and that the development of the
prison will presumably require the provision of water, sewerage and power services which the said developers
suggest should be planned with the development of the Beckett lands in mind, and that at this time it would seem
appropriate to have the Council insist that City staff submit its report as directed by the Common Council at the
April 14th, 1975 meeting -- the necessary report be submitted as soon as possible.
Councillor Parfitt advised that she has a map that shows the relation of the Beckett lands to the site
for the medium security institution and that the distance is less than a mile from that site. The Mayor felt
that the main problem is going on to a throughway - that we are trying to use that Martinon cut-off and it is
bringing traffic there, which constitutes a danger. Councillor M. Vincent asked for an indication as to how much
it is going to cost the City to supply the water and the sewerage and the proper power to the site for the
prison, so that the Council can have that information to see how it relates to the contents of Mr. O'Connell's
letter regarding provision of services for the Beckett lands. Mr. Barfoot replied that it is not the intention
that it would cost the City anything to supply water, sewerage and power. Councillor Hodges, in confirming that
is the understanding the Council members had in this regard, stated that if Mr. O'Connell's client wants the
services he has to put up his own money for them. Councillor Higgins stated that in the light of new facts - if a
prison is going in there and the Federal Government is putting in the water, sewerage and power, et cetera, and
you are talking about a housing development that very well might connect under Mr. O'Connell's cost, and what
have you, to open up a development - he thinks the report should come in in the light of new facts, and not the
report that was forthcoming a year ago. Councillor Kipping felt that this is something which indicates, perhaps,
that some of the apprehension of the people in the Martinon area - that their real estate will be devalued as a
result of the penitentiary going in there - may be allayed by the fact that here is a developer who is still
interested in a proposal which he made before knowing that a penitentiary was going in there - he, in fact, has
become more interested; he felt that this does take away that one point which the Martinon residents had in
objection. Councillor Green reminded the Council members that this (the penitentiary site) is still in the stage
of negotiation with the Land Committee and that as far as requirements for the land, and what they would be
willing to pay, and so on, has not been settled.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the New Brunswick Branch of The United Empire
Loyalists' Association of Canada, advising that the Branch wishes to sponsor the Loyalist Day ceremonies on May
18th, 1976, marking the 191st anniversary of the granting of the Charter of the City of Saint John, and that it
is proposed to have the flag raising ceremony at 8.00 a.m. followed by a youth parade and assembly at 11.00 a.m.,
and that the Branch requests the permission of the City to arrange for these events, be received and filed and
the necessary permission be granted.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Ralph J. Stephen, solicitor for Caldo
372
~
J?.;l~A :T
Sohp.Je"'?
Ca/..,t'p ,,(~~
/17111/'/!le I'///e
h~~~-;z>k~
/7ct:'e:>s
J('f;htf-P"/'-
71'<011'7.-7. ,4'..( v/s .
a.....,..h?
s.:T: h'ffN.!'e
$k.;>~/n;l C/ub
.-tne!.
/Y~/i'e -fe.;w/
elf. .d1
.z;: e ~/me in
C'/Iff r/b!-s
Ltd., which is an owner of a sub-division at Millidgeville in the City of Saint John, known as Millidge-
ville Estates Phase 3, which sub-division was approved by the City in the latter part of 1975, advising
that this letter is directed to two portions of land shown on the sub-division plan as 'Parcel A and
Parcel B, and that on August 30th, 1963, an agreement was entered into between a former owner of the
lands in question, Turnbull Real Estate Company and the Board of School Trustees (who were the former
owners of an adjacent parcel of land now owned by the City, of Saint John) and in that agreement, the
Turnbull Company agreed to supply to the Board of School Trustees two strips of land 66 feet in width:to
provide for access from the Board's land into the Turnbull land or across the Turnbull land - and that at
the time Caldo Ltd. presented this sub-division plan to the City for approval, this developer had time
commitments with its financing and was unable to take the time to renegotiate these two easements or
rights-of-way; and advising that his client proposed that the City, through its proper departments,
examine its rights of access to the property of Caldo Ltd. and, if it is felt that access is necessary,
then permission be granted to redraw the right-of-way doing the least damage to the parcel as possible,
that is, instead of drawing it through the middle of the lot as contemplated by the agreement, favour one
side of the lot or the other - and noting that Parcel B was so drawn that it contains 120 feet frontage
and advising that it is his client's suggestion that the City release one part of the Parcel, that is, a
lot 60 by 100 feet and if necessary, maintain the other 60 by lOa-foot lot as an access; and advising
that he has met with Mr. Zides on this matter and Mr. Zides is aware of his client's request; and ad-
vising that his client and he are interested in as early a decision on this matter as possible and they
are prepared to meet with any City departments or committees that are necessary -- be laid on the table
until a report is received from the Planning Advisory Committee regarding this matter.
I
.
I
Read a form letter prepared by The Saint John Figure Skating Club Inc., and forwarded to
Council by Natalie Leavitt, 62 Cedar Grove Crescent; Joan MacPhee, 260 Manchester Avenue; Elizabeth J.
Angevine, 143 Lingley Lane; Leon Young, 75 Courtenay Avenue; Madaline Boutilier, Box 443, Rothesay,
N. B.; Mr. and Mrs. Barrie Rigby, III Mallette Road; Ray and Bonnie Lloyd, 17 Ray Street; Kimberley Peer,
938 Kennebecasis Drive; Isabella Kenet, Spruce Lake, R.R. 6; and Mr. and Mrs. S. J. Lough, 885 McCavour
Drive; in which protest is made of the decision of the Common Council tO,cut back on the number of days
per year that City rinks will be in operation, and which advises that the figure skating school and
Gordie Clark's Hockey School were both lost to the City for summer 1976 in favour of playing tennis, et
cetera in the new $3,000,000.00 arenas. The form letter expresses the view that the shortened season, as
reported - early November to the end of March, five months only - is utter misuse of such expensive
facilities which were designed for year round use, and advises that the Figure Skating Club offered tq
pay $12,000.00 for the use of eight weeks' ice this summer - this should have covered all the "out of
pocket" expense of operating the arenas - but the Club was denied its request. The letter states that the
said Club feels that Council should reconsider its action and expand, not curtail, organized ice activities
in City arenas, especially when the net cost is so small.
.
The Mayor advised that, over and above the above noted form letter, he has been in receipt of
several letters stating that there are certain groups that run such things as figure skating, power
skating and senior skating and they feel they could at least make the rink break even for using it during
the summer months. Councillor Gould advised that he has met with these people and learned that what they
are really trying to do is to circumvent the Provincial Government restraints on spending; he added that
we looked at that very seriously and at many alternatives that might have been possible to work, but in
each case it came down to the fact that we were looking at ways to circumvent the said restraints, and we
could not do that, in all due conscience. He felt that it is unfortunate that this had to happen this I
year, but that maybe the situation will look a little better next year and the groups concerned can get
back to a fuller schedule. The Mayor noted that the problem is that the Government said we can spend
fourteen per cent, but even though the City broke even on it the City has to spend the money and that
figure has to be included in the gross figure. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he understands and
appreciates the restraints, and that he felt that if this situation is going to happen another year the
City might look at the fact that there are people who are employed at these arenas, anyway, and that if
the various organizations, such as the Figure Skating Club, or others, are able to pay the operational
costs through ice rental, this is something that the City should perhaps incorporate in its submission to
the Provincial Government, because it is a shame 'that people who want to have figure skating cannot have
it when they are able to pay the exact costs for it themselves, out of their income; he felt that, more
importantly than that, from the figure skating point of view, they lose the services of instructors and
once they lose them for a period of time they are very difficult to get back. The Mayor stated that he
had planned to call (the Provincial Government) and see what we could do on that. Councillor Gould
pointed out that the City tried to net some of its budget items and for that reason the Province sent the
budget back to the City with instructions to reduce that budget by a million dollars to its budget for .
netting purposes, the Government is certainly not going to permit the City to do it for $12,000.00 in
regard to this particular situation. Councillor MacGowan asked if there is any reason why the staff
could not be given a leave of absence for the eight weeks involved and let the Figure Skating Club pay
their salaries, and it would not show in the City's books as a way to get around the problem. The Mayor
replied that he feels the City will be looking into the matter in more detail, but, right now, the
situation is as discussed above. Councillor MacGowan noted that a point had been made that these groups
will lose the services of these instructors and that we cannot keep putting this matter off, and she
asked whether Mr. Park could inform Council as to whether it could be arranged in any way, that the said
staff could have a leave of absence, as suggested. The Mayor stated that he plans to call the Minister I
of Municipal Affairs and see if the Minister can find any way for us to get around that one problem; if
the Minister does not find an answer to the problem, the matter will come back to Council. In reply to
the suggestion advanced by ,Councillor MacGowan, Mr. Barfoot pointed out that it is a question of the
general philosophy of the Anti-Inflation Programme, which Programme is meant to control the City's
spending and to control an agency's spending on behalf of the City. He stated that this particular
example was actually mentioned to the City by the Department of Municipal Affairs when the City was
attempting to get the budget approved - the Department official said that the regulation was written in
such a way that a city, for instance, would not be able to turn over its rink to a service club and have
them run it at apparently no cost to the city because that would be getting around the anti-inflation I
restraint - the idea is to cut the spending of the city and its various agencies. Councillor MacGowan
made the point that the City would be saving money because it would not be paying those particular men _
somebody else could be paying them - there surely must be some way it can be done. The Mayor noted that
this is a rule and regulation that we would have to find our way around. Councillor Cave noted that it
was this Council, not the City's Recreation Department, that had these budgetary cut-backs, and in view
of that, he stated he should think that the Council should refer this matter to the Director of Recreation
and Parks for a complete report, as to whether the Figure Skating Club's proposal is as good as it
sounds, or not.
Councillor Kipping'explained that this matter first came to him as a query from the Saint John
~~f/~uJte igure Skating Association, and he called Councillor Gould in on it because Councillor Gould is chairman .
,., 1..-_ L' /J tJe of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board, and they met not only with representatives of the Figure
~n~l)?jr r.7~.5 . Skating Association but also with the Director of Recreation and Parks, and investigated the alternatives,
and it ended up being the fact that all we would do in any alternative we might adopt - and there was one
good one, which Councillor MacGowan has just mentioned - would be to circumvent the spending restraint,
ut, on the particular point that Councillor MacGowan has brought up, about leasing - the way it was
~
r"
4l)"'J !J
t~l 6\ t~
.
1
-' c e .{-/me;'
CN~ r/J?.f.:.
s..T~~u#e
$A'".;dln:/~
I Le.
.7J I,., ~ 6"'~ q.
'7>_nYS
IfIfn/der
ff Y;Jdh
/J?01 !for
.
(}fJUI7. ;rl.
//"J?t!en
t'e,MJ7e/l-
{/,.,/f,I?S
relal-itm -
I sA/'p
{!t7h1I>1, /r1wA.
.
I
I
. ~tllVl.frjjp'
.....
brought up to us was the possibility of leasing an arena and paying for it themselves (that is, the Skating
Association would pay for it) sounded very good, but the first thing we run into is the fact that we would have
difficulties with insurance, and, also, with setting a precedent for leasing out City property to other groups
which, certainly, would not have the responsibility for looking after it that the City has - and, thirdly, we
would have problems with employees who are members of Unions which do not normally permit that kind of an arrange-
ment to be made - they cannot, normally; so, we finally had to put it down, for all those reasons, and the
representatives of the Skating Association at that time understood, although they did not like it any more than
the Ci~y likes it, because the City realizes that, surely, with a self-sustaining thing like this we should be
able to do it. He stated he thinks that we should now make a strong representation to the Provincial Government
that these kinds of self-sustaining projects should be outside the restraint programme, because here are citizens
who want to do something and pay for it by themselves and yet, they cannot, because of the restraint programme.
Councillor Green spoke in favour of approaching the Minister of Municipal Affairs, as mentioned above by the
Mayor, regarding the effect of the restraint programme regulations on our young people, to see what can be done
to change the regulations in a matter such as the one presently being discussed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above named matter be referred to the Director of
Recreation and Parks for a complete report, with regard to the above mentioned proposal of the Saint John Figure
Skating Club Inc. to pay the City the sum of $12,000.00 for the use of eight weeks of ice time during the summer
of 1976 at City rinks.
The Council members noted that after receipt of the above requested report, they can make a Council
decision regarding what action to take on the matter in question in an approach to the Minister of Youth, and
that, in the meantime, the Mayor will be getting in touch with the Provincial Government by telephone regarding
this particular matter. Councillor Kipping noted that these matters are before the New Brunswick Legislative
Assembly - maybe the proposed change in the municipal grants formula - and he felt that this is the time the
Council should be getting to that body as quickly as it can regarding this particular matter, and he suggested
that the above motion could include the wording that the Provincial Government be approached officially in this
regard. Councillor Gould stated he feels it should be made clear that there is no way such an arrangement could
be made regarding the Saint John Figure Skating Club's proposal this year, because it is too late for that group
and too late for the Gordie Clark Hockey School, and too late for the instructors in figure skating already
because those instructors have now committed themselves to other communities. Councillor Kipping replied that
the said groups know that.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he desired to raise a matter, and to make comments on it. He stated
that an incident has been going on for the last, perhaps, week in this city that he thinks requires some cor-
rection and perhaps even a comment, or two: it has been bounced around for three or four days now, the comments
made about certain members of this Council having strong affiliations and relationships to unions, and he felt
that the Council members had their say on the subject at the last meeting, about who they represent, and who they
do not represent - he thinks that all of the Councillors try to represent all the citizens the best they can. He
stated that, however, an article appeared in the newspaper, over and above this, and he has to believe the
article to be true, unless the writer imagined it or wants us to state that it is not fact - and that was - when
there was a reference made by some member of this Council that it would be surprising to find out or know the
number of votes that are cast in Committee of the Whole on an 8 to 5 basis - he was referring to 8 votes either
for or against something, and 5 votes either for or against something. He stated that he thinks two things
happened here, that if the rest of this Council does not speak on, that perhaps they are either accepting it as
to be true, or they are not concerned about it - both of which he thinks are wrong. He stated that he is not
suggesting that the Committee of the Whole is any great secret - what goes on, there - at all; he noted that
everybody says, at election time, that they are going to take more items out of Committee of the Whole and have
open_door sessions - and he stated that he is satisfied that there are no secrets or any great mysteries done in
Committee of the Whole, and what is there, in a majority of cases, should be there - but he thinks that when a
member of this Council comes out and says almost to the extent that there is a certain group of Councillors who
are completely voting on a number of items in a block of eight in Committee of the Whole, that they are questioning
the integrity of Council in action in Committee of the Whole, and they are identifying almost a conspiracy, to
continually vote that way - he thinks this is wrong and that it is degrading the Council as a whole and it is
also insinuating to the public that there are, perhaps, improper or wrong goings-on in voting that way. He
advised that this was reported in Mr. David Williams' column in that he was advised by a member of this Council
that he would be surprised how many votes were 8 to 5, and that he (Councillor M. Vincent) thinks that, in order
that this thing does not get really led astray and somebody later realize just how serious it is, the Mayor
should ask that person who told Mr. Williams, to declare his stand right here, at this Council, as to how many
times the votes are done in Committee of the Whole on an 8 to 5 basis. He stated he thinks that the Mayor should
remove the question that the person who said that - if, in fact, it was said - created when that person made that
remark. The Mayor stated that, to start with, the votes in the Committee of the Whole are not legal; legal votes
are taken in Common Council, and they are then public information, and if anybody wants to look up the minutes
they can verify that what Councillor M. Vincent is saying is true, or whatever anybody else says. Councillor
Cave stated that, further to what Councillor M. Vincent has mentioned, and just to set the record straight _ Dave
Williams made a statement in his editorial that Councillor Cave, now a real estate salesman, was a member of the
Union during the many years Councillor Cave worked as a foreman at the Saint John Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company.
He stated that in order to put the record straight, he was with the Union and a member of the Union for seventeen
years, and in 1938 he went Foreman and he waived all rights to Unions, from then on in; for thirty-three years,
he was Foreman at Saint John Shipbuilding. He stated that if that is Union activities, he does not know what is.
He stated that he would like to withdraw a statement he made to the Mayor: he is not sure whether he called the
gentleman a "skunk" or a "snake", but he will withdraw that remark because he wants to stay on that Committee and
he wants to find out how irresponsible and unethical that same gentleman can be. Councillor Hodges stated that
there are articles that he read in the newspaper that are very erroneous. He pointed out to the Mayor that on
grievances matters, they do not come to open Council and the Council members vote on those matters, to either
uphold or deny grievances, in Committee of the Whole. He stated that the so-called Labour representatives on
Council vote in true conscience - he noted that in the past, they have voted 12 to 1, and the only one who did
not vote in that matter was himself, and that was the time when the Arbitration Board chaired by The Reverend
Canon H. C. Quinn made its recommendation. He added that there have been other times when the so-called Union
eople have acted on the grievances for the City, and he knows of one particular one on which he served when the
COuncil went against the Union. He stated that it upsets him that a person would question his integrity _ he can
only say that, about others, he questions theirs. He stated that everybody knew when he came to Council, what
his feelings and affiliations were - he had never hid it. Councillor Green stated that as far as voting in
Committee of the Whole or even in this Council, he votes as he sess fit - no ties - and with a clear conscience _
it has been that ,way since the day he was first elected, and he hopes it will be that way until he retires from
this Council - and that takes in quite a long period of time.
Councillor Kipping stated that, as the author of the speech which instigated most of this discussion,
he would just like to have the record clear that what he said was, of course, in public and was available for
ublic view, although it was reported, in his opinion, very poorly in that things were patched together and said
in a way in which he did not say them. He stated that he would like it to be known that he provided the Mayor
ith a copy of the complete speech, and that he would be willing, indeed, to provide all the Councillors with a
opy of that speech. He added that he stands by what he said, and he did say that there were eight members of
374
~
LEGAL
C'lf!! Spkl-/~pr
t!l?hJ~. W'Jp/e
C"/f?l/an(;O~
ST'Pa'tiY?p,eh;
~ed. /lSS~.
Np, '-/
7JNt"fI S'Kd~
(;t'eh'?;;J/e PI7 )
sOIme
1I"",a;-, 7?/~h b
Cb~-.
eKI!'h/,PI/Qh "eh14-.
#Km.;;/Jo? '1?/~h
. /1cr
C'tf!l Spl/~/tpr
{y.t If /J?.-nafer
PQ Tk~ CIN'6'-/!,
S. T %11 ~~""e h S
~ec-t.l'lssP~.
Nt?, ~I
[Jp1f/7, #//tnt!'6'#C
(','Iy ~iilhe.il~eJ"
/l!l?ne-h J7 C'/, !I
b(1/')?t>I-VI~ n.?Ee
s..T /Ius hiPs
-&~tff'K/.pr ?e
s-t-e,Phen ~~
~f'a' rl"'Phr
:JJl.<h~d/l7, Fla.
TuqPl' /tI.J't
~a....,,,//MsA/;o
Council who were either presently affiliated, or had been affiliated, in the past, with Unions; he stated
further that he would like to be very clear that he did not make the other statement which Councillor M.
Vincent has mentioned, and that is, that one would be surprised how many votes upstairs are 8 to 5 _ he
advised that he did not make that statement at any time, either privately or publicly, and he does not
know who did, and he can understand the consternation of, any Councillor who would have heard about that
statement.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that this meeting continue; in legal session.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he wonders why the Council cannot deal with agenda Item 27 in I~
open Counc iL
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green, A. Vincent and Davis voting
Consideration was given to the letter, dated March 19th, ,1976, from the City Solicitor, with
reference to the decision made in Committee of the Whole on January 12th, 1976 to uphold the grievance
regarding a policewoman working on the Drug Squad of the Police Department, and with reference to Common
Council resolution of March 1st, 1976 which directs that the matter be referred to the Human Rights
Commission with the intention of obtaining an exemption, and to the opinions expressed in the said letter
by the City Solicitor, that it would be improper for the City to ask the Human Rights Commission for an
exemption under the Human Rights Act and thereby allow the City to discriminate on the basis of sex, when
in this case both parties have agreed not to so discriminate and that to make such a request unilaterally,
would be asking the Commission to interfere with a Collective Agreement, without the concurrence of the
other party. The letter recommends that the City Manager and the Chief of Police meet with the Union
representatives to explain the matter along the lines as outlined in this letter, and seek their con-
currence and agreement to an application for such an exemption, which, in the opinion of the Chief of
Police, is necessary for the more efficient operation of the Police Department.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
.
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor, the City Manager and the Chief of
of Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. in
from the City Solicitor, and see if they can come to an agreement based on
from the City Solicitor.
Police meet
view of the
the content
with the Executive
above named letter
of the said letter
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Commissioner of Finance could telephone the Commissioner ,of
Finance of the City of Moncton tomorrow and ask him what bank borrowing rate that city is paying, so that
he can compare that rate with the rate that is being paid by the City of Saint John. He added that he
desires this information because he intends to bring the matter up in open Council next week.
On motion
I
The meeting adjourned.
~oo "~eo>.
.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty~
ninth day of March, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
I
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of
Engineering and Works, J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Admini-
stration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, C. Nicolle, Director
of Recreation and Parks, and D. French, Director of Personnel and Training
I
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
Mr. Stephen Mosher was present at the meeting with the members of the Saint John Dry Dock Huskies
Tug of War Team. He advised that the Team members were guests at a luncheon tendered, in their honour ~n
Dunedin, Florida, United States of America, when they participated in the recent Tug of War Championships,
and that at that luncheon they presented to their hosts the New Brunswick flag which was received with
great enthusiasm and appreciation, and they also extended greetings from Mayor E. A. Flewwelling; he also
advised that the Team members were royally treated by their hosts of Dunedin. He advised that the Team, on
behalf of the Mayor, Council members, Chamber of Commerce and the citizens of the city of Dunedin, extend
the deep appreciation of the said officials and citizens of the gift of the New Brunswick flag and greetings
from Mayor Flewwelling, and, in reciprocation, would now present to the citizens of the City of Saint John
and to the Common Council, on behalf of the City of Dunedin, Florida, a plaque bearing the coat of arms of
that city with the thought that the City of Saint John will extend a warm welcome to the people of Dunedin
who gave the Team such a great welcome in Dunedin. At this time, Mr. Mosher expressed the sincere thanks
.
....1
r"
a7S
.
I
I
'lJ,4J7n.lltLv,-
(7f7t??P1.
.
I
.
7?e-~f)nil?f
I/i"n/lfht:; f?,C
CokP1bKS
I>> r. .( ees),OI
,() Zed
ZOJ7iJ7!l
~~..: ,{.:/W
:lJoc-I-o r.,e.-
. et~J%-/st-
f).,c;tioes
.....
of the Team members to those businesses and private donors along with those citizens of Saint John and surrounding
areas who supported them financially and morally, and he mentioned in particular Councillors F. Hodges and A.
Vincent. He also expressed special thanks to Mr. Andrew McArthur, Vice-President, and General Manager, and to Mr.
J. D. Irving, President of the Saint John Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Company Limited who made it possible for the
Team to bring home the International and North American Championship Tug of War Team of North America. Mr. James
Kyle, Lead Man of the Team, thereupon presented the said plaque to Mayor Flewwelling, who accepted it and expressed
to the Team on behalf of the Common Council and citizens of Saint John congratulations on the Team having become
the Heavyweight Tug of War Champions of North America. The members of the Team were introduced individually at
this time and received verbal recognition for their achievement.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising took place regarding the proposed re-zoning for the Knights
of Columbus of a proposed lot backing onto the St. Joachim's Church and Silver Glade Nursing Home lying opposite
what would be the intersection of Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue, with a frontage of about 515 feet along the
latter, and a depth of about 186 feet, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential to "RM-l" Multiple
Residential district classification, to permit the construction of a Knights of Columbus building with the first
phase slated for 1976. He stated that no written objections had been received in this regard.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated March 19th, 1976,
which recommends against the re-zoning of the proposed site for its intended use, for the reasons cited in the
letter, and further advises that the site could be re-zoned to "RM-l" Multiple Residential classification but the
Committee would not approve the proposed use at this particular location. The letter notes that the proposed
site is outside of approved sub-divisions in Silver Falls Park and it would lie,at the junction of the extensions
of Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue, and that its development would, therefore, be subject to the terms adopted
by Common Council at its November 3rd, 1975 and December 22nd, 1975 meetings as pre-conditions for further sub-
division, these being that:- (a) Mark Drive be extended to Loch Lomond Road with rough grading and chip seal
finish; (b) in addition to Bonita Avenue and Michael Crescent, a third street, Martha Avenue, be developed to
rough grade and chip seal surface to Mark Drive to reduce traffic through the existing low density residential
development and provide needed access to the apartment development; (c) development along Mark Drive, Cindy Lee
Street and the portion of Martha Avenue from the present sub-division to Mark Drive be undertaken with streets
and services to full City standards before further development south and west of the present sub-division (on
extensions of Michael Crescent and Martha Drive). The letter notes that twelve letters were sent to obtain the
view of property owners in the area, and that the Residents' Association felt that, before any approval is given
for a building permit, Mark Drive should be completed to Loch Lomond Road with sidewalks and lighting installed;
that was the only letter received but the Advisory Committee received two telephone calls from individuals who
had reservations about the project. The letter further notes that the present zoning of the site does not permit
the proposed type of use, which is classed as a private club, and that the application for re-zoning does not
specify the zoning classification requested, but a private club, fraternity or lodge is a conditional use in an
"RM-l" Multiple Residential zone, which is the zoning of the adjacent area; a conditional use is one which is not
allowed as a matter of right but can be permitted by the municipal Planning Advisory Committee subject to such
terms and conditions as it may impose. The letter advises that in considering the application, the Committee felt
that (1) it is most likely that membership will not be restricted to local residents but will be open to the
whole community; (2) the generation of traffic will not be local in nature and could at times be excessive in
volume; (3) the proposed site is not on an arterial or collector street; (4) the preliminary plan indicates that
the building will not be of an architectural style suitable to the residential environment; (5) a use likely to
involve a liquor license from time to time is not compatible with a residential environment - a better location
is nearer to the focus of community facilities and district centres. The letter advises that it was felt that,
if this use is essential to the area, it should be located on Mark Drive or on Westmorland Road where there are
already community, oriented uses.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if there is land available on the public market on Mark Drive Or on West-
morland Road in the areas where the Advisory Committee is recommending the Knights of Columbus might locate this
proposed facility. Mr. Zides replied that there is undeveloped land, but he cannot say whether or not it is
available to this organization. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the existing zoning in the said area would be in
accord with the proposed type of establishment or facility. Mr. Zides advised that it would be so in the area
down towards Westmorland Road; he added that it might create a bit of controversy because some of the people from
that area are opposed to a tavern that is proposed to go in just off Mark Drive; on the other end of Mark Drive,
towards Loch Lomond Road, it would take a new kind of zoning. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the same thinking
would apply in relation to the Silver Falls housing in locating this proposed project on Mark Drive Or Westmorland
Road, as has been applied by the Advisory Committee suggesting against the location of this project in relation
to the housing that already exists in Silver Falls Park. Mr. Zides explained that in the area where this project
is proposed to go it is on what you might call a purely local or internal street - there is nothing there, at the
moment, but all of the lots that are proposed to be developed there would be for multiple family housing; on the
Mark Drive-Westmorland Road end of it, there are businesses primarily and on the opposite end (the Loch Lomond
Road end) there is really nothing there, and he does not know what the long-term development might be. Councillor
M. Vincent asked if Mr. Zides or the Planning Advisory committee have had an opportunity to speak with the
representatives of the Knights of Columbus on the content of the Committee's report as to its recommendation,
prior to this meeting of Council. Mr. Zides made negative reply.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table for one week until the
Council can look into all aspects of it.
It was noted that no person was present to offer comment with regard to the said proposed re-zoning.
Councillor M. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
The Common Clerk stated that the necessary advertising took place regarding a proposed amendment of the
Zoning By-Law for Dr. Leesha G. Zed, to permit offices of both a doctor and a dentist in one building, Dr. Zed
being desirous of extending the building at 101 Carleton Street for such purpose. He advised that no written
objections had been received in this matter. No person was present to speak either for, or against, the said
proposed amendment.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns amending Section 68(2) by inserting a new
clause (oa) after clause (0) to read, "subject to subsection (4), a professional or business office", and by
inserting a new subsection (4) to read as follows: "(4) A use mentioned in clause (oa) of subsection (2) may not
e located in excess of 300 feet from a 'B-3' or 200 feet from a 'B-2' zone", be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
endments Thereto".
~37B
~
.lJr.L~sl.;:j t;
2ed
;Zl?~/)?f ~-~
Z>~Rr+~ms
().,e,t/'cl?$
'Pe6e" /I. 7h~
Jle-2..t?I7/~
res-6-r/c.lf/on
:lJ"eJ?lfW'~4
$~-~/v:
dl?YI!2/o~>>?eh~
"'.,."
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns amending Section 68(2) by inserting
new clause (oa) after clause (0) to read, "subject to subsection (4), a professional or business office",
and by inserting a new subsection (4) to read as follows: "(4) A use mentioned in clause (oa) of subsection
(2) may not be located in excess of 300 feet from a 'B-3' or 200 feet from a 'B-2' zone", be read a second
time.
.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
1
Mr. Peter H. Thomas of Victoria, British Columbia, was present further to his letter, dated
February, 1976, in which he advises that he is seeking the approval of the Council to re-instate the "RM-2"
zoning in the Brentwood Sub-division with no construction time restrictions, as requested in his letter to
Mr. M. Zides of February 17th, 1976, copies of which had been provided for the Council members. The said
letter of February 17th advises that he purchased the said site from Associated Investors Corp. Ltd. on
July 20th, 1975, zoned as "RM-2" which had an approved plan to construct 902 units; that his purchase
greement does not have any time clause that indicates he must build buildings within any specified time
schedule; that Mr. Zides' letter of January 16th, 1976, to Mr. F. J. O'Keefe indicates the re-zoning of
this area was tied to a five-year time limit which had expired June 7th, 1975; that should economic con-
ditions exist in his opinion that he decide never to build on the said site but hold the land for speculative
appreciation, he requests Council confirmation at this time that the said "RM-2" zoning and the existing
approved plan of development of 902 units be given to him without any time limits, irrespective of whether
he constructs any buildings or not - that is, he wishes Council approval to hold the land for as long as he
chooses, to have no construction requirements, and to maintain his present zoning.
I
Mr. Thomas advised that he purchased 20.14 acres of the above named sub-division, near the
Brentwood Manor, and that the name of his company is Century 20 Real Estate, which has no affiliation with
Century 21 in Saint John and is a different company. He advised that after purchasing this land last July
he started work on the site, clearing the bog, and on January 19th, 1976 he found out by a letter from Mr.
Zides that the zoning when it was originally given on this particular site had expired, as noted in his
above mentioned letter to Mr. Zides, which was actually prior to his purchase of the land; Mr. Zides
informed him that in order to get a re-instatement of the zoning of the land he would be required to appear
before Council, and this has been the first opportunity he has had since then, to do so. He stated that
his appearance before this meeting was to ask the Council if he can build on this particular land _ he
added that they have no request to change the plan that was originally given - at this time there is no
intention to do so; he has developed plans for 96 condominium town houses which are going to the final
mortgage applications and building plans at this time, and they have already expended a little over $100,000.00
on the site. He advised that he has not yet got his mortgage funds but has every indication that it appears
they will be forthcoming, so he is planning on going ahead with the 96 units this year, being nothing
unforeseen happening; his biggest concern is that of having a built-in time restriction considering the
question of difficulty of financing in Canada this year; if it is at all economically viable, he wants, to
build the buildings exactly the same as they are on the plan. He advised that he is a developer and has
built about twenty million dollars worth of buildings, and he bought this land in Saint John to build on
and it is his full intention to build, but if it is economically not feasible to build he would not want to
be in a situation where he had spent in excess of a million dollars on a piece of land and not have it. He
added that he intends to build this land, just like anybody else does; in the event he does not build the
land and somebody else wants to buy it from him, it is for sale. Councillor MacGowan advanced the sug~
gestion that a five-year limit be attached to this development plan. Mr. Thomas replied that he is an
investor and has an investment in the site at this time in excess of $300,000.00 - this is a lot of money
and it could be invested anywhere - he has a company which employs quite a few people, and as he looks
ahead he wants to be very sure that he really has got what he purchased. He advised that it is secondary
behind the fact that he is coming before Council in the matter, because he really bought 902 units that he
could build on, that is his plan.
.
I
Councillor M. Vincent made the point that there are members on the Council who are not familiar
with this Brentwood Sub-division plan of five years or more ago, and he suggested that it might be pre-
mature of Council to try to make the type of grant that Mr. Thomas is requesting unless it has been dealt
with by staff and possibly a recommendation brought back to Council. He added that Mr. Thomas' requests are .
rather encompassing one, even though he appreciates Mr. Thomas' reason for bringing the request in, that
way. Mr. Thomas pointed out that he does not want to change the original plan - it is exactly as it - it
is a general plan that was approved approximately five and one-half years ago - he does not want to change
that plan, at this time.
Councillor Parfitt asked for information concerning the town housing proposed, and if they would
be built under the Assisted Home Ownership Programme which she believes puts a limit of approximately
$34,000.00 on each unit. Mr. Thomas replied that that is the exact type of town housing he has in mind for
this site; however, they are unique in that, to his knowledge, they have not been built anywhere in the I
Maritimes - they were successfully built in western Canada - they are a stack, back-to-back type of town
house - it is a two-storey type of town houses and is like an apartment where you have two storeys; there
are four separate, 24-suite buildings, which were the plans that were approved five and one-half years ago;
they are just now getting their costs in on them. He explained, in reply to Councillor Davis' points that
. Thomas could either keep or dispose of this land if he likes and Council has no control over that or
has nothing to do with that, and that in regard to Mr. Thomas' desire to tie this land up in a certain
zoning classification forever and a day a case like that would have to be referred to the City Solicitor to
find out if that is possible, he felt, and that he personally does not feel the said zoning should be a
ermanent type of thing -- that he would just have gone ahead and built but he received a letter which I
advises him how the City's zoning restrictions are, "you might not be aware that the re-zoning of this area
was tied to plans submitted by the Brentwood Park people and filed with the City's Common Clerk and that ,
he re-zoning expired in June of 1975". He noted that when the land was originally zoned the building
project was supposed to be totally done by 1975 - those were the original builders' conditions - and that
is why he was before Council at this time -- as it is right now, he cannot build. Councillor Davis felt
that Mr. Thomas can build if he were to make application for the zoning in the usual way. Mr. Zides
explained that this is one of the cases of re-zoning which ties a development to a plan, and also, these
Section 39 (of the Community Planning Act) that the Council frequently gets can be tied to the time period;
it is not really automatic that the re-zoning ceases because the Council could simply pass a resolution and
take it off the actual re-zoning - the idea behind that is that in this particular case there was a project
ith a great deal of density and a great deal of housing units permitted; Brentwood Tower is one of three .
uildings like that, and not including the Brentwood Tower there are still potentially 902 units there; Mr.
Thomas is in a situation that Council might at any time cancel the re-zoning on him and make it revert to
the original zoning, and Mr. Thomas is present at this time to ask that this not be done - in fact, he is
asking that the time period be taken out, altogether. Councillor Gould asked if Mr. Zides is saying that,
technically speaking, that zoning has now reverted to its previous classification, according to the time
~
r"
'~'i1
~ ~
.
231'.f"~lf-w, "d
. SUb-pt/1/..
aeV'd/~'??&n
I 'Pekr H'.
"7l7t7.1?ldilS
t?1Qmfhq
rt!j7p~'C
l7?eSe'~e ~
1fmJ?
1f;f?J7 -I'ees
.$(~.IH~-
.-6/;;'.1'75 crt-
u/e$PI? Cc>v.
j7/anr-
{'17~Q.#. V/
C'I'-t!f /J1fr.
P~tpJ'1~
7?e~lrel'l?
I 7?'f%I'T
~::A-I',I,/
C'/!?>7-6-1'17 y.
. -h-.,.,ltOhq
$111/;;t-er P,e
~;"Vlr"l1 m,
.
.])c;vit/
Carrel"
Coun. ,4,
I VlneenT
1
.
~
limit. Mr. Zides replied that the said time limit ran out in June of 1975; if the Council does nothing about it,
there is no change in the legal effect - if the Council decides to do it any time after June, 1975 it is free to
do so and that reverts the zoning on Mr. Thomas or whoever owns the land. Councillor Gould asked if the correct
procedure would not be for Mr. Thomas to apply for re-zoning to whatever classification he wishes this land to
be, now. Making negative reply, Mr. Zides pointed out that the question is simply to extend the time period, or
to take it off, altogether, by resolution. Mr. Thomas, referring to the proposed five-year extension time,
stated that one concern he has right now, in time, is that the Assisted Home Ownership Programme is out of funds
on April 30th and he has to have his total package ready to have for those officials, prior to that date, for
construction this year, and that he thinks five years is too short to build 902 units - he can see the Council's
viewpoint in the matter - if the economic conditions are there five years from now, he can come back.
The Mayor advised Mr. Thomas that the Council will render a decision in this matter, later in the
meeting. Councillor MacGowan made the suggestion that Council refer this request to City staff to bring in a
recommendation for the next meeting of Council.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report of the Fire Department for the month of
February last, be received and filed.
Councillor Gould asked for information regarding collection of transportation fees with the City's
Rescue Squad, and whether those fees are being collected regularly. Mr. Barfoot replied that such information
will be reported to an early meeting of Council.
Read a letter from the City Manager, supplying information regarding building inspections at the
Coleson Cove generating station, in reply to an enquiry made at the meeting of Council held on March 22nd last.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the above named report be laid on the table for one week
to permit Councillor A. Vincent to meet with Mr. Zides, the Building Inspector, and the City Manager for further
information, and a meeting.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that, in
anticipation that the Proctor & Redfern Report will outline schemes costing millions of dollars to implement
flood control measures in the Marsh Creek, discussions have been held with officials of the Provincial Department
of Environment, the Ministry of State for Urban Affars, and the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, con-
cerning possible sources of funds for such flood control work, and that the arguments which can be made in
support of funding by other governments will depend very much on the type of flood control scheme which is
adopted by Council, and until their policy decision is made, there is very little detail work that can be done on
the submissions; andwh~t~eheai~~e~~ata~~?i~oYnv~ne ~~bc~~~sb~tesgur~In~iifu~dSafartt~~o~hlonir~~~i~n~~ough
the Federal-Provincial Flood Damage Reductlon Agreement,lwhen concIuffea, coura~e rge means or pfovl~lng Federal
funding for flood studies such as the Proctor & Redfern 'Study now being completed, and, possibly, also for
construction of flood control works and other measures to reduce flood damage; and recommending that the City
request the Minister of Environment to consider the urgent requirements for flood damage reduction in the Marsh
Creek area, and to ensure, if possible, that the Agreement when concluded with the Federal Government, includes
funds for flood control works and other flood damage reduction meaSures in the Marsh Creek Watershed -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor MacGowan expressed the hope that they would still pursue every other avenue of funds in the
above named matter.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that with regard to the Marsh Creek flooding conditions, and so on, he
understands that Mr. David Carter, of the Federal Department of Urban Affairs, was in the city on March 23rd
last, and stated he wonders if there was any reason the Council members were not notified, because Councillor A.
Vincent has been repeatedly asking if there is Federal land down there, and so on; he stated he would like very
much to have met with Mr. Carter when he was in the city. Mr. Barfoot advised that Mr. Carter was on a routine
visit to the city and Mr. Barfoot was not aware of any desire of Councillors to meet with him on this particular
issue, and we were enquiring as to what particular information Mr. Carter could give us as to avenues to explore
to obtain other funding. Councillor A. Vincent stated he understands Mr. Carter was in the city pertaining to a
private letter, not a City Council letter, nor a City Manager's letter - he understands Mr. Carter was here on a
letter from the Marsh Creek Flood Committee; he stated he particularly would like to be informed the next time
Mr. Carter is here because he understands that if the City really goes after it, it can get some funds - and he
would like to be informed.
Councillor M. Vincent asked when the discussions were held, and in what form, that are referred to in
the above letter from the City Manager, and how does this become a possibility. Mr. Barfoot replied that a
number of meetings have been held with the Provincial Department of Environment - telephone conversations - that
has been a continuing matter for about a year, or more; Mr. Carter, who is the representative of the Ministry of
State for Urban Affairs, was first contacted about two weeks ago on the matter of work he might be about to do on
funding there, and we held a meeting on either March 22nd or 23rd; we have written Mr. Kenneth Fraser of Central
Mortgage and Housing Corporation and have talked with him on the telephone starting two or three weeks ago.
Councillor Green asked how soon, if the Council gives approval at this meeting in regard to the above
recommendation, the City Manager will be in touch with the Minister and the other members of Government dep-
artments that may be affected, so that when the Proctor & Redfern Report is in by the end of the month we can get
something going, very quickly. Mr. Barfoot explained that one of the purposes of his recommendation is that the
Council go on record as asking the Province to consider a sub-agreement within the Federal-Provincial Flood
Damage Reduction Agreement which deals specifically with the provision of funds for flood control works; he
thinks it is important that the Council indicate at this time its support for such works, and he would expect
that if the Council agrees with this recommendation, then a letter will go off this week on this matter. The
Mayor expressed surprise, stating he thought this was done a long time ago, recalling that the Council had
discussed this almost a year ago and that the City already had some answers on funding and all it was waiting for
was this Report to come and then we were ready to go; he noted, however, that if it has not been done, it is now
necessary that the above recommendation be put through and get the money that is available as fast as possible.
It was noted that the above resolution would be considered a formal request to the senior Governments from this
Council.
1378
~
J1.~rr Wtiid-
~r)? 7l~)9r
1Jj;,~j, Crr~
.,t'/oed ($');#1'6/
2J.;w/#t C'iiil,.te-r
ep/lJ? /7. tIt'J7ee.
~.JV,g-tl.l
I?/a/'ls~ &eek
I'dnd
Fe~. 19,V2f;
.$u.h7/1?er
.:zt.~ -flm/? dlr
C'Hy I"ink
S. 7: h~~~e
Skii1-E-/ nff ClUb
C/tf-y /JI~r.
.J);,.,./?et"l'.cf ~rk.
tl/ltl/Le'l f;1ewe~_
//.s~~P'17d~C .vr
$. :T: Cen. h'P~.?
Sei#e",
~,h$h Cf,ee/r
Councillor M. Vincent asked for a progress report on when the Proctor & Redfern Report will be
received, noting that it was to be in at the end of March, and that it was supposed to have been in on
March 15th and at that time he asked if it was going to be in by the end of March and he believed the,
Council agreed that if it was not that we might take steps to have an immediate effort to have a Pro-
vincial Government meeting. Mr. Barfoot stated that it is anticipated that this Report will be on the
next week's Council of April 5th; this report was commissioned by the Provincial Department of EnviroqIDent
and the Council, is being provided with copies of the report at the same time - one of the problems of
delay is that of producing copies of the report; he himself does not have a complete copy of the report
and the City does not at this time have a complete copy of that report from the Provincial Government.
Councillor M. Vincent recalled that the Council was told that a draft copy of that report was availab~e
and was in the city two weeks ago, and he noted that he is now told that the City does not have the
complete report. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that there is a difference between the draft report, which is
incomplete, and the complete report, which is being prepared. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the base
report is complete and whether it is just a matter of reproducing it so all the Council members can have a
copy, or is there more information to be gathered and the study to be carried on with. Mr. MacKinnon, who
is a member of the committee that is guiding the said report, advised that the report that came in on
March 15th last was stamped a "draft" copy and that copy was, for all intents and purposes, meant to be
the completed copy but it was in a form for both the Provincial and the City people to peruse, to look at
to see whether or not there was anything we wished changed or added, or discussion on - there were a
number of sections that we wanted expanded, there were a number of things that we did not feel were
necessarily clear and that we wanted put in a different form - and all of that was agreed to on March,
15th; the consultant, in turn, took that back and was to make the changes - but, for all intents and
purposes: that draft copy with its content was what we were going to get on March 31st but there was going
to be revisisions made to it - that was the copy; that copy is still to come in on March 31st with a
separate copy of just conclusions and recommendations to come in by April 2nd - it is intended to have
that copy available for the Council meeting of April 5th - but regarding the semantics of whether or not
it was a final copy or draft copy, they are both the same - the one that came in on March 15th contained
essentially everything that is going to be in the report that is coming in on March 31st; however, re-
garding the time period between March 15th and 31st they were going to require them to put it into the
final report - re-typing it and duplicating it; there are two reports, with 25 copies of each report ~ one
is with a summary and conclusions, so there are 50 copies to come to the Province and 50 copies to go 'to
the City, approximately; the final report is being done and duplicated in Toronto. Councillor Green
expressed the desire to have a "teach:"in" on the report prior to April 5th for the information of Council.
Mr. MacKinnon noted that the report was supposed to have been completed one month earlier, he believes,
but there was some difficulty during the completion of the report - the consultant ran into some dif-
ficulties with the compilation of all the materials - if the report had come in as contemplated, the
report would have come to Council ahead of time and the Council would have had time to consider it -
however, in subsequent meetings following when it was supposed to have come in, Council indicated to the
Glen Falls group that they would get the report by the end of March; however, Council is getting the
report at the same time, and he believes Councillor Green is just about correct in anticipating that the
Council will receive the report "cold turkey". The Mayor asked if a briefing for Council can be arranged
based on the copy of the report the City now has and filling in with a few extras that will be coming in
to complete the report. Mr. MacKinnon replied that both Mr. Barfoot and he have a copy of that report,
and they can certainly use that incomplete copy - the report that is coming in on March 31st would contain
everything except for the shorter version which would be summaries and recommendations; he thinks that if
the Council wishes to meet before the April 5th meeting it can be briefed on it, at that time. The Mayor
replied that we will arrange such a briefing. Councillor Green stated he feels that the "teach-in" will
pr?vide the impetus in this matter.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he had met with Mr. David Carter in Fredericton, accidentally,
and Mr. Carter thought it would be of help if the City could prove that the Department of National De~ence
owns land out at the Marsh Creek. He recalled that he has already asked at three previous Council meetings
for information as to whether that Department is a land oWner out there, and he would like the City
Manager to find this out, because he is told that the Strescon property is leased. He asked that the City
anager look into this question. He added that there is Federal money available, if it is Federally-owned
property.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the
Director of Recreation and Parks, providing requested information on the summer skating programme of the
Saint John Figure Skating Club that was submitted to Council on March 22nd last by the said Club as an
offer to pay $12,000.00 for the use of eight weeks of ice time this summer at the Stewart Hurley Community
Arena - adivsing that the President of the said Club was advised in February, 1976 that because of re-
strictions placed on expenditures, this proposal could not be considered this year unless the Department
of Recreation was to further reduce the fall and winter skating programme, which it was not prepared to
do - and advising that, subsequently, a further discussion in the matter was held with Council members of
the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board and no further action was taken, and that, in any case, the ti~e
has passed for consideration of a programme for this summer, and that what the Club is concerned about now
is an early opening and late closing of the arenas in 1976-77 and the favourable consideration for a
summer programme in 1977; and further advising that the Department's proposed fall and winter arenas
programme calls for the opening of three arenas by mid-October and the other two by November 1st, with the
closing dates for March 31st, except for one which will operate at least until mid-April and, if neces~
sary, to April 30th, 1977 and that this period meets the needs of most of our citizens and at considerable
cost - and further advising that if a summer skating programme is to be provided in 1977, the total cost
should be borne by the participants with the proposal submitted in time for inclusion in the operation
budget for 1977 -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager in reply to the
recent enquiry at Council meetings regarding the status of wooden sewers at the Marsh Bridge and regarding
the General Hospital sewer draining into the Marsh Creek, be laid on the table for one week, for further
detailed information.
Councillor A. Vincent contended that the said wooden sewer never was examined, and noted that he
brought the matter up over four months ago. He stated that the further detailed information he wants is
as follows: this sewer is 136 years old and he wants the City Manager to tell him who was the man who ran
the camera through the - was it X-rayed - who was the camerman - because he knows it wasn't; he does not
want the history of the sewer, he wants the condition of it - he does not want it after that paving is
done at the Haymarket Square ramp; he wants the inspection of this wooden sewer done; he is saying that
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
JI""
.
IGlf~.5pte/ti
s: r C'e>u 174:;
/}6Att,/r ~
/}q"'~f!'me;d-
Can;;!da
~CKfl!S" ..(.
I
.
~hi1P1G1
7k~kc!''''.> h
/lffl'd'fm?'~
I C'/tySP~c;-&
S. :J: I( ~ a..,.
~!:f-,(';;w roe
dt!t'pJ71h7t7. .
st,ifmd"aft. '
C'PI1-t-l"tJ/ or
l'enr
.
I t'17.mm. #'AoA
(;ran#
l/uh?.:/'? ~~
men-6- Sel"v/ee
5t~dy(5'ot!j~
P/Bhh. S~~d
l.,cor S.:T: dlrea
.(..7J)l?m
/lsse>e. 4-t-~
J>PJ/L-~ .2Je,o
/S-tTt~ /?,m/.
('see ~ .3to)
.
.....
~379
there has never been an inspection of the said wooden sewer, and that it can be done, and he is saying that the
City should make sure - that the public has suffered enough inconvenience at Haymarket Square - that the City
Manager is waiting until it is all paved there so he can get'there with a jackhammer and break up that pavement
(to make the inspection) and Councillor A. Vincent does not want that to happen; he wants the City Manager to
write a letter to the Council stating that as a professional engineer he puts his professional ethics on the line
that that sewer, particularly with a highway going there, will last at least three years without being jacked up -
because Councillor A. Vincent understands that driving the piles down there have caused some serious problems.
The Mayor replied that the requested report will be obtained for Councillor A. Vincent.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Davis, Hodges and Gould voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the subject matter in the letter from the City Solicitor,
dated March 26th, 1976, with reference to a proposed amendment to the Saint John County Abattoir Act as it per-
tains to an Agreement with Canada Packers Ltd., be dealt with in legal session of Council, due to the fact that
the matter involves a City-owned property and another company and money, and that the City could lose a lot by
discussing the matter in open session of Council.
Mr. Rodgers pointed out that what is merely before the Council in the above noted letter is a recom-
mendation based on the request; if Councillor A. Vincent wants to have other discussions on other matters for
legal session, he supposes that is the proper place for them.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Gould voting "nay".
It was noted that copies of the said letter of the City Solicitor had already been given to members of
the news media at this meeting, along with other items of Council correspondence.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named letter, dated March 26th, 1976, from the City
Solicitor, with reference to the request made by Canada Packers Ltd., (the present Lessee and operator of the
premises known as the Saint John Municipal Abattoir), through the Saint John Abattoir Commission that the company
be relieved of its obligations under Paragraph 21 of the leasing agreement with respect to custom killing services
but continue the meat processing operation, submitting a proposed new section for the said agreement if the
Council wishes to accommodate the said request, which would necessitate seeking an amendment to the Abattoir Act
at the New Brunswick Legislature, and advising that by means of such an amendment, the Council could by resolution
suspend the operation of Section 1 of the said Act, and that on the passing of such amending legislation and
necessary resolution by Council, the Council could then by mutual agreement of Canada Packers Ltd., amend its
Lease accordingly and meet the request of Canada Packers Ltd., be received and filed.
, On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated March 26th, 1976,
to whom the Council on March 22nd last referred the recommendation made by the Saint John Housing Commission that
the City seek necessary legislative authority to enact a by-law regulating the concept of accommodation standard
control of rent, for study and a report, advising that from his examination of the Municipalities Act, he is
satisfied that legislation is necessary in order for the municipality to enact a by-law governing this subject
matter, and that as for a recommendation to proceed or not to proceed to seek legislation at this time, he is
unable to comment in view of the lack of information before him, and further advising that before he can advise
the Council on this matter, and in order to prepare a petition for Private Legislation if Council so wishes, the
Housing Commission perhaps may be able to provide in greater detail its concept of the standards and control
envisaged, which he believes is necessary having regard to existing and proposed Provincial Legislation and the
fact that the City may now seek Private Legislation; and noting that with such additional details from the Com-
mission concerning its concept of "accommodation standard control of rent", Council will be in a better position
to resolve whether input from other staff is also desired - for example, the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Finance - and that the Council might conceivably wish to be advised as to the costs associated with the administra-
tion of such a programme if Private Legislation is granted to the City -- be referred to the said Housing Com-
mission for greater detail.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committeee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, March 22nd, 1976, when there were present
Mayor Flewwelling, and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A.
Vincent and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendations, namely:-
1. That the City agree to contribute resources for the year 1976 for the Human Development Services Study
(also known as the Social Planning Study for the Saint John area), as follows:- provide accommodation for the
consultants, L. J. D'Amore & Associates Ltd., of approximately 1,800 square feet at $1.70 per square foot (making
a total of $3,000.00); provide professional staff from the City's Planning, Police, Recreation and Parks, and
Legal Departments (approximately $6,000.00); provide clerical assistance - for mailings, minutes, et cetera
(approximately $1,500.00) -- making a total resources contribution of $10,500.00.
2. That the City make available to the Police Department the sum of ,$1,250.00 to assist in the cost of the
entire programme in 1976 to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Saint John Police Department.
Respectfully submitted,
E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
29th March, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
. RESOLVED that section 1 of the above report be adopted.
Councillor Green stated that he feels that in trying to assist the above named Social Planning Study
group, this is not the year for the City to do it and he feels that the City should withdraw for this year even
~3S0
~
r; r<<17T-
P(lt/!!t!? ~ I:
/917I7/J/.
,
s..:T ~1t't"~hS
7Jynfed,455;!:"!"
~oC.;i/ 6/
Jb~$/Ph :Ed.
7?et-/I't!'mehT
t(/m. A .k1'J?..ffda
~ al7L ee>~h7.
7?e>.c-J'7!1' S~n/e>r
~if/'.;r~HS /1'-0/.
,.(~~
$el7/t?J" C'/I-/~tP~
,.fs~, ?rt>.Jf!?cr
C. 111.11. C
k'/H/dilh/S Club
Sen/e>r e/~/2~
-/sf' j7rojecc-
{J, M. ~ e.
/Y; 13. Hsf' &r'p
though the City's commitment of $10,000.00 is being made up by other means (as outlined in section 1 of
the report). He stated that he is not in favour of it, and he therefore intends to vote against the
motion. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he, too, had opposed the City contributing towards the cost of
the said Study this year when it was in terms of dollars and cents, but he is satisfied that by making
useful gain of the resources approach and using City staff, and other such approaches, that it is not
going to be the output of requested money that was earlier for, and he is therefore now able to support
the motion, in view of the change of approach. Councillor Kipping pointed out that the Council, in
adopting this motion, would not be helping any group, but would be helping the City and all of its social
services - there is no question of helping any group - and if this were not to be done we would be losing,
as Council members all know, some $70,00.00 worth of services for study funds which will be applied to the
improvement of social services in the city; the only way the Council can help the City in this regard is
through services for the said Study, rather than cash, and he thinks it is excellent, and that the Council
should do so.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Green voting "nay", and a minority
of other Council members voting "nay".
During discussion of section 2 of the above report, Councillor M. Vincent recalled that when the
Council first considered the subject matter in Committee of the Whole, he read to Council the letter from
the Chairman of the Anniversary Committee of the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No.
61, C.U.P.E. and at that time, he (Councillor M. Vincent) was asked to obtain further information so that
Council might decide whether City financial participation was worthwhile or not, and at the March 22nd
last Committee of the Whole meeting Deputy Mayor Higgins reported to Council what was going on and how
much money was seen fit to give from the City, and the motion was passed that the said $1,250.00 be made
available so that it could be forwarded to the said Union. He noted that the wording of section 2 of the
above report gives an entirely different intent because the words "Police Department" are used instead of
"Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E.", whereas the intent was that the
money be payable to the party which made the request, namely, the said Union. He further noted that there
was no indication at any time that the said 150th Police Department anniversary celebrations were to be a
joint venture between the Police Department and the said Association, and he added that this was an effort
on behalf of the unionized membership of the Police Department to hold a commemoration and they had asked
for some assistance and the Council had agreed to assist them to the tune of $1,250.00 for their effort.
During further discussion, it was confirmed by Mr. Barfoot that the said sum is available in, and will
come out of, the 1976 budget item called Unspecified Grants.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that section 2 of the above report be amended to read, as
follows:- "That the City make available to the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No.
61, C.U.P.E. the sum of $1,250.00 to assist in the cost of the entire programme in 1976 to commemorate the
150th anniversary of the Saint John Police Deparmtent", and be adopted, as amended.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of Trustees of the Civic
Employees' Pension Plan, recommending the retirement of Mr. William L. Kingston, an employee of the Works
Department, effective March 1st, 1976, in accordance with Section 9, Sub-section 1 of the Pension Act; Mr.
Kingston having complied with the provisions of the said sub-section by providing medical reports as to
his permanent disability, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Read a letter from the Land Committee relative to Common Council resolution of December 2nd;
1974 in which the Common Council, in accordance with the recommendation from the City Manager and the
Commissioner of Finance, acceded to the request of Rotary Senior Citizens Housing Ltd. that the City take
over ownership of the senior citizens housing project situated on land close to Millidge Avenue and
constructed in 1964, and instructed that this be implemented in accordance with Common Council resolution
of August 3rd, 1964 and that the Legal Department arrange for submission to the Common Council of the
documents necessary to effect the transfer of ownership, and that the project be managed by Saint John
Housing Authority under the general direction of the Real Estate Department. The Committee's letter notes
that following December 2nd, 1974, the Secretary of the Rotary Senior Citizens Housing Ltd. contacted
Central Mortgage and Housing Coporation regarding the change of ownership, and that Corporation has made
certain requirements which have to be complied with before it will agree to the transfer of the project,
namely:- (a) that the City of Saint John be formed as a Non-Profit organization which is acceptable to,
and meets the requirements of, the Corporation; (b) that the City is prepared to assume the existing'
mortgage and either assume or enter into a new operating agreement as required by the Corporation; (c)
full particulars of sale transaction, including sale price, are to be made available to the Corporation;
(d) the financial structure incorporating the transfer of assets and liabilities, and more specifically
the reserves, share capital and earned surplus accounts, is in accordance with Corporation requirements _
it would be necessary to draw up a financial statement by an auditor giving a complete balance sheet so
that the Corporation can determine that the transfer of these assets and liabilities is in accordance ,as
outlined above. The letter notes that as of this date these requirements have not been complied with and
ownership remains with the Rotary Company. The letter advises that in December 1974 the Kiwanis Club who
own a similar project, requested the City to purchase their project and asked how the City intended to go
about arranging the transfer, and the matter was referred to the Land Committee by Council, and the
Committee carried out a detailed investigation of the financial condition of the Company and discussed
various options with both Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and New Brunswick Housing Corporation,
and that, basically, the problems were as follows:- (1) increasing costs presented the possibility of
rising rents out-stripping some senior citizens' ability to pay; (2) the project was experiencing financial
losses which would require a rental increase to achieve financial balance - these items included curable
accrued depreciation, insufficient cash reserves for replacement of capital equipment - this had resulted
in a net loss on annual operating expenses of $1,999.00 for the year 1974. The letter further advises
that the Land Committee asked New Brunswick Housing Corporation if that Corporation would take over the
project but it was unwilling to do so, but it was, however, prepared to offer a solution to two problems:
(1) the Club would work out a new rental rate adequate to cover operating costs and borrowing sufficient
to improve the units; (2) New Brunswick Housing Corporation would then enter into a lease arrangement Mith
the Club at' an economic rent and sublet to tenants with rents based on income (this would have the ad-
vantages of leaving ownership and management with the service clubs but providing reasonable rents to the
tenants) - New Brunswick Housing Corporation was prepared to offer this service to both Rotary and Kiwanis
projects -- both Clubs were approached during August 1975 but since then little has happened; the matter
was again discussed by the Land Committee in December 1975 and the said Housing Corporation was asked if
the same arrangement suggested by Mr. Scott, the President of the Corporation, would be available to the
City if it took over ownership, and Mr. Scott replied that while the opportunity he had outlined would be
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"...
.
.l?r!'$/hd/hff
Imo1f/e>n ~
~/"~ 0/1<.
~1f/~ens
//s!T-~-c-d.
$". chf/.zeh
h:S~?r&J..f
-<ar4 a~
I
.
I
/ltS~I7Nt.<-.5J.
.9' ~Yeh6s-
l70.b?,o"
Ch?d $. 7:
,ciY'e /t?oY,
/lnn/y.
I
47",.1)_ ~'
'71-t/nee&
/l?Cil//
I ~PI':l~n5'
{'Ale!' of"'/1J)e
Po//ee 2J~
.
~
381
available to the City, some of the rules between Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the New Brunswick
Housing Corporation had changed since his first enquiry and the proposal is perhaps not so attractive to the
Province as it was. The letter advises that the Land Committee can see no real advantage to the projects, or to
its senior citizen occupants, by the City taking over ownership, and the Committee feels that the City should
carefully review its decision to take over these projects in the light of the responsibilities the City is being
asked to accepted.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the following resolution adopted by Common Council on December
2nd, 1974, be rescinded:- "Resolved that in accordance with the recommendation from the City Manager and the
Commissioner of Finance, the request of Rotary Senior Citizens Housing Ltd. that the City take over ownership of
the senior citizens housing project situated on land close to Millidge Avenue and constructed in 1964, be acceded
to and implemented in accordance with Common Council resolution of August 3rd, 1964, that the Legal Department
arrange for submission to the Common Council of the documents necessary to effect the transfer of ownership, and
that the project be managed by Saint John Housing Authority under the general direction of the Real Estate
Department.":
AND FURTHER that the letter from the Land Committee regarding this matter, be received and filed.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the City Manager and the Commissioner of Finance are in accordance with
the above proposed action, in view of the fact that they had made the recommendation that was adopted on December
2nd, 1974. In reply, Mr. Barfoot pointed out that the reason for the recommendation on December 2nd, 1974 was
that the City had agreed in 1964 to take this housing project over if the Rotary Club so requested; the Rotary
Club did request, and the City, because of that 1964 commitment, had a commitment, he understands, to take over
this project and this was the reason for the Council resolution of December 2nd, 1974. Councillor MacGowan asked
if it is his opinion that the City is still committed to take over if they request the City to do so. Mr.
Barfoot replied that he thinks maybe this should be examined further, just to see what commitment there is,
because of the 1964 resolution of Council. Councillor Davis advised that that was the point of the doubt about
bringing the Committee's letter to this meeting of Council, because we have not discussed the letter's subject
matter with the Rotary Club prior to bringing this letter to Council - the letter came to Council just a little
too fast - but, he sees no harm in the said motion being rescinded at this meeting of Council, and we will
discuss it further with the Rotary Club and with the Kiwanis Club. Councillor MacGowan proposed a motion, that
was not seconded, that the matter be tabled until this discussion takes place, and that no action be taken until
we have this further discussion, commenting that if the City has a commitment, why rescind the said motion?
Referring to the last paragraph of the Land Committee's letter, Councillor Kipping expressed the view that it is
premature to rescind the said motion, and that the rescinding motion should be withdrawn and the Council should
replace it with a motion that the City carefully review its decision to take over these projects in the light of
the responsibilities the City is being asked to accept - and then, no-one will be hurt, and no precipitous action
will have been taken - the Council will not have done something it might be sorry for or that might be illegal,
later, in view of the 1964 resolution. Councillor Green noted that, in recommending the rescinding of the 1974
Council resolution, it was the intent of the Land Committee to pursue what knowledge it has regarding funding of
this type of housing for tenants, to maybe pass on to the two Clubs concerned and suggest other means of financial
assistance for the Clubs in operating such housing facilities. Councillor Davis pointed out that the said 1974
resolution obligates the City to take over these projects - the City has no alternative - the Council has ordered
it; the Committee's investigation shows there are certain advantages to the senior citizen occupants of those
buildings and to the citizens of this city if those buildings were owned and operated by service clubs _ there
are advantages there, but as it stands now, the City has no alternative but to take them over because the said
1974 resolution of Council orders it, and that is why we would like to have that resolution rescinded - and then
we can keep on having discussion, and can always pass it again.
votes.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the majority of Council members casting affirmative
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named matter be turned over to the Chief of
Police and his Department.
Councillor Parfitt advised that, primarily, the above noted problem is the loitering of youths in our
aIls and attendant evils; she noted that the authority of the Police has been taken away and they cannot do what
they would like to do in some cases, and that she has been in touch with the Police officials, and so on _ and
that this morning, she got advice from a lawyer to the effect that some authority cannot be given at the local
level in Canada (she has read that some authority at the local level has been given to the Police in the United
States of America). She stated that, also, she wanted our Police officials, the Crown Prosecutor and the owners
of the malls to meet and explore the avenue of prosecuting under the Federal law, Section 41 who can cover this _
here has never been a test case. The Mayor noted that the motion that has been made is that the matter be
turned over to the Chief of Police for his action. Councillor Parfitt commented that the parties she has named
can talk the matter over, but this was the advice she got from a lawyer - to look into Section 41 of the Federal
law. The Mayor noted that if Councillor Parfitt could bring that information to their attention, they would
appreciate it. Councillor Pye advised that less than twenty years ago, Saint John was governed by a Police Act,
chiefly, plus the Criminal Code of Canada, but shortly after 1955 or 1957, the Police Act was abolished when
382
,{"/~~/)?Y jP.
C'/-I/t!'5 of M
C'A/~ v/" ;7Jokee
J1.;;Jyer .I~
C'ou#. -;P8".H'-I-~
{'PK.#. ,o/'..a:.-- ~
e'Nh-t~ ~o /
t1Ph,r/7!/Oh,S
~~. .7iest/c.'
:k~. h"~/-z!h
Jff?I7~ ~"r
epu/rty' ~p/
,(,;md' a~h1.
CbU.h, 4. JI/~"?<
(/17/PJlS C0-t7d.
amM '
'?en5/on psl!"
Serv/C!e or
-/ormtT/f Cbum!y
em 'p/Pyl?es
13/1/ .f'&1r )'ty/s--
/;1~"l'e
~h~/PI1 /7c:!.7!-
~
there was a change in the judiciary system. He stated that the Police Act contained many potent sections
which gave the Police real authority - not authority that they abused, but very essential authority which
enabled them to control hoodlumism and undesirables in our city streets - and this definitely would be
applied to places like the malls, today. He recalled that there was a "Moving On and Away" section of that
Act and a policeman had, the authority to order a man to move on and away from any public place and if he
failed to do so, he could be placed under arrest. He stated that had the above motion not been proposed,
he was about to propose a motion that the said section be embodied in the Criminal Code in the form of an
amendment; he added that the said section gives the Police tremendous authority which, all throughout his
early years ,on the Police Force, was never abused, but it was a very important and potent weapon. Councillors
Hodges and A. Vincent did not agree with Councillor Pye's statement that the said section was not abused by
the Police Department, stating that they personally know it was abused. Councillor MacGowan suggested that
the motion also include the provision that the subject be referred to The Cities of New Brunswick for their
discussion because we have discussed this, and she thinks that if it is going to go Federally, that we
should get the in-put from the Province. It was pointed out to Councillor MacGowan that when the Chief of
Police comes back, the Council can then discuss her suggestion.
.
1
Read a letter from Councillor Parfitt advising that she will be attending the 12th annual National
Prayer Breakfast in Ottawa on April 8th this year, and asking for permission to organize the third annual
prayer breakfast in Saint John during the latter part of April; and noting that, as before, this would be
at no expense to the City as each person attending is expected to pay for his or her own breakfast. Councillor
Parfitt stated that so much planning is going into the observance of Loyalist Days that perhaps it would be I
appropriate in the said Saint John prayer breakfast to stress the qualities of life inherent in those
people of two hundred years ago and the quality of life today - we think of the so-called "higher standard
of living". She stated that 'she was glad to read in the newspaper that in Newcastle, New Brunswick, the
Royal Canadian Legion is going to attack the deteriorating life style by employing a community action
programme, and she feels this would be a good prelude to what we mean and what we are thinking of when we
talk about Loyalists - their hard work, their worship, and so on - and we need more of that, today, she
feels. Councillor A. Vincent suggested that this prayer breakfast be held on the City's patron saint's
day, June 24th, which is Saint John the Baptist Day. Councillor Parfitt advised that we will meet and
discuss the date for this prayer breakfast.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
.
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that Councillor Parfitt be granted permission to
organize a prayer breakfast, at no expense to the City; on a date to be determined by her.
Read a letter from Councillor MacGowan, advising that she recently visited the County Gaol which
is in a building that was constructed approximately one hundred years ago and which, by today's standards,
is antiquated, obsolete, inadequate and overcrowded, and was built to accommodate a maximum of 70 inmates,
but with the increase of crime in our society, twice that number are being crowded into the building; and,
advising that she is convinced that the staff are doing an excellent job working under such conditions but
certainly must feel frustrated in their efforts, and that she is surprised that to date no-one has re-
quested an investigation into the conditions existing in the Gaol; and requesting that the Council refer
the matter to the Department of Justice and the Department of Health for a thorough investigation into the
matter with immediate remedial action.
I
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter of the County Gaol building being antiquated,
obsolete, inadequate and overcrowded and accommodating twice the maximum number of 70 inmates for which it
was built to accommodate', be referred to the Department of Justice and the Department of Health for a
thorough investigation into the matter with immediate remedial action.
During ensuing discussion, Councillor Hodges advised that the John Howard Society many times has
made surveys and appealed to the Provincial Government to have the County Gaol removed, but the question
remains: where is it to be put that would be acceptable; he added that this is the problem that the Justice
Department has been faced with in the past, and that the said Department is trying to find a suitable place
where they can put this new gaol; that Department recognizes the fact that this gaol needs replacing, but,
unfortunately, the Department does not have the money, they tell us, and they do not have the land, or the
staff. He felt that we should do everything possible to get a new facility, and if we must have these
types of institutions then we should get the best one we can in the future. Councillor A. Vincent stated
that he knows that some senior citizens in this city live in accommodations that are worse than those in
the County Gaol, and he is of the opinion that we should carefully consider first doing something for those
people of our city who do not commit crimes and are not sent to this gaol. Councillor Davis recalled that
the Minister of Justice was in the city a few weeks ago and made a tour of the Gaol and simply said that
there was not any money to do anything about that facility. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would
like to see the Department of Justice pay the City some rent for the County Gaol building, because he
understands the Departments does not pay rent at the present time for it; he understands that the said
Department heats the Board of Trade building and the Tourist building and the Court House and the paint
shop in back, and the rest is for free rent - also, the Province does not pay rent for the Court House - he
feels that the trade-off of supplying heat in return for free rent was a poor deal at that time, and it is
still a poor deal, today. He asked that the matter of the rents be looked into as well, when the matter
referred to in the above motion is taken up with the Province. Councillor Davis stated that, on this
subject, the Land Committee now has all the facts and will be discussing it next Monday, April 5th.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for a copy of the information that the Land Committee has.
.
I
Read a letter from the Co-Ordinating Committee of the four Civic Unions, advising that they are
in agreement with the principle that former County employees should be given the right to acquire their
past pensionable service, and that this Committee feels the number one priority of Council and the Pension
Board should be to implement the pension plan design which was agreed to by all Civic employees and their
respective groups in October and November 1975 and that, therefore, the Committee feels this plan design
should be presented in one parcel, and that the Union groups will oppose any legislation that is submitted
at the 1976 sitting of the Provincial Legislature; and further advising that these groups will support,the
plan design as recommended for submission to the Legislature in the spring of 1977, and that since the plan
design covers all Civic employees, the Committee feels the introduction of legislation in 1976 covering one
item only is premature, and that the entire design proposed provides the benefits acceptable to all em-
ployees and every effort' should be made to have it finalized immediately.
I
Councillor A. Vincent suggested that we should get together with the four Civic Unions regarding
the above matter, and, maybe, this being the case, we should withdraw our petition for the proposed amend-
ment to the Pension Act in question, and he asked what is the time limit for withdrawing the Bill. In
reply, Mr. Rodgers stated that he understands that the process has been started with respect to Council's
.
~
,...
38 ~3
.
recent resolution for presentation of the Bill, and he believes that the first Notice of Legislation has appeared
in the Royal Gazette; he stated that he assumes the Bill can be withdrawn at any time up to the date of the
meeting of the Legislature which he is sure is not set as of yet - that is all he can say with respect to time
period, but right now, the process is in motion with respect to the proposed amendment going through.
7b11~ipJ7
0,/PJ?S
('g-o~L (J
J'e,f;>;5/p)? ,;fc
~;I/ /Qr
,,(/!!!//S ~~H
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Common Council meet with the Board of Trustees of
the Civic Employees' Pension Act and with the Unions as soon as possible to straighten the above mentioned matter
out before the Council withdraws the said Bill for the Legislature.
I
,Councillor Green, a member of the Pension Board, advised that the Board studied the Pension Act thor-
oughly and presented changes proposed to the Pension Act and that the Board is trying to assist some of the
former County employees who, under the old plan, had to wait three years under their plan before they could join
the pension plan. He stated that it is the feeling of the Pension Board that if this Bill is presented to the
Legislature we will make ourselves look foolish in presenting it with the opposition forthcoming from the four
Civic Unions, and that he was suggesting, with the thoughts of the Pension Board Trustees, that the Council
withdraw the Bill and never mind meeting with them. Councillor Kipping spoke in support of proceeding with
presentation of the Bill, noting that in the period between the 1976 and 1977 sittings of the Legislture some
employees retiring are going to lose out on these beneftts (if the Bill was not presented until 1977); he thinks
it would seem to be the logical thing to proceed with the Bill in 1976 - that as long as all parties are in
agreement on this one item - and in their letter, the Co-Ordinating Committee of the Unions have said they are in
agreement on this one item but want a whole package; he suggested that, as long as the said Unions are in agree-
ment on this one item, why not go ahead with the Bill, because, he feels, that the total package they are talking
about probably belongs more properly in the realm of collective bargaining, and not done through the Pension
Board as this is being done, with the pressure from the four Unions who are trying to "kill" it, every time it
comes up; he stated that he believes they should collectively bargain for this in their working agreements.
Councillor Green noted that the whole pension plan is being redesigned and it is known that the report of the
actuaries in this regard will not be ready until the spring of 1977. Councillor Hodges asked if, when this
matter of the proposed amendment to the Pension Plan regarding the County employees, the Union representatives on
the Board of Trustees of the Pension Plan were in favour of such amendment, and said they were going to sell it
to their Union membership. Councillor Green made affirmative reply, stating that the Union representatives on
the Board voted for such amendment but were not able to sell it to their Unions.
I
.
I
On being asked for his comments, Mr. Park advised that he does not see the logic in this whole situation,
and he noted that the situation has been explained well enough, the amendment 'that was put forward a month ago
was done with the full agreement of the Pension Board members at the time, and now, as the above noted letter
advises, the four Unions are saying they are opposed to it. He stated that, from Our past experience, we would
judge in the light of this intent to formally oppose the Bill when it is heard in Fredericton, that it is a
foregone conclusion that the Bill will not receive the approval of the Legislature - and it would appear, in the
circumstances, that there is little point in going ahead with the amendment at this time; this is his opinion, as
well, from our past experience, that there is little point in pursuing this with the knowledge that four Unions
are likely to oppose it. Councillor Kipping asked for Mr. Park's opinion as to whether this is a matter more
properly for collective bargaining - that is, the whole package that the Unions are talking about. Mr. Park
replied that the Pension Plan has not been a subject of collective bargaining at any time - we would find it
difficult to do this because then we would be dealing with five or possibly six groups of employees and it would
be extraordinarily difficult to maintain a common plan if it had to be bargained for with that many groups - so,
on the whole, to his way of thinking, it is much more satisfactory that we have one Plan that is not the subject
of collective bargaining. Mr. Park stressed that the Pension Plan is not bargained for - it is not part of the
collective bargaining, and it is not a subject in any of the Union contracts.
.
During further discussion, it was noted that by delaying the presentation of the said Bill, some of the
employees will be hurt who are due to retire between now and the spring of 1977 and who will not be able to take
advantage of the retirement provisions of the present Pension Plan. Councillor Hodges suggested that the Council
should do everything possible to ascertain what the problem is with the four Unions regarding this proposed
amendment to the Pension Act, and to see what can be done in order to get this amendment through at the present
sitting of the Legislature. Councillor A. Vincent explained that in moving the above motion, it was with the
intent of trying to get the Executives of the four Unions in here some night along with the Pension Board, adding
that he has never been happy with the set-up because the City only has two members on that Board and the Unions
have four members on it, and he is not happy with our actuaries, and he is not happy that our Pension fund
is well over-funded (he added that it has to be over-funded because when we started we were getting as low as
three to four per cent and now we are getting big interest on thirteen million dollars) - and if our money is
invested right... the whole thing is out of whack, and that is why he wants the meeting, and that is why he made
the above motion. He stated that he understands it will not interfere with second and third advertising in the
Royal Gazette of this Notice of Legislation, and so on, and he added that we can have this meeting in the in-
terim. He advocated that we settle the questions first regarding this proposed Bill, and then go to the Legis-
lature with a united front. At this time, the Mayor noted that the motion is that the Council meet with the
Unions and discuss this proposed amendment to the Pension Act, with the Pension Board also in attendance.
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried, for meeting with the Pension Board and the Unions on the
said subject.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
2J<<!: servrc.
I C't'-!y /~
/~~.
Socl'cl/Ser-
Vlf:t?5 [>f7IUJC/
0-/' C,..e6deJ?
S.Y;
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Social Services Council of Greater Saint
ohn, protesting the cut-backs in city bus service and drawing to the attention of the Common Council the serious
roblems created as the said Social Services Council sees them ,in this regard: that most adversely affected are
he senior citizens and handicapped persons, and a large number of volunteer service persons who give hours of
ime to 54 community agencies and hospitals; that, already, a considerable number of agencies are finding that
heir volunteers are not able to go because of lack of transportation, particularly in the evenings and on Sundays,
and this also applies to the many other volunteers of long standing who are not registered with the Volunteer
ureau; that the Services Council notes that experience has shown that city bus service is essential to a com-
unity of this size and that senior citizens depend a very great deal on public transportation to attend their
activities and clubs, and that an upgrading in this city of city bus service should be a top priority; that the
said Services Council is aware of the City of Saint John's financial problems, caused by many things, among which
~ ~. are lack of long range planning and priority setting for services, and that this city must have adequate bus
~J\'$;?O~ ervice, with buses that are clean, and travel on time, if it is going to live up to its claim to be a progressive
e''-V~city -- be received and filed and copy of same be forwarded to the Transportation Committee.
.
Councillor MacGowan noted that it is very important that Saint John have a bus service with buses that
re clean, and that travel on time. Referring to the contents of the above letter, Councillor Davis commented
hat the bus system has nothing whatever to do with any financial problems that the City has - the problems of the
us system is because of problems that the bus company is having financially; with reference to the letter's
comment, "lack of long range planning and priority setting for services", he noted that there is no lack of long
....
:384
~
~l(5
Cdy
sel'///~~
1 1'bl/J:5 /71-
.I.e.L
I/ou-es ~.;Jke
d'U"'~/hj' OJ?
tuee~LS'
range contract with City Transit Limited and it has five more years to go and he thinks that is a good
example of long range planning and that the Council and the Transportation Committee did a good job -~ so,
he thinks that the President of the said Services Council has some facts mixed up in the said letter _
Saint John's financial problems has nothing whatever to do with the bus company's financial problems and
any lack of long range on the City's behalf has nothing whatever to do with the transportation problems;
referring to the statistics quoted in the said letter regarding number of volunteers and number of volunteer
hours given by them of time, he noted that it works out to 29 hours a year given by each volunteer which is
not a lot of hours - he felt that if all these 350 volunteers worked a four-hour stint and they all took
the buses the entire revenue would be $2,000.00 a year which is about what the bus company loses in two
days -- so, it is the old, infirm and the weak who suffer from these things, we know that, he pointed out _
but he felt, just the same, it is nice to have the facts right. Councillor Parfitt stated that she called
the City Transit Limited to enquire how many senior citizens use the buses and was informed that even ~hen
there was the service (prior to the present cut-back service) very few senior citizens used the buses;
especially at these times. She noted that on Sundays, the churches are offering bus transportation and
people have volunteered to use their cars to provide transportation, when asked for it. Councillor Kipping
felt that something has to be done about this because it is an obviously unsatisfactory situation but we
have to believe the company when it tells us it will go bankrupt if it is forced to operate unproductive
lines, or, at least, unprofitable routes. He asked exactly when the Provincial Transportation Study report
is due. Mr. Barfoot stated, that as he recalls, the report was due about this time - end of March or early
April. Councillor Kipping noted that as soon as we have that report, surely we can make the proper moves,
and if it turns out not to be very helpful to us, because it may be kind of on its own, and it will have to
solve it in its own way as speedily as it can humanly be done, and he thinks that the Council owes that to
the citizens who are now suffering from an obviously inadequate bus service.
.
I
I
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that at the last meeting of Council, the City Manager promised him
a report on the dumping at Howe's Lake on the week-ends and the number of times the City has been checking
this problem, and stated that he has been receiving many complaints. He stated that he has heard three or
four names (regarding being caught dumping at this location) but he is only interested in the report, and
if that name is not in the report (Of the leading citizen of Millidgeville who was caught dumping) then he
will have to publicly name that citizen, the one that he knows of. He stated it is his understanding that
the Police are not doing their duty in catching the offenders, and he feels that if that is the case, let
us tell them how to get the evidence.
.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above named subject, that has been discussed above by
Councillor A. Vincent, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion that the City Manager give him a complete detail of the
visits on week-ends at Howe's Lake on the dumping at Howe's Lake and some kind of a recommendation to cure
this ill. He noted that the situation is terrible in that area of the Sandy Point Road and that on a
Sunday or early Monday morning the papers blow all the way down to the Hazen-White-St. Francis School" and
that his concern is that this problem be cured. Councillor Kipping felt that the only real way to cure the
problem in question is to move that dump out of where it is. He recalled that for over three years no~ he
has been asking for a report on waste management and control; he added that some information has been I
forthcoming, but it is all pretty well academic and technical, and there is no action, as far as we k~ow, -
up to this point, being taken on finding an alternate site for the Howe's Lake dump. He noted that this
dump is immediately behind a pretty good class of housing accommodation which is fronting on University
Avenue, and right now, he is told on very good authority that the University of New Brunswick in Saint John
can hardly open their windows up there on a warm day because of the stench, and he noted that when that
multi-million dollar hospital goes in there, it, too, will experience the problem of the smell from this
dump. He stated that, in the meantime, before we remove that dump, we should not let it be an eyesor~. He
stated that the report on waste managment was asked for, as mentioned above, and it has not been fort~coming.
Councillor Davis replied that Councillor Kipping's remark is not quite right because there has been a 'lot
of work done in this city on waste management - we are always stymied by funds - the City Manager wanted us
to buy a compactor this year to compact the garbage and cut out the burning (when it is compacted it does
not burn) but we were not able to do that - there were 'luite a :few things that were investigated, and:
approximately four years ago the Council was visited by a man who was a Minister in the Federal Government
with e'luipment, incinerators, and equipment like that, that the City could not afford to buy; there are all .
sorts of things, that the City cannot afford; he felt that moving the dump site will move the problem,
somewhere else; he thinks that the housekeeping at this present dump could be improved upon regarding the
bad situation out at the dump, and he suggested that perhaps if we moved the gate of the dump in about
fifty feet from the road the people would dump their garbage fifty feet off the road rather than have the
gate right at the road, as at present; he noted that the City is a city with less than 90,000 people with
million-dollar problems. Councillor Green advocated that either the gate of the dump be moved back, as
mentioned by Councillor Davis, to overcome the problem of dumping outside the dump, or keep the dump open
on Saturday afternoons to receive garbage from citizens who wish to take advantage of such extended hours,
so that the garbage can be kept off the road, and he felt that if the City Manager would explore this
possibility, that maybe we can overcome the present dumping and littering problem there. Councillor I
Parfitt asked if a fee could be charged for dumping at the Howe's Lake dump after the present closing hours
of the dump on Saturdays, that would cover the wages of the person who would be reqired to be on duty in
this regard - a Commissionaire, or whatever - to let such persons in, on a Saturday afternoon. Mr. B~rfoot
replied that there is no fee for dumping at the dump, and it would require changes in the Garbage By-Law if
a fee were to be charged, but the only trouble is, with charging a fee we would then have to have a man on
to collect the fee, which means that the cost of "red tape" and bureacracy would increase. Councillor A.
Vincent explained that what he is asking the City Manager for is a report on the dump on the dumping
practices; he noted he understands a loader has to be sent from Rothesay Avenue every Monday morning to
this dump, and it must cost something for that loader and helper to clean up this dump all Monday morning I
which means it is not really all profit by shutting the gate of the dump (on Saturday afternoon). He added
that he would hope that report would explain the negotiations to date with the Provincial Department of ~
Health for a new incinerator, and that, surely, we are not going to let the new hospital locate out in that
area and just dispose of its garbage, anywhere. He stated that that is the kind of report he is asking
for, and a master plan for the new site should be included in the report - and over-all picture of sanitary
condit ions.
Mr. Rodgers asked for permission to place an item on the agenda that covers the point but does
not answer all of Councillor A. Vincent's questions, the item being a letter for the information of CO,un-
cil.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
.
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the City Solicitor be
placed on the agenda of this meeting at this' time.
Cd:! ~;;e/-coY'
~
r"
.
I/tlwe; ~k<
P(~~j?;nf
trip/A; PHS
G';U'ba!;e
$!f- A.;IW
I ?l"P6et:~~; I!?H.
1
.
/11/l7lster
h'shel'ies(
.
Jll?le.l"H ~
L31't?~1Ut>t>t:f
S~-~/I/,
re-;:<OH/h5
He...e~pme:
pl..h ~ Zi!?hlh
I e~/1kd
S' !feiilAS
J7/al7h.l911tws,
Cpmh/,
I
.
.....
r38S
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter, dated March 29th, 1976, from the City Solicitor
with reference to the concern expressed by Common Council over the manner of disposition of garbage throughout
the City of Saint John, advising that he has recently had referred to him by the Police Department for an examin-
ation, two incidents involving alleged violations of the Garbage By-Law, and that he has carefully considered the
said by-law and has read the Police Statements and has conferred with the witnesses and investigators, and has
also examined the evidence at hand, the manner of its acquisition and handling, and that as a result of this
examination, and in particular the available evidence, he has decided that no further action concerning these
particular alleged violations is warranted; and further advising that, however, he has, on March 29th, discussed
this matter with the City Manager, the Acting Chief of Police, and other City representatives of the appropriate
departments, and that discussion was held mainly to outline the course of procedure to be taken and the evidence
believed necessary to proceed with prosecution action for further violations under the by-law -- be received and
filed.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if we are going to try to implement the dumping in front of Howe's Lake on
week-ends to everybody regarding catching them for doing so, and he pointed out that the garbage that is dumped
is coming from Rothesay, Westfield and Millidgeville. He felt that the Police should, in the future, take the
persons who are caught before the Magistrate and let the Magistrate throw the case out of court, because innocent
people are being blamed for this dumping of garbage, by hearsay, which is unfair, and, by taking them before the
Magistrate the wrong citizens are not blamed. Councillor Parfitt commented that the emphasis is being placed on
just dumping outside the Howe's Lake dump site, -but people are contravening the Garbage By-Lawall over the city,
but they are just being warned in the meantime and then they will start cracking down on them; she asked if this
particular problem cannot be treated in the same way, for a while. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he cannot
understand why, with the free garbage collection system in Millidgeville, why a leading citizen in Millidgeville
would take a box of Christmas wrapping, or whatever it was, in the box, and dump it in front of the ... he thinks
that an example has got to be made.
Councillor Pye voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor Pye advised that he wished to place an item on the agenda.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the item that Councillor Pye wishes to introduce, be placed
on the agenda at this time.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the matter that Councillor Pye wishes to discuss is an emergency.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay".
Councillor Pye advised that the matter definitely is an emergency. He stated that he would like to
know why, after a lapse of five weeks, he still has received no report from the City Solicitor in relation to a
request by Council that he request the Minister of Justice to initiate an investigation into the dumping into the
retention of Mystery Lake, and, also, a request for a ruling from the said Minister. He asked why has nothing
been forthcoming. Mr. Rodgers advised that the reason nothing has been forthcoming is that he has had no re-
sponse to his correspondence to Fredericton, which was addressed to the Minister of Justice. The Mayor noted
that we will have'to have a follow-up. Councillor Pye advised that he is not too happy with that and he felt
that it does not look very well for the Minister of Justice and that the Minister is not too prompt in his
returns. He noted that the Minister had no difficulty in answering the other question pertaining to Glen Falls
and that it was a matter of ten days and the Minister submitted the answer to Council. Mr. Rodgers stated that
he can follow the matter up.' Councillor Pye stated that he understands that the Minister of Fisheries was aware
of this matter two months or more ago and took no action on the matter, so, he is wondering if there is anything
radically wrong there and if there is something being "swept under the rug". The Mayor stated that Mr. Rodgers
has said he will follow up the matter, for a quick reply.
Councillor Gould withdrew from the meeting at this time.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that Mr. Peter H. Thomas -- who purchased from Associated
Investors Corp. Ltd. on July 30th, 1975 20.14 acres of land in the Brentwood Sub-division, which land was re-
zoned in 1970 to "RM-2" classification, subject to the developer carrying out the development scheme in accordance
with the development plan filed in the office of the Common Clerk, and based on a five-year development period
(WhiCh period expired June 1st, 1975) -- be advised that approval be given to extend the said "RM-2" district
zoning on this sub-division for a period of five years from June 1st, 1975.
Councillor MacGowan asked if Mr. Zides feels that the Planning Advisory Committee would endorse the
above named extension of time. Mr. Rodgers posed the following question: if the Council does not do anything in
the matter, what hardship is being caused to Mr. Thomas? Councillor M. Vincent stated he feels that the City
Solicitor's comments are most relevant in that if there is no hardship being imposed upon Mr. Thomas, the way
things presently stand, why should the City commit itself to something if it is not imposing any hardship on the
man. He added that he does not think it is an advocate of good business to make a commitment to tie the City up
to something unless the Council is obligated to do so or unless we are creating a hardship to Mr. Thomas, and if
we are, he would like somebody to tell him to the contrary. Councillor Davis discussed Mr. Thomas' presentation
and request, made earlier in this meeting, and Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that Mr. Thomas is only develop-
ing in his first phase a small portion of this land but is asking for a "blanket" for the whole area because he
needs a longer period and stated that he feels the Council should give him this five-year extension and if Mr.
Thomas does not follow through, then the five years are up. Councillor MacGowan stated she would like to know if
it is necessary for Mr. Thomas to get the funds to have an extension of time, and if an extension of time is
necessary, does Mr. Zides believe that the Planning Advisory Committee would go along with it, and should the
extension be for five years or should it be forever, or should it be for a year and a half, or two years. Mr.
Zides replied that he cannot speak for the Planning Advisory Committee which has not really dealt with this
question; however, in regard to other questions, there is no guarantee that a Council - this one, or another
one - might find reason to revert the zoning, which he thinks it legally can do, subject to a legal opinion from
the City Solicitor - therefore, he thinks that Mr. Thomas is probably acting correctly in asking for some kind of
an extension - if he got a "blanket" extension (that is, forever) that is one thing - if he got an extension for
five years, at least, he has a time frame; so, he feels that Council should give Mr. Thomas some kind of an
extension; he thinks, in the first instance, if there is any concern on the Council's part, perhaps he should be
given an extension to at least go ahead with the 96 units that he is now proposing; the other questions asked by
Councillor MacGowan could perhaps be answered by the Planning Advisory Committee, he suggested. Councillor
Parfitt asked if Mr. Zides feels that Mr. Thomas has time enough in one month in which to get a definite plan
386
~
C'a17~ &~.I!
~~~. solicitor
C't"" ~ /. ,L effort to
:"'1.7I?/(C'/-z:-PI" necessary
.4b~l7/r ~""...".
I7p~"ir /e.;;;S~
a51"'ehfe~7!-
(}"mm;#e~ o.,c'
WhPk
LEG A L
t!/f!f SlPhc/~pr
.s. J: ('pun~'y
/lC~#o/r '""4c~
Cdna~ ~
~ rd.
/lb~~'hir ~se
d~.;r"~mt!?4
"
ready to present to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to have the plans approved to get the finan-
cing in question, and Mr. Zides made affirmative reply, advising that Mr. Thomas has the plans prepared now
for those 96 units. Councillor M. Vincent asked if there is any hardship being imposed upon 11r. Thomas if
that is not done. Mr. Zides made negative reply, stating: other than the fact that there is a potential of
a Council change. Councillor M. Vincent asked: when did the Planning Advisory Committee or staff last see
the plans that Mr. Thomas is contemplating reactivating again? Mr. Zides replied that the Planning people
were working with him fairly closely on this whole question, and it has been very involved: at one point,
for example, they were dealing with seven different groups; this was of fairly recent date, he added.
Councillor Kipping, noting how we get bound by precedents, stated that he is a little worried about any-
thing that goes over a one-year period because he believes all our precedent is that people have land ,for
one year, at least according to the theory and the agreement, and if they do not develop it within that
time it is supposed to revert. He asked if that provision applies in this particular re-zoning matter.
Mr. Zides noted that he thinks two different things are being talked about: in Mr. Thomas' case, we are
talking about a private piece of land which was re-zoned to a fairly intensive density on a pretty am-'
bitious scheme and the Council of the day said it would go along with this type of thing and that it ~as
much more of an intensity type of thing than anything the City had had, and that it would like to see it
happen, and would work on the premise that the developer would develop it in five years. He added that, as
a matter of fact, the developers proposed the time and thought they would do it in five years, and thi's is
where the five-year time limit came in. Councillor Kipping stated that, on that basis, he can agree with
the five-year extension.
.
I
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, during which Councillors Hodges, Kipping and
Parfitt withdrew from the Council Chamber, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed the Chair, in legal
session of Common Council.
I
Discussion ensued at this time regarding the March 26th, 1976 letter from the City Solicitor
pertaining to the Saint John County Abattoir Act and the desire of Canada Packers Ltd. to be relieved of
the company's obligations under Paragraph 21 of the abattoir leasing agreement with respect to custom
killing services but continue the meat processing operation. Councillor A. Vincent stated that Councillor
Davis, the late Councillor Donald Patterson and himself were at a meeting of the Abattoir Commission when
they first made this report and they (the company) indicated that unless they got this through there was a
possibility they may shut down the place - he pointed out that that is how serious the matter is. He
stated that what Mr. Rodgers has in the above named letter regarding amending the said Act, he is not sure
is what the company wants and he is not sure the proposed amendment to the Act can pass the Legislature
because other parts of the Province want Saint John to retain the abattoir but they will not send us any
beef to slaughter, and the volume of killing at the abattoir is away down; he felt that it would not be the
Saint John Members of the Legislative Assembly who would oppose the proposed Bill, but it would be those
who want to give us a problem. He stated he would not want to think that in presenting such an amendment
to the Act's clause (as noted in Mr. Rodgers' letter) that it might cause trouble and that Canada Packers
may just pullout of Saint John altogether. Mr. Rodgers pointed out that to meet the company's request, a
Bill has to be presented to get a clause out, or a clause in, regarding the agreement under the said Act;
he pointed out that if the City takes out the clause that the company is requesting be taken out, the City
has absolutely no control after, whatsoever. He stated that the amendment he is recommending for a clause
to go in the agreement at least gives the Council the discretion to control it afterwards, by resolution _
but, once the Act is amended by the Legislature, then the matter is out of the City's control, forever.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that, in such case, it is also out of Canada Packers' control, and this is the
point he could not discuss in open session of Council, namely, the possibility of losing Canada Packers
plant. Mr. Rodgers explained that he introduced his letter in open session of Council because of the time
periods involved in getting the amendment through to assist Canada Packers' request. In explanation of his
proposed amendment to the said section of the said Act, Mr. Rodgers stated that he understands that Canada
Packers requested to be relieved of their obligations, under their leasing agreement, of custom slaugh~ering _
custom killing; that is the whole purpose of this legislation and that is why we went to Frederictom from a
public health point of view to get the legislation passed in the beginning; if you grant that "blanket"
request then Canada Packers is relieved of that obligation (he noted that, really, there is no public
abattoir in existence any more) and you are going to get a lot of opposition to that request, because, if
it is granted, then Council has no control whatsoever over Canada Packers and its carrying on as a public
abattoir with respect to slaughtering. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he thought that Mr. Rodgers was
going to bring in some kind of a guarantee that the company maintain its meat operation, and so on.
Councillor Davis expressed the view that the City Solicitor's recommendation simply gives the authority to
the Council to suspend or cancel that clause - it takes it away from the Province - the Council can then
deal with Mr. Chalmers again because there is no guarantee they will continue anything down there. He'
noted that the way Mr. Chalmers puts it is they will pay the rent and they will put in a couple of men once
a month to do the killing, and close the plant. Mr. Rodgers agreed, noting this is so, if the Council
grants the company's request, this being what the company is after; the company can move out of town.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he wants it in the legislation that the company cannot move out of town
and that they have got to place so many bodies. Councillor Davis noted that the company will not sign
that. Councillor A. Vincent stated that the company was told at a meeting attended by Councillor Cave and
himself, that that is the only way the company is going to get it (that is, as outlined by Councillor A.
Vincent as above). Mr. Rodgers noted that, in other words, we do not really know what the company wants
and is requesting. Councillor A. Vincent stated that we do know what the company wants: the company tells
us they want to get away from custom killing, and we are saying it is alright to do that and to amend the
lease to say that, in lieu of that, the company is going to employ 68 people, or whatever it is talking
about. Councillor Davis stated that he sees the proposed new section in the Act, giving the authority to
the Council, as the opening door - then, the Council can make a deal with the company - at the moment, the
Council cannot - at the moment, it is all Provincial, whereas the proposed amendment to the Act gives the
Council the authority to cancel it on these terms. He noted that they are not going to put a clause in the
Act saying they are going to employ 120 people, or 60 people. In reply, Councillor A. Vincent advocated
that we make the company live up to its lease. Councillor Davis pointed out that, even then, the company
can knock it down to 10 people. Mr. Rodgers stated that he can certainly reconsider a resolution along the
lines of Councillor A. Vincent and be more specific as to what the Council wants Canada Packers to do. He
added that he believes we should have a meeting with Canada Packers. Councillor A. Vincent asked if Mr.
Rodgers had a meeting with Mr. Gilbert, the solicitor. 11r. Rodgers replied that he called Mr. Warwick
Gilbert and Mr. Gilbert told him he was under the impression that the City was in the process of taking the
necessary steps to Fredericton to meet-Canada Packers' request. Councillor A. Vincent stated that at the
meeting, the first thing we agreed to was that their solicitor, Mr. Warwick Gilbert, and the City Solicitor
meet. Mr. Rodgers advised that he told Mr. Gilbert that his understanding that the City had agreed to
grant Canada Packers' request and that it was in the process of getting the legislation was not true.
.
I
.
I
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that a meeting be arranged between Canada Packers Ltd., the
for Canada Packers Ltd., City staff, the Legal Department and the Abattoir Commission in an
resolve the above named matter, and from that meeting, hopefully, bring back to Council the
document that would meet the requirements of Canada Packers Ltd. and still protect the City.
.
~
r"
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
F1teedofiJ If?
C/ty-
7?l?bRrr
IllJO.~
'Pt7nlf4./jJ.
l7?ezf/re~e.
~&>~/.d //
Sr-Ohe
1b1t~e ..:z>e
.~~/l3h.~
/J/p..2 ~~h
~Ot-h /ll7l7ir.
b?, 'R- crf! y dJJ1
CcIt'lef~
CfP'JPiUh / 'fy
C/~b
.....
3~'1
Councillor Green stated that the custom killing operations of Canada Packers Ltd. at the abattoir is
not paying this company at all and the company wants to get out of it, and the company has told us that if the
City will relieve it of this obligation it will increase the processing of sausages, hams, and so on, and be
bringing in a lot of such products from Montreal, and the staff would be maintained.
Councillor A. Vincent suggested that the above noted meeting be held on Friday morning, April 2nd. Mr.
Rodgers agreed that that would be a satisfactory date to him.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Co lerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the fifth day of
April, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of
Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations,
and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning, A. Ellis, Building
Inspector, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal
Services, C. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, D. French,
Director of Personnel and Training, P. Clark, Fire Chief, J. Melanson,
Division Fire Chief - Prevention and Investigation, and R. Jackson,
Deputy Police Chief
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on March 22nd
last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on March 29th
last, be confirmed.
The Mayor asked that a motion be entertained by Council, as follows:- "That the Freedom of the City of
Saint John be conferred upon Robert Murray Pendrigh, M.D., C.M.".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Freedom of the City be conferred upon Robert Murray
Pendrigh, M.D., C.M.".
The Mayor made reference to the retirement, which commenced on April 2nd, last, of Ronald H. Stone,
Deputy Chief of Police, and noted that this great policeman served the City well for a number of thirty years.
He stated that as to date the City has two additional Deputy Police Chiefs he would ask Council to consider the
fact that the City might not fill the position left vacant by Deputy Chief Stone's retirement for some time, as
the two Deputies can be called upon as the Chief of Police sees fit to replace him if he needs to go out of the
city; he noted that this leaves money the City can use at this vital time - and, possibly, even to add an ad-
ditional Constable to our Police Force, if necessary. He felt that the Council could consider this suggestion,
at a later date.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Director of
Recreation and Parks, advising that Carleton Branch No.2 of the Royal Canadian Legion, in this their 50th
anniversary year, wanted to mark the anniversary with a project for the youth of the area formerly known as
Carleton by donating a new 15-passenger van which would be of great assistance in the transporting of groups
operating out of the Carleton Community club (baSketball, volleyball and floor hockey teams, et cetera) and the
:3S8
~
Senior Citizens' Club as well as others in the area, and advising that the Legion Branch and the Teen Club
at the said Centre are prepared to pay the cost to maintain and operate this van for the balance of this
year and the Department of Recreation and Parks would be responsible after that time (the main normal:
maintenance items are gasoline, oil and insurance); and recommending that (a) the City accept with thanks,
this proposal with the conditions submitted by the Legion Branch, as follows: the van will be donated 'under
the following conditions (1) that the van will be stored at the Carleton Centre, (2) that the van will be
available to the Legion, and other associations in the area formerly known as Carleton, upon proper written
request and upon proof that proper drivers and insurance is available, (3) that the van is not to be used
by the City of Saint John other than for the Carleton Centre programming, (4) that the van is under the
care and control of Mr. Fred Miller, or whoever is supervisor of the centre, (5) that the van is to be
~~~ ~~~,:~ maintained by the City of Saint John, (6) that a limited amount of drivers are assigned to drive the van,
(7) that if, in the event the Carleton Community Centre programme is discontinued, the van revert to its
7.7 //7 /' original owners; (b) the unit be incorporated into the City's equipment fleet -- be received and filed and
'f ~/ lA/? ho/h-h the recommendation be adopted.
!yo,,Z :l3raneh
Present on behalf of the said Legion Branch were Messrs. G. A. Goss, Past President, and Robert
(J,..,el- (7-1' ve;;J? Clifford, Chairman of the Sports Committee of the Branch. Mr. Goss at this time presented the keys of the
van to the Mayor, who expressed, on behalf of the citizens and the Common Council, thanks and appreciation
t?apJ.'et"J7~~~A().p for this van and for all the Legion's philanthropic works both for the veterans and for the community at
"~j( ~ large, including the use of the van by the Carleton Community Centre Senior Citizens' Club.
Sr~tf/~fiN$.'
C)'I(J
p~. ~ecr. +
"P.;vJ",{-S
:l).7?~ E
.
I
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that authority be granted for payment of the following
construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services regarding projects that
were undertaken in connection with the Department of Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
~.J7C. ~~<<?~ 1. Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station
,1/f"1- 't..--t'/p, (a) Simpson Construction Ltd. .
Total value of contract $ 589,600.00
$/"'pSPJ7 ~Phdr. Total work done, Estimate Number 1 19,000.00
,/ ~I!t'. Retention 2,850.00
Payments previously approved Nil
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated March 17, 1976 $ 16;150.00
(b) W. H. Crandall & Associates
fA/, II. t?'JbV?Ke>l~ Engineering Services
, /755 PC'. Payments previously approved $ 53,262.14
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 5,
dated March 19, 1976 $ 3,261.18
2. Western Industrial Area Trunk Sewer I
Wh. In,(Ksr./lJ Galbraith Construction Ltd.
7;unJr Se lVe.r Total value of contract $ 588,860.00
Total work done, Estimate Number 8 578,472.10
~.;llb~H/' Retention Nil
C Ph::;,"';'. -I-t-/t'. Payments previously approved 576,472.10
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 8,
dated March 23, 1976 $ 2,000.00
On motion of Councillor Green
Capl't--/ IH'(!/~
,1.;dimerMA--e
C"~ /e?.r/ H~ -:;PI.;>h
JOb, F/f?t>d <i!-
S,/?$ (/,,~/).11
/J1R~t/~,#/
e)( dm/hdl phS
prt:>ffr.aI"?n?6
'Ppl/'ce4,cipe
.:J)eyX5.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that authority be given for payment of the following
construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engineering services regarding the following
amed capital project:-
.
Latimer Lake Chlorines Plant
John Flood & Sons (1961) Ltd.
Extension of building
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended-for payment, Progress Estimate Number 2,
dated March 17, 1976
$ 18,685.45
18,685.45
2,802.75
7,941. 32
$ 7,941.38
I
Read a letter from the City Manager relative to medical examination programmes for the Police and
Fire Departments, as outlined therein, and recommending that the proposed medical examination programme be
approved and implemented immediately in the Fire Department.
Councillor Kipping asked what Chief Clark sees as the prime benefit of this scheme of medical
examinations for members of the Fire Department. Speaking in relation to the Fire Department, Chief Clark
stated he thinks the primary point to consider is the early discovery of coronary cases within the Fire
Department, and that the Fire Department is quite prone to heart conditions and it has been found that a I
good many of its members are not aware of the fact that they have a heart condition and by the time thry
are aware of such condition they are either unfit for duty or perhaps they die - so, that is our primary
purpose, in the Fire Department service because of the number of heart conditions that the Department is
faced with. Councillor Kipping felt that the Chief must feel, then, that the members will not take the
initiate themselves to, keep close check on their health - but, because the Chief wants to make it a depart-
mental routine examination, he must feel that is the case. Chief Clark, making affirmative reply, stated
that they discussed this with their medical doctor, and pointed out that he thinks it is a natural thing
that people perhaps overlook or reject, namely, making an appointment to go to a medical doctor for an
examination - and he added that from their discussion with Dr. Parlee and based on Dr. Parlee's recommendations
the City Manager on March 26th, 1974 set up a special committee composed of Mr. F. S. Haycox, the former
Police Chief H. McKay, and Fire Chief Clark, to meet with Dr. Parlee and discuss their problems, and the
recommendation from this committee was that we concur with the proposed medical examination as submitted by .
Dr. Parlee. Councillor Kipping stated that the reason he was asking about this is that he himself sees it
as a benefit which probably is a negotiable benefit, because it says in the City Manager's recommending
memorandum that where such examinations are initiated by the employer rather than the individual there,is a
fee to be paid; he thinks that is the point, really - there is a fee to be paid, and he feels that the,
~
,...
."j,;;:'; "9
00'
.
I
I
individual should initiate this examination himself because he is partially covered by Medicare and Blue Cross if
he initiates it - but, if the employer initiates it then the whole cost falls on the employer or almost the whole
cost - and he feels that anything that an individual can do, rather than having the organization do - and par-
ticularly the employer, which in this case is the City and in the circumstances that we find ourselves in now,
then the individual can do it - he means, the service is available, the benefits are available and they are
available on the individual's initiative, and he sees no reason why the City should be sort of "big brother" in a
case like this - added to the reason that he feels that perhaps it is a negotiable item under collective bar-
gaining because it is a distinct benefit - he is also afraid of the precedent that it will set - it may be fine
for the Police and Fire Departments - the Police have not yet expressed their thoughts on it, by the way, as the
Council knows, except to say that they have it under study - because they are stressed very severely at times and
have physical strains put on them over and above the average - but, at the same time, they can take the initiative
and do it by themselves, and if, in the process of an examination, initiated by the employer, a malady is found
then the employer is going to end up paying completely for the treatment of that disability - and he sees that as
an additional burden which the City would be letting itself in for. He added that the precedent, to which he
referred, would be that the two Unions may get it and the other Unions will very soon thereafter demand the same
benefit, which is another fear he has, about it. The Mayor asked if the City can recover from Medicare a portion
of the cost per man. Chief Clark, in reply, stated that he would go along with Councillor Kipping's thinking if we
were talking about ordinary situations, but it has been revealed through a national survey that the highest injury
rate and the highest death rate of any occupation surveyed was within the fire service, and it is the contention
of the Fire Chief that if an employee is working at a hazardous occupation - and that is exactly what the fire
service has been classified as - that it is the responsibility of the employer to provide that medical examin-
ation - if it was a normal job, then perhaps he may go along with what Councillor Kipping is saying, but our
records do not show that - our death rates are very high and a lot of it is related to the respiratory tract and
the coronary section of the body. Councillor Kipping replied that he realizes that is a point, and that may be
the turning point of the whole thing - he is just pointing out that there are these considerations that the
Council should be making.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
(;I'zt ~ RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the following Medical
~ ~)o. Examination Programme be approved, and implemented immediately in the Fire Department:- the said Programme is to
.I??e~c~~ be carried out on all members of the Police and Fire Departments in the first year, except for those recently
e)'~m':~~PJ1 taken on, and thereafter is to be given annually to those persons 40 years of age and over; Dr. H. Bruce Parlee,
~~jr)o~~;.v Medical Examiner for the said Departments, is to be paid the sum of $6.00 per examination over and above the
~. ~~ retainer fee ($1,800.00) at present charged for his other services; a contract be drawn up incorporating the said
r-It'e-L/ . provisions; the estimated cost of the Programme in the first year is $1,200.00 for each department and in sub-
~~Jjee ~~ sequent years $500.00 - the first year's costs have been included in the 1976 budget; the physical examination
~/ '/"'". under this Programme is based on "Weeks Base Data Physical", plus the following: X-rays (chest, gall baldder,
~~~.~I'~~ gastrointestinal series); electrocardiagram; urinalysis; complete blood count and sedimentation rate.
PariS'\!?
Councillor Hodges asked how many people go on pension from the Fire Department before the age of sixty-
five years, which is sixty years of age. Chief Clark replied that the vast majority retire before the age of
sixty-five years. Councillor Hodges noted that this is a cost factor. Chief Clark advised that we have approxi-
mately between 25 and 30 fire fighters who have severed their employment with the City because of medical con-
ditions and ninety per cent of those, he would assume, are because of heart conditions. In reply to Councillor
Hodges' question as to whether could some of these people been in good health at the present time had this pre-
ventative examination programme been in effect, Chief Clark stated that Dr. Parlee has indicated that this would
be so, in his opinion - further, the report submitted by the symposium that was conducted by the United States and
Canadian fire fighters, attended by many top-ranking heart specialists, indicated that it is the early discovery
of this condition that is absolutely necessary. He agreed with Councillor Hodges' point that the objective of
this examination programme is to prevent these early retirements thus benefitting the City and the Pension Plan in
retaining in the City service by preventative examinations an employee who otherwise might develop a condition
resulting in early retirement. Councillor M. Vincent agreed that this is a preventative programme, and stated
that he thinks that the City really has an investment in its employees, and that if the Council can prevent any
problems from becoming worsened then the City is going to get a better return from its employees, and he is in
favour of this Programme.
I
.
I
I
/P/7"
. 7?etfl/ .6
I ~.Yes oJ?
{', 't!f
'pre>j7t?ni e s
.....
Councillor Parfitt stated that she can see the value of early diagonisis, and so on, and that she, in
fact, wishes there were these clinics that you could go to - but we are talking about people of 40 years and over,
and she felt that surely by that time we have been told that civil servants are very responsible and that when it
is covered by Medicare that it could be part of the Agreement that the men would have a check-up once a year
through the Provincial Medicare. Councillor Green spoke in favour of the recommended Programme, noting that he
feels it is a preventative measure. Councillor MacGowan asked if these medical examinations are going to be
compulsory, as outlined in the City Manager's letter, and Chief Clark made affirmative reply. Councillor MacGowan
asked' if there is no way that in the Agreement it could be compulsory and Medicare would pick it (the cost) up.
In reply, Chief Clark stated that under the Regulations of the Fire Department it would be compulsory to take the
examination - he had no comment on the question of who is to pay the bill. Councillor MacGowan noted that if the
employee initiated the. examination, Medicare would pay for one examination a year. Chief Clark replied that you
cannot make it mandatory for an employee to do something that his own Plan is going to pay for - he thinks it is
only proper that you make it mandatory and that the employer pay the cost. He added the view that he is sure that
the City cannot ask him to use his Blue Cross, and that if he wishes to use it, he thinks that is his own choice,
even though the City pays part of the premium costs for Blue Cross coverage. He stated that the Programme is no
good if it is not mandatory, and the provisions to make it mandatory are in the Regulations of the Fire Depart-
ment, that the Common Council passed in 1974 and by making it mandatory he thinks that the onus is on the City to
pay the cost. Councillor MacGowan stated she does not understand why the City should pay for it when the em-
ployees are already covered for the cost of the examinations some other way (Blue Cross and Medicare); she added
that everyone is entitled to at least one free examination a year. Councillor Kipping advised that he is not
against in any way the objective of the Programme because he agrees with the preventive value of this Programme _
all he is saying is that it is a policy decision of this Council as to wether the City gives this kind of a
benefit to the proposed two groups of civic employees without giving it to the other civic employees, and without
negotiation. He stated he maintains that the City cannot afford this Programme, as valuable as it is.
"naylt.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Kipping, Parfitt and MacGowan voting
Consideration was given to the joint letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner of Finance,
recommending authority be given for payment of the 1976 real property tax bills regarding City-owned properties,
as shown on the submitted summary list. The Mayor asked what tax, the City pays regarding the Rotary Club pro-
perty, shown on the said summary. Mr. Park replied that the City pays the taxes on the two senior citizens
housing projects, one of which is owned by the Rotary Club, and the other, by the Kiwanis Club, and the said item,
described "Rotary" actually covers these two projects; the City has been paying the taxes on these two properties
since 1965, or maybe 1967; from the inception of the project, and he believes this understanding must have been in
the original arrangement negotiated with the two service clubs. Noting that April 15th is the deadline date for
payment for receiving discounts on such tax bills, Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Council could have a teach-
1390
~
1'17{, ;;p, E: ~
Oh c/-t~
'pro'p';~/es
Sub-L/y,
~ ~1',t!'Mf!?d-
t?;1P'/St?17 /I've,
/l!~n-/O.rd ~""',P
S"h ahs6.CO,
~6-~.
CJ/iy /11.1'1".
~/kr :lleCKt
(;ep/5tt? "z::;
OI{,Pnh~//' b?~
(}()~pJoeJ.{'b~~H
'jZ)/.;;1n
{.( II. ph -t P/b/e
.j:
--'1-
p,.od-Pl"4lfd~
/'-!-~ ;;fe-pod...
/lJDlI".sh c"eeA-
~-I-eI".5ht!?d
/Jft;hd~t!?me;ffbr
F/,p,t CPJff/'lO
in before that date on these tax bills - regarding, for instance, the Lord Beaverbrook Rink which he
understood was a gift, and now the City is paying taxes on it, and he understood those types of gifts were .
supposed to be free of taxes.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager and the Commissioner of Finance, authority be granted for payment of 1976 real property taxes,
being 466 tax bills on City-owned property, of $230,708.58 net total payable, the 1976 funds that are
available in this regard being:- Departmental Budgets $181,214.41; By Recovery from - Sundry Accounts,
Receivable $9,625.00, Parking Commission $10,592.44, Urban Renewal Project - North End/West Side $29,276.73
making a total of $230,708.58.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that Manford
Thompson Construction Company Limited is developing land on Molson Avenue for the construction of twenty
townhouses, and that the servicing plans of the developer met with the approval of the Engineering and
Works Department, and that, according to the City's sub-division policy, the City will be responsible for
the following costs:- (1) water materials (watermains, gate valves, fire hydrants, et cetera) $6,600.00,
(2) sanitary sewer materials (pipe, man holes, et cetera) $1,150.00, (3) storm sewer materials (pipe, man
holes, et cetera) $7,150.00 - totalling $14,900.00; and recommending that the said expenditures be ap-
proved for water and sewerage materials to be charged to the 1976 capital budgets and that the Mayor and
Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in due course - be received and filed and
the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter, dated April 2nd, 1976, from the City
Manager with regard to the brief from Mr. George F. O'Connell, Q. C. on behalf of Mr. W. A. Beckett to re-
zone approximately 400 acres of land in the proposed Beckett Sub-division in the area of the MartinonBy-
Pass and the Acamac Backland Road, advising that construction of the services to the medium security
penitentiary site in that area may lower the costs of development of the Beckett property slightly, but
this change does not affect the main argument against approval of the Beckett development which is related
to the conflict with the Comprehensive Community Plan, and the associated costs of allowing development
which is in conflict be received and filed and a copy thereof be sent to Mr. O'Connell on behalf of Mr.
Beckett.
Councillor Cave expressed the view that he does not think the Council should turn the Beckett
housing down, and noted that we need housing. He felt that the Council should look further into the
Beckett proposal and have Mr. Beckett come in, and added that he does not agree with the suggested re~
commendation contained in the above noted let~er from the City Manager. Councillor Green agreed that the
City of Saint John and the surrounding areas need housing, and he felt that possibly if Mr. Beckett may
come in with a proposal regarding land prices for small lot owners to build on and ask the Council to go
along with such a proposal it is something that we may work out for the rank and file of the citizens who
would wish to build a, house and be given the opportunity to build - that if it is possible, the Council
could work something out again with Mr. Beckett and ask him to appear before Council particularly with the
new construction that will be going on in the western area of the city. '
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table.
In proposing the above motion, Councillor Green suggested that the matter be laid on the table
until the Council asks Mr. Beckett along with Mr. O'Connell maybe to act on his behalf, or both of them,
to appear and maybe to up-date this proposal.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors MacGowan, M. Vincent,
Hodges and Gould voting "nay".
Councillor Kipping stated that he wonders if the Council could have from the Planning Advis~ry
Committee a rather full statement on the conflict that there is with the Comprehensive Community Plan.
The Mayor replied that when the Council discusses the matter that point will be brought up and the per-
tinent information will be obtained from all those people who will be brought in to do so, to give the
Council the information it needs to give the Council the ability to think the matter out correctly.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report dated February 1976 and prepared by
Proctor & Redfern Limited, consulting engineers and planners, entitled, "Water Management Study, Marsh
Creek Watershed, Saint John, N. B., Summary Report, Summary of Potential Flood Control Measures", be
received and filed.
Councillor Cave expressed the desire to have a briefing on the above summary report as soon as
possible so that the Council can take action on funding and determine what action it is going to take" in
the above matter. The Mayor noted that when the Council studies the above summary report it will also
study the comprehensive report from the said consultants, and that the proposed teach-in will take place
prior to the May 3rd meeting that is to be held with Federal and Provincial authorities on this report.
He added that we will look into Councillor Green's suggestion that Mrs. Elsie Wayne, Chairman of the Glen
Falls Flood Committee, and one or two or her associates on that Committee, be invited to attend the said
teach-in so that they may be informed of the details regarding what funding is available, what course of
action is being proposed, and what is going on.
--I
1
.
1
.
1
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked permission to place an item on the agenda at this time, with re-
ference to the flooding condition at Perth-Andover on the St. John River, adding that this is an emergency .
item.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named item be placed on the agenda of this
meeting at this time.
~
r"
. /I'laypr
/7p1?~/.nf
7J.~A -
/lnLo(A!?': M
'* flI'i,,/t'd (()
/Y, fl3.
~SS/S7fclJ?C'
I.?Ph/~~
2J<<:'t 6;' or
M-;f!~l
/C'e
7)", ,/ eesk
t7. ;?ed
I
.
1i't?-ZPII/h
(/J1c#/of}
/t; s-t-)
I
.
Kl7lfhis
CPkmbuS'
I
I
1?e-::?Ch/';,!/
K;,/~/ds
CbIuHlJuS
.
C>/~~~C, .
Wetf.A-r
7(e$lJ<idialf.
2&'-.I'07W
......
391
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Mayor be authorized to inform the officials of the
Perth-Andover and Woodstock area of the sympathy of the City of Saint John in their present plight and problems
with flooding conditions caused by the St. John River freshet and that the City offers whatever assistance it can
offer in the way of any piece of equipment or expertise.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
ity of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns amending Section 68(2) by inserting a new
clause (oa) after clause (0) to read, "subject to subsection (4), a professional or business office", and by
inserting a new subsection (4) to read as follows: "(4) A use mentioned in clause (oa) of subsection (2) may not
be located in eXcess of 300 feet from a 'B-3' or 200 feet from a 'B-2' zone", be read a third time and enacted
and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto",
was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
The Common Clerk advised that the matter of the proposed re-zoning of land lying opposite what would be
the intersection of Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue to permit the construction thereon of a Knights of Col-
umbus building with the first phase slated for 1976, and the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee re-
commending against this rezoning and explaining the reasons for such recommendation, were laid on the table at
the March 29th meeting of Common Council until the Council could examine all aspects of this matter. It was
noted that first reading to the Zoning By-Law amendment in this regard had been given by the Common Council on
February 23rd last, prior to the advertisement of the proposed amendment.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning a proposed lot backing onto St.
Joachim's Church and Silver Glade Nursing Home lying opposite what would be the intersection of Cindy Lee Street
and MarthaAvenue with a frontage of about 515 feet along the latter and a depth of about 186 feet, 'from "RS-2"
One- and ~o-Family Suburban Residential district to "RM-IUMultiple Residential district, be read a second time.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the Council at its last meeting had asked that Mr. Zides bring in
further information. Mr. Zides advised that it will not take any harm to re-zone the above named land but it
will not do anything for the Knights of Columbus because the By-Law would have to be changed, as well, because
this kind of a use has to be approved by the Planning Advisory Committee and the Committee has refused the re-
zoning application. Councillor Green expressed the view that the proposal of the Knights of Columbus for develop-
ment of this lot is a good one, for that area, even though it may not be approved, and that he personally feels
the proposal should be supported. Councillor Pye advised that although liquor is on occasion served, or will be,
if this club license is granted or if the permission is granted to erect this club, but it is not a tavern - the
liquor that would be sold on the premises would be sold only under permission that would be obtained for that
purpose at a given time for a given occasion, and it would be done in the evenings for the benefit of the member-
ship or for any festivity they care to carryon there - therefore, unlike a tavern, you would not be getting a
steady flow or a frequent flow of traffic like in the daytime would tend to jeopardize the lives of school
children in case you were to encounter a few individuals who were not in a capable frame of mind to operate their
motor vehicles - it is not to be confused with a tavern, and it is a very worthwhile organization, and it is
greatly needed for that particular area which is becoming quite heavily populated. He stated that as far as
traffic movement is concerned, that portion of Silver Falls Park is not a section where the traffic movement is
heavy - it is not like the flow which emanates along Mark Drive and runs up Michael Crescent and Bonita Avenue _
it is set back to a reasonable degree from Mark Avenue which is the main entry - so, it can hardly be classified
as a dangerous situation, traffic-wise or otherwise. Councillor M. Vincent noted that while some members of
Council may be in favour of the request, he thinks that the Council has to face the situation in that, as the
Council has been told, it has no say in the matter. He noted that all the Council can do is remove from the
table the Planning Advisory Committee letter, receive and file it, and the Knights of Columbus be so notified.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors A. Vincent, Green and Cave voting "yea" and
the Mayor and Councillors Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the matter of the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law,
for re-zoning of a proposed lot backing onto the St. Joachim's Church and Silver Glade Nursing Home lying opposite
what would be the intersection of Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue to permit the construction of a Knights of
Columbus building thereon with the first phase slated for 1976, be taken from the table.
Councillors Cave and Green voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the corresondence relating to the application from the
Knights of Columbus for re-zoning of a proposed lot backing onto the St. Joachim's Church and Silver Glade
Nursing Home lying opposite what would be the intersection of Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue to permit the
construction thereon of a Knights of Columbus building with the first phase slated for 1976, be received and
filed and the Knights of Columbus be informed of the reason for the Council not proceeding with the proposed
amendment to the Zoning By-Law in this regard.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and Green voting "nay".
Councillor Higgins noted that the Planning Advisory Committee letter with regard to the above noted re-
zoning application is information for the Knights of Columbus, who can come in with an alternative proposal.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, advising that the
present Weight Restrictions By-Law does not contain a provision for the payment of a minimum fine and thereby
allow the Police to take no further action when discovering infractions under the by-law, and submitting a new
Weight Restrictions By-Law, containing, among other things, the voluntary payment' provision, and advising that
392
I
~
t(/e'jAf ~s6/~
i /(~/1 S ~- ~
tfkj'ht-lfdNC
-cit?/15 :B'y-~Ol
/(k/ffh-t- 7testl-lc-
-I/M5 ~.y-..(OIW
We/~A-t- ~e'dr/a-
t/O/1S ~-A".;;/w
/J1ar>A-d- amm.
//larke-I-
,( eRSt?
$en/bI'P H/end':
//erIhL/ ~rdlf!'1-
Cu/ld
P/Olhh. ,-?R'~s.a
/'17' p-l"IiCe.l"s
~!f~"'~ /J? /Ieee
of /q~ ~"J-.
'pubhc- pep,P'p.se.
C I/. ~...,/.6r..../l-h
due to the time of the year and the need for an up-to-date Weight Restrictions By-Law to allow 'the Police
to properly enforce this matter, he is recommending three readings be given to the By-Law at this meeting .
of Council, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Weight Restrictions Within The City
of Saint John Enacted Under Authority of Section 262(1) of The Motor Vehicle Act", be,read a first time.
Councillor MacGowan expressed the view that the provision in the above noted by-law for a fine
of not less than $10.00 and not more than $50.00 should be changed, to increase the fine to be not less
than $25.00 and not more than $100.00, stating that she feels that a fine of $10.00 is not enough to
bother anybody and that they are not going to get caught often enough to really do any good. The Mayor
asked why the fine limits of $10.00 and $50.00 were chosen in the proposed by-law. Mr. Rodgers replied
that those amounts of fines are in the present Weight Restrictions By-Law, and that the new by-law is
before Council with respect to voluntary payments only - the amount of those fines limits can be changed
at this time, however.
Question being taken, the above motion was adopted.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Weight Restrictions Within The City
of Saint John Enacted Under Authority of Section 262(1) of The Motor Vehicle Act".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that subsection (2) of Section 3 of the by-Law entitled,
"A By-Law Respecting Weight Restrictions Within The City of Saint John Enacted Under Authority of Section
262(1) of The Motor Vehicle Act", that is before the Council at this meeting, be amended to read, as
follows:- "3.(a) Any person who violates this by-law is guilty of an offence and liable to a fine of not
less than Twenty-five Dollars ($25.00) and not more than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00).".
Councillor Hodges stated that he will vote against the above motion because it is the driver,
and not the company, who pays the fine, and it is the drivery's license that is marked, not that of the
company; his second point is that if the driver were to take it to court, he would win. Councillor
Kipping asked if the Council could confirm or have denied the fact that it is the driver who pays the .fine
out of his own pocket. The Mayor noted that that question has nothing to do with the law. Councillor
Kipping felt that there are some Councillors, apparently, who are going to vote on the basis that this
would come 'out of the pocket of the driver, and that is a good point, if it is true; however, he does not
believe it is true because he believes that, at $10.00, the company will simply take $10.00 out of petty
cash and give it to the driver for him to use in paying the fine should he be picked up in this city for
violating the by-law, provisions. Councillor M. Vincent felt that the Council should be considering the
fact that the intent of this particular by-law is to try to keep vehicles off our city streets at a time
when the roads would be subject to damage, and that if it is going to be beneficial to have an increased
fine placed on the operators of the vehicle in order to protect our streets then that is what the Council
should have to be considering. He added that, unfortunately, if it is a case that the driver has to pay
the fine, he has sympathy for the driver, too, but the Council has to look at the intent of the by-law
which is to try to protect our streets from vehicles which are going to cause them damage.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Pye, Hodges, A. Vincent and
Higgins voting "nay".
On motion, of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Weight
Restrictions Within The City of Saint John Enacted Under Authority of Section 262(1) of The Motor Vehicle
Act", be read a second time, as amended in Section 3(a) thereof.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By:"'Law Respecting Weight Restrictions Within The City
of Saint John Enacted Under Authority of Section 262(1) of The Motor Vehicle Act".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
_ RESOLVED that an emergency be declared to exist and the by-law
entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Weight Restrictions Within The City of Saint John Enacted Under Authority
of Section 262(1) of The Motor Vehicle Act", be given three readings.
Question being taken, the motion was lost, with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Market Committee, advising
that it was agreed at a recent meeting of the Committee to rent, with Common Council's approval, a four
room section of the third floor of the Market building to the Senior Friends Handicraft Guild, the said
section comprising 764.81 square feet and to be leased for a period of one year at a rate of $2.50 per
square foot which will afford a rental of $159.34 per month, be received and filed and the requested
approval be granted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Municipal Planning Director
advising that at the March 30th, 1976 meeting of the Planning Advisory Committee, the following officers
were elected for the current year, namely:- Chairman, 14r. Leonard D. Andrews; Vice Chairman, Mrs. Joyce
Milrod; Executive, Mr. John Barry -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter dated March 31st, 1976
from the Planning Advisory Committee, the Common Council accept from C. V. Galbraith the sum of $576.00 in
lieu of land for public purposes with respect to the Verdun Galbraith property which lies on the southerly
side of Point, Road and just east of Lorneville Road (L-114) - Mr. Galbraith is proposing to sever two lots
of approximately 17,000 square feet from the easterly side of this land and a market value estimate of
~7,200.00 has been received from the Property Management Branch of the City (at 8% of the market value;
I
I
.
I
.
1
I
.
~
"""
.
~11;" #"'vI5.
COI?/I'l7.
'7?J.YJrJed in
lieu p/' l'uPhe
,Pee"'ppsf? ~
tVhJ. r:
I Ga/~"CJHh
I /J1()~ Crido
7>w,.k
.7J0l"J'1 .#dh-
"up
7? eC/'e.;iIfid J1
a",e.;;
.
~;/ I+:"",
,(eff/S/.iiJ t-~""
I J>e'7sifJ/1
/11M. /l.
$uh7o,e,.vi/!e
S. T //sf Co
s: X J:asr /.;.
/Jsst!",I>r~/y
II/.~ 1/5f al'l
.
l/J1oJ//e hPP?t?
paJ'K
39.:3
the sum to be paid to the City is $576.00).
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter dated March 31st, 1976 from
the Planning Advisory Committee, the Common Council accept from William C. Galbraith the sum of $224.00 in lieu of
land for public purposes with respect to the William C. Galbraith property which lies on the easterly side of the
Lorneville Road approximately 200 feet south of the Lorneville United Church (L-114) and which has a width of 260
feet and extends about 2,000 feet to the shore line and the Galbraith dwelling is situated on it about 160 feet
from the street (on September 22nd, 1971 the Planning Commission approved and recommended that Common Council
approve the placement of a mobile home on this property to the rear of the Galbraith dwelling and the approval of
the Department of Health was obtained) - and a market value estimate of $2,800.00 has been received from the
Property Management Branch of the City (at 8% of the market value, the sum to be paid to the City is $224.00).
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter dated March 31st, 1976 from the
Planning Advisory Committee, the Common Council accept from Monte Cristo Park (L-96) the sum of $872.00 in lieu of
land for public purposes with respect to the proposal of Daryl Northrup to sub-divide Parcel 0 situated on the
westerly side of the Gault Road at its intersection with the proposed Caryl Drive (two lots are involved: Lot 76-1
has an area of 17,896 square feet and is for conveyance; lot 76-2, which comprises 42,004 square feet, is being
retained by Mr. NorthrUp) - and a market value estimate of $9,900.00 has been received from the Property Mana-
gement Branch, of the City (at 8% of the market value, the sum to be paid to the City is $872.00).
Councillor M. Vincent asked if, in Monte Cristo Park, there is sufficient land for recreation purposes
already laid aside. Mr. Zides stated that there really is not such land already laid aside, explaining that this
is a sub-division that started years ago in the former City of Lancaster and has not materialized as well as the
original proponent anticipated and that it was in a later phase that land for public purposes would be brought
into play. Councillor M. Vincent stated that his concern there is that quite often we are accepting money from a
number of people who are willing to payout rather than provide the'land, and he is just wondering if, from time
to time, we are not voiding the development of recreational development in those places and not doing an injustice
and a wrong. Mr. Zides replied that the general principle is that we attempt to obtain land when a worthwhile
amount of land and the proper location, and so on, is made available to the City. He pointed out that it is not
only for playground purposes that the City takes land for public purposes - sometimes it has to do with other
features such as conservation of a stream easement, and so on; sometimes, for preservation of even a view, or a
pedestrian walk-way, or whatever; although recreation is the number one priority, school sites are another high
priority, and so on; but the type of thing that is coming to Council is cases of one, two or three lots, or the
percentage of land that is available to the City under the by-law is so small as to be worthless - so, in those
cases we take money in lieu of land for pUblic,purposes.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that legislation be sought to provide a pension for the widow of
the late A. Summerville.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission advising
that pursuant to authorization of the Common Council on November lOth, 1975 to investigate the feasibility of
utilizing land in the Saint John East Land Assembly Project for immediate use as a mobile home site, the Com-
mission made an investigation and enquiries to the New Brunswick Housing Corporation and to Central Mortgage and
Housing Corporation and learned that there are 133 serviced building lots in the project and that the proposal to
establish mobile home lots in the present Saint John East Development Phase has not been accepted by the senior
partner, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and that the New Brunswick Housing Corporation concurs in the
decision, and that both organizations realize that there may be need for serviced mobile home lots in the Saint
John area and both could make such development available in a future land development phase -- and advising that
the Commission therefore regrets that there appears to be no immediate method for mobile home developments in East
Saint John Land Assembly; and further advising that about half the above named 133 lots are as yet uncommitted and
it appears that the majority of lots (the lots are suitable for building under the Assisted Home Ownership Pro-
gramme of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation) are being used by developers for resale rather than individual
home builders, and that there has been a general lack of public information respecting these properties although
this is improving; and further advising that long range plans for further Land Assembly in East Saint John in-
dicate provision for a mobile home park but the lots could be sold to individual owners in effect converting the
concept of mobile homes prefabricated homes for permanent placement; and further advising that it is the Com-
mission's view that to be economically feasible as an operation rental park there should be provision for some 100
units, and that the Commission proposes to make further representation on the Common Council's behalf to endeavour
to make a mobile home park developed on the rental concept -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Parking Commission advising
~~J.&pAri~ that the Commission is proposing a parking facility (a) on the King Street East site presently occupied by Bar-
~ ~ bour's Store, or (b) underneath King Square, and that the Commission is asking the Common Council for approval in
I ~:h principle to proceed with preliminary plans for one of the proposed sites, be received and filed and approval in
7kP,f,~T.iiIt.'I/"t!. principle to proceed with preliminary plans be granted.
kf~ :st. fiil$T-
~.t~~ Councillor Kipping advised that the intent of the above motion is to let the said Parking Commission
s,ife. choose the one site for which preliminary plans would be proceeded with. Councillor Hodges asked if plans were
, ~ proposed several years ago for constructing a parking area under King Square. Mr. Barfoot replied that the Works
tI,?~)9If7~j7 ~ Department was involved about fifteen years ago in making up estimates for such a proposal. Councillor Hodges
asked if the plan in question is as valid today as it was at that time. Mr; Barfoot replied that it is as invalid
today as it was at that time. Councillor Hodges observed that, in that case, it will not be necessary for the
Parking Commission to proceed with preliminary plans for underneath King Square, and that all that should be done
is the site on King Street East above mentioned. Mr. Barfoot replied that the King Street East site would be
cheaper. Councillor M. Vincent asked if this site is not the site where the new fire station is going, and stated
... that, this being the case, he would think that site would be automatically eliminated for a parking facility. Mr.
Barfoot advised that the King Street East site that the Parking Commission is proposing he believes is rather a
narrow site for an economical development for parking - to be economical, parking has to have a certain shape and
certain minimum dimensions because of the dimensions of the motor vehicle and the fact that two parallel lanes are
needed plus the driving area - so, it would be difficult to develop an economical parking garage on the narrow
amount of land which is left after the fire station is completed.
ll....
39,4
~
Councillor Kipping advised that his interpretation of the Parking Commission's letter is that
the Commission wants to proceed with preliminary plans - in other words, the Commission wants to talk
about something so that the Council will know enough about what the Commission is talking about to be able
to make a decision. He urged that the Council let the Commission go with preliminary plans, and then the
Council will know what the Commission is proposing and the Council can ask its questions at that time.
Councillor Green, a member of the said Commission, pointed out that the Commission is cognizant of the
parking problems in the up-town area and wanted to see if something could be proposed to assist the
merchants in that area, particularly underneath King Square, and in bringing it about it would be brought
to the attention of the Common Council. He felt that 400 or 500 cars could be accommodated under the
Square which would service not only the merchants, but also the Admiral Beatty Motor Hotel, and so on.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he wonders if Councillor Green has an estimate on cost because the City has
already spent several thousand dollars on plans for parking in the Water Street area (between $14,000.00
and ~18,000.00) and we started here with a parking garage and we have a commitment with that architect to
spend that much more. He stated that he will support the Commission's request in principle but he is
wondering if we are talking about ~25,000.00 to tell US we cannot do it, because he understands that when
King Square was deeded he thinks it is clear that the Anglican Church.. Her Royal Highness gave it to the
City for a square, ever and a day - and that is what defeated the parking underground proposal fifteen
years ago - it can only be used for a square and it must be in the shape of a Union Jack - and that is in
the deed; he stated that if we know all this, why do we want to engage architects. Councillor Green
replied that the Commission wanted to find this out before it went too far - it does not want to touch the
up above no matter if it had come about that the upper part would be removed everything would be put back
in its original position - the Commission realizes this, but it wants to have the approval of the Council
to explore the full realms of the question before it went any further.
Councillor A. Vincent expressed the view that King Street East would be no place for a parking
lot and he would have to vote against that, to start with. He stated that he thinks we should go over to
Union Street and take from the Bank of Montreal up to near Charlotte Street and put in a miniature parking
garage of 200 to 300 cars, ramp-parking, which can come right in that area, and it would serve that whole
area. He stated that he has talked to some people in that area, and that would be the place - but he
feels that, even though it is made of beautiful masonry, a parking garage is ugly, and he therefore thinks
such parking facility should go on Union Street - not because it is ugly but because it is the best place
for it, economic-wise, and everything - and the City has to do something with Union Street, traffic-wi'se
flow, and we should have maybe four 250-space parking lots rather than one large one. He stated that he
supports the Commission in principle, but he does not want to spend an awful lot of money for information
that is in the file gathering dust in old City Hall in the attic.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above matter be tabled until the Council
receives some information from the Planning Advisory Committee, and more information from the Saint John
Parking Commission.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion to table was lost with a majority of Council members voting
.
I
I
.
I
Councillor Gould stated that he wonders what is involved with the cost for preliminary plans
fees and if the Council approves this is the Council, in fact, approving those costs, and if the Council
is approving those costs, does the City have it in its budget. Councillor Kipping replied that it is not
the City's budget and the Council does not even have to approve it - it is just a courtesy. The Mayor
noted that we will have that prepared. Mr. Barfoot stated that he does not have the information about the
costs of the plan because he was not able to get to the Commission's meeting. The Mayor confirmed to
Councillor Gould that the said Commission has funds to do the said preliminary plan costing, on its own.
Councillor Higgins asked if Councillor Green and the Parking Commission, in using the word "plan" is
talking about a preliminary investigation of the feasibility of this, and not about drawing plans and
hiring an architect. Councillor Green confirmed that the Commission is talking about a preliminary
investigation, as noted by Councillor Higgins. Councillor Higgins stated that if that is what is being
talked about - the investigation of this in principle, to go back to the legal implications, as Councillor
A. Vincent has brought up - he is completely in favour of that. Councillor Green explained that the
Commission wants to find out if it is possible, what could come out of it, investigate it, bring back just
as preliminary plans as Councillor Higgins has stated, and let the Council go from there - the Commission .
does not want to press the Council into doing anything. He added that the Commission's funds are administered -
by the Commissioner of Finance of the City and are under good control.
Councillor MacGowan expressed the intention of voting against any motion for any further in-
formation on this matter, or anything else, stating that she thinks it is a ridiculous plan and that she
can see nothing but dead trees in King Square and that, as such, she will vote against it. She stated
that as far as the alternative proposal for a parking site on King Street East by the fire station, she
cannot imagine anything much more ridiculous, with all the traffic there, and the event of a fire. She
stated she thinks they are both ridiculous locations and that she will vote against them. Councillor M. I
Vincent expressed his intention of voting against the request, also, because he thinks that the Council
has been told - and he thinks that the Council should surely know - that the area on King Street East is
just not in a suitable location for parking. He felt that the Council creates a lot of situations where
it is asking people to go ahead and prepare studies and prepare plans, and sometimes he questions how
reasonable they are. He felt that everyone would agree that the King Street East location is not a
logical place for the parking facility, and he felt that "underneath King Square" is a rather all-en-
compassing remark for this Council to say "go ahead and prepare a plan" on something as vague as that. He
stated that, with all due respect, he thinks that the Council may even be misleading the Commission a
little bit to think that the Council would pass a motion to the effect that it could go ahead and prepare I
plans for a parking area underneath King Square. He stated that he does not think it is sensible, at all.
The Mayor replied that he thinks the intent of the Commission was not to prepare plans but to see if it is _
feasible or not, so the Commission is going to have to do some studying itself, and it wanted to let the
Council know what it was doing.
~rK,'I'J!/ hci//iy
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Green, Kipping,
Parfitt, Pye and Higgins voting "yea" and Councillors MacGowan, M. Vincent, A. Vincent, Hodges and Gould
voting "nay".
Co<< J7. 11. Vi"t:ed-
~".Ir/~ CI1Jz5WrOlJ?
tJJ,,~-I1//i{e
. 'P~".k'-n!l
Councillor A. Vincent made the suggestion that we contact Canada-Wide Parking, or somebody, to
do the above mentioned feasibility study for that, rather than pay somebody. He added that they do it in
every other city, and that there are three or four companies - and that Canada-Wide Parking is the one
that he knows of and that company will give the city a turn-key operation if you are interested in saving
the City money. He stated that he will give the City Manager the information on the names of the other
companies besides Canada-Wide Parking in this regard who will come in - they are experts - they will not
draw plans for us, or anything, but they will co-operate and give us a study. Noting that the feasibility
study is to be done by the Parking Commission, the Mayor advised that we will guide the Commission to the
.
~
r"
.
1'1/I7I$k" :ks-h'
1i'.e,//I, 7?
.z;",dJ''L
O"'qq 717Y~
h/el1r.5 .I1-,L
1k1J?th/er. efe-.
{}qf(.W.jf. Vrh~
I e,'~ ~I'_
~ ..MSf'.e
:0; 'a~rLilte".,t-
I/<ica>>t- bldf.
.
;f'9pl't'- ",6
~Mqj',e
c()/Ietfrhll'l
8Ydeh'J
395
said parking consultants.
consultants will be handed
Councillor A. Vincent stated that the idea is that the
over by the City Manager to the Parking Commission.
names he gives of these parking
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Minister of Justice of the Province of New
Brunswick, acknowledging receipt of the Council resolution of March 15th last requesting assistance from the Royal
Canadian Mounted Police in conducting an investigation in the City of Saint John, advising that a request has been
made for the assistance and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police has agreed to assume the conduct of this investi-
gation into the facts and any allegations arising out of the recent hearings of the Omega-Lanthier-City of Saint
John suit, be received and filed.
Read a letter from Councillor M. Vincent, advising that he would like to discuss at this meeting the
matter related to buildings that are still standing that are vacant and damaged and possibly dilapidated. Coun-
cillor M. Vincent stated that he has noticed there are a number of buildings in this city that are unoccupied - in
some cases, they are dilapidated, and in other cases, they are burned-out buildings - and with the summer season
coming on us and with the possibility of a good tourist season it is his feeling that the City should be doing
something about these buildings which are standing allover the city and which are certainly unsightly and are an
invitation to unwelcome people making use of them.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that a report be requested from the City Manager, the Building
Inspector, or whoever is responsible for the fact that the number of unoccupied buildings throughout the city that
are either dilapidated or burned-out buildings are still standing, as to what is going to be done about these
buildings, and when.
Read a letter from Councillor M. Vincent, stating that in view of the fact that the curbside system of
garbage collection has been in effect long enough to determine its effectiveness, he would request, officially, an
up to date report to Council from the City staff, to be made public, on the over-all City garbage collection
service so that a comparison can be made between the present system and the previous method - in particular, how
much money is being saved with the present method, what type of problems are being encountered now as compared to
the former method, and what benefits are being experienced now over the previous method.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that a public, up-dated report be'provided to the Common Council on
the City's findings as to how the present over-all City garbage collection service is functioning as compared to
the previous garbage collection method - in particular, costs, some of the benefits and some of the problems that
are arising.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
I C'.s, c: l11eil1J1Y!'- Seconded by Councillor Hodges
~')?~~~~. RESOLVED that the letter from C. S. C. Management Limited of Stellarton,
~q~e~~~I-~ N. S. with reference to Lot A on Millidge Avenue that is owned by Sobeys Stores Limited and the desire of that
;(~~ company to dispose of this undeveloped site, which is subject to a right of repurchase by the City of Saint John,
~I'hj:(, ~ with the City providing the company with a complete waiver of all of the City's rights under the existing option,
I / :!~~Y< be referred to the Land Committee.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
S.T$~ 7r~
4;eryenCf
. hPee.si)1.f
OIL C.ty
~/7
S.T //.sf- {'~II?
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Board of Trade, which advises
that it has been noted during the past year that in many cases where severe fire damage occurs, a shortage of
housing is experienced for those people who are forced to evacuate their homes or apartments and that this sit-
uation has been a problem of Common Council for some time and the Board realizes that the Council has made efforts
in the past to procure facilities for the purpose of providing alternate housing and which suggests that the
Council consider designating the old City Hall building on Prince William Street as a short term emergency shelter
for victims of fire and/or flood or any other catastrophe as outlined in the Board's letter, and which states that
it is also believed that a service organization might be interested in accepting such suggestion as a project for
their organization (that is, Lions, Kinsmen, Rotarians, United Commercial Travellers, and other groups interested
in public and social assistance) - and which asks the serious consideration of this matter by the Common Council _
be referred to the Saint John Housing Commission, for a preliminary investigation and a report.
Councillor A. Vincent noted that the Saint John Board of Trade does not tell the Common Council how it
I is going to finance the above noted proposal, and stated that he thinks that a real, good organization like the
Saint John Board of Trade should enclose its cheque. Noting that the Board's letter mentions that the old City
Hall building is vacant, he suggested that maybe the Board's office should be vacant, for the rent the Board is
paying on the Sydney Street premises. Councillor Parfitt noted that after the large, recent fire on Exmouth
Street, she noticed in the newspaper that the Irving campsite offered their facilities for the burned-out fam-
ilies, and she was wondering if something of that nature could be worked out. The Mayor noted that the Housing
Commission will be informed of Councillor Parfitt's suggestion. Councillor Kipping recalled that on March 22nd he
asked for a report on the City Hall and other City-owned properties with a statement of what contacts have been
o.Y'r' ~'L /~" made, by whom were they initiated, and what firm offers have been received for any of this space during the period
I ~ ~/~~~// of the last five years. Mr. Barfoot replied that there are sort of two channels proceeding in this matter: he
~~~ ~~~. believes that the Land Committee is working on it. Councillor A. Vincent interjected that there is to be a
~../ ~ ~ meeting with the Federal Government on Wednesday morning, April 7th, and he believes that the Federal Government
re~. 7"t? . wants to use part of City Hall. He noted that Councillor Kipping is on the Unity Committee and knows as much
~' ~ about the matter as he himself does. Councillor Kipping replied that he was not asking for that - he was just
~,iJf onr,... following up on the request he made at the March 22nd Council meeting for a report, as already noted. In reply to
Councillor Kipping's question as to when the report he had asked for will be forthcoming, Mr. Barfoot stated that
the report, insofar as it goes, can be ready next week.
On motion of Councillor Gould
,?fM,lfP$,~
.trli,'~'17 Seconded by Councillor Cave
/ RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. and Mrs. Murray Kingston and from Mr. and
11.1,..~~~y/Af l~s. David Gifford advising of their desire to purchase equal portions of the City-owned land that is located
(?/#et1WC between the property at 249 William Street that is owned by Mr. and Mrs. Murray Kingston, and the property owned
~~;,~ ~ by Mr. and Mrs. David Gifford on that street, be referred to the Land Committee.
.....
Councillor Gould asked for permission to introduce an item at this time, pertaining to legislation to
allow the implementation of a paramedic rescue unit in Saint John.
396
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
~
Seconded by Councillor Hodges .
RESOLVED that permission be granted to place the above noted item on
the agenda of this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
~/l1 /DI",1q/sU'P.
Saint
/'III7/~r ~.../IA
iPcil"l:O'h7t"L/&- ~
ttl7/'I-
CaJ?~ k.f~
/lktte?i" /,as
~'yJ1e-t'me,lir
.JJ/II .,';r /~/546e
LEG A L
$.:T.' ~,.IDar
1J",It.!~ /l~ '
C','t-.'f /Jlf/'-
~xprQf?/'icNhpn
7Jr?ck St: ~/~h/'-
/I'J..rKR/- S,. ,Pl'f}/ec
$/ 2JQcIr S-&-.
~,G~ SeiKr/e
/l~e/1c/t?s
h-rres-ter C,.ee
.:l.3 Ill/II Sf:
{J,UI7. /l. Y;i?t:~nt-
7).;,.,1 Ii Ca;?-/-e-r
uvl1?1 tJ// ~ftl.
blq_,
Sf:
Urban
"WHEREAS the Common Council of the City of Saint John, the New Brunswick Medical Society and the
John Medical Society support the concept of a paramedic rescue unit;
AND WHEREAS the citizens of Saint John through the Saint John Board of Trade contributed ap-
proximately $11,000.00 for the equipment required for a paramedic rescue unit:
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of Saint John strongly urge the
Minister of Health to introduce the appropriate legislation for enactment at this session of the Legis-
lative Assembly, thus providing the required legislation to allow the implementation of a paramedic rescue
unit in Saint John."
Councillor Green advised that he wished to discuss a matter pertaining to Canada Packers Limited.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the item that Councillor Green wishes to discuss
regarding Canada Packers Limited be placed on the agenda at this time.
I
I
Councillor Green advised that with regard to the matter of Canada Packers Limited, the Saint John
Abattoir Commission met on April 1st last with representatives of this company, the letter from the City .
Solicitor, dated March 26th, 1976, having been, in legal session of the March 29th Council meeting, re-
ferred to such meeting. He noted that the Solicitor has the report and the Commission is recommending that
the City Solicitor's letter, which suggests a certain amendment to the Abattoir Act if the Council wishes
to accommodate the request made by Canada Packers Limited that the company be permitted to abandon custom
killing at the abattoir, be followed and that Canada Packers Limited bear the costs of the changes in the
legislation.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that with regard to the request made by Canada Packers
Limited, the present Lessee and operator of the premises known as the Saint John Municipal Abattoir, that
it be relieved of its obligations under Paragraph 21 of the leasing agreement with respect to custom
killing services but continue the meat processing operation, a Bill be presented at the present session of
the New Brunswick Legislative Assembly seeking an amendment to the Abattoir Act for the addition to the Act
of a new Section lA containing wording to the effect that the Common Council of the City of Saint John may,
by resolution, suspend the operation of Section 1 or any part or portion thereof, from time to time, and
for such times as the Common Council deems necessary or expedient.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that at the last Council meeting, he opposed the above proposed
legislation until after he had a meeting. He noted that the April 1st meeting referred to by Councillor
Green was an excellent meeting with the City Solicitor and the solicitor, Mr. Gilbert, for Canada Packers
Limited, in attendance, as well as the three members of the Abattoir Commission present, and other re-
presentatives of the said company in attendance. He stated that the intention behind the company's request
was straightened out at that meeting, as well as the intention of the proposed legislation, and he is now
satisfied that he can support it as a member of the Commission.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting.
Members of the Council were informed by the Common Clerk that in reply to the Council's
for a meeting with the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority, the said Authority will meet with the
at 12.30 p.m. on April 9th next, at the Authority's office building in Saint John West.
request
Council
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he had been given the definite impression through a con-
versation Mr. David Carter of the Ministry of State for Urban Affairs had with him in Fredericton, that the
Irving Oil building should be preserved. Councillor Kipping felt that there is no need to check for an
answer on whether the Government is interested or not in doing anything with this particular building"
stating that he had checked it out through Mr. Michael Landers, Member of Parliament for this area, and Mr.
Landers checked it with Urban Affairs, and it is true that Urban Affairs have no interest in that Irving
building, and he also found out that there were no funds for a building of that kind - that building does
not have enough historic value for the Historic Sites and Monuments Board or anybody like that, to be
interested in it - so, it is just nothing to Urban Affairs. Councillor Cave asked if the funding for this
Market Square project will be finalized this year and that there will be no more funding. Mr. Buck stated
that the programme was'for eight years and this is our eighth year - he is not saying that the funding will
, ' be finalized this year. Councillor Cave asked the following question: if the City does not expropriate or
if'e,.,e~/
Consideration was given to the report, dated April 1st, 1976, from the City Manager with regard
to expropriation of properties for the Market Square development and with regard to the relation between
widening Dock Street and the Irving Oil property at the corner of Dock Street and North Market Wharf,
noting that retention of the said building causes a serious problem for future traffic operations at that
location, is not in accordance with present plans for Market Square, and is not supported by Government
Departments, and for these reasons it is recommended that this property be retained in the list of pro-
perties which the City intends to expropriate. The report advises, further, that the property of John
Searle Agencies, namely Tax Map Reference No. F-6-19-7, 51 Dock Street, which had been inadvertently
omitted from the previous listing, should be added, and further, that the property of Foster Green, Tax Map
Reference No. F-6-1l-12, 23 Mill Street, should be deleted, and further advises that if the Council is
agreeable to these changes, the proper confirming resolution will be submitted to the next open session of
Common Council.
I
.
I
I
.
~
""'"
r/r.6an
. '7?ent?wtRl
I
I
.
b'pI'f!P,,/;at/
1I1.i11'M G'f:
'p/'IOjed
:J)tlCK $.s. y..
,PM,Per-r;'l es
IrY/~a1,4
.7e>bh ~~)r/t?
1ft?#e/....s
I hrpesfer
G! /"l?t! h
.
I
1
.
7?P~~e a/
Kif: re,..!~
Coec,.~e
a,hff".dq~'
.....
391
make an offer and then expropriate this property, is there any thought that we may lose our funding in the end.
Mr. Buck replied that he cannot say that - the funding is available right now - it is an eight-year programme and
we are in our eighth year and we are the only programme left; ,they will not extend the funding - we do not know
whether the time for the programme will be extended - the Federal Government would like to wind up this programme
but he is not saying that it will. He stated that if he thought the City could acquire this Irving property on
the said corner for one dollar there is no way that he would expropriate it, but he has no evidence to show that
the City is going to get it for one dollar - the practice with the Irving interests on every property that the
City has ever acquired is that the City makes an offer and it has never had any response on any property that it
has ever acquired - they just do not respond - there is nothing wrong with that - it is just the way the Irvings
deal, that is all.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Council would consider if Mr. K. C. Irving was approached and he
deeded the said corner property to the City for the sum of one dollar that we might name the new library in this
Market Square development after his wife. During ensuing discussion, it was noted that there is already a library,
endowed by Mr. Irving, at the University of New Brunswick that has been named after Mrs. Irving. Councillor A.
Vincent added that in making the suggestion, he is talking about demolishing the said corner property at Dock
Street and North Market Wharf of the Irving Oil Company. Councillor Gould made the suggestion that a donation of
money from Mr. Irving would be very helpful towards the development. Mr. Rodgers asked if the road widening
purposes is cost-sharable under Urban Renewal. Mr. Buck replied that this is so with regard to both the land
acquisition and the works on the road. Mr. Rodgers advised that the evidence before the Expropriation Advisory
Board will show as purposes for exproprpation the road widening purposes, and not just Urban Renewal - that is, it
will show both purposes.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he was under the impression that somebody was going to talk with Mr.
Irving in this matter, and added that he is not going to call up Mr. Irving; he does not care who does it, he
added. Noting that the Council has not agreed yet that this is to be done, Councillor Kipping stated that he
thinks that he was the member of Council who brought in the motion repeatedly on the last Council, and on this
Council, that the City honour Mr. K. C. Ir~ing and anybody else in his family. He felt that Mr. Irving should be
honoured, but let us not honour him to that extent for the sake of a couple of tens of thousands of dollars worth
of building - he does not feel it is enough - he thinks that Mr. K. C. Irving should be donating a library _
paying for almost the whole thing - or something like that. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that the Irvings had
made it clear to a previous Council that if the iibrary were up on King Street East where the gaol is they would
pay for the whole library.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the proper confirming resolution be submitted to the next open
session of Common Council regarding expropriation of properties for the Market Square development, to accomplish
what has been recommended in the letter dated April 1st, 1976 from the City Maager, namely, to retain the Irving
Oil property at the corner of Dock Street and North Market Wharf~be retaine~in the list, to add to that list the
property of John Searle Agencies, and to delete from that list tlie property of Foster Green.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Yincent voting "nay".
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~""?
Common ,..k.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twelfth day of
April, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Com-
missioner of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, G. Baird, Commissioner
of Economic Development, R. Jackson, Deputy Chief of Police, and
J. Brownell, of the Recreation and Parks Department
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
The Mayor extended congratulations to Chief of Police E. W. Ferguson on having been valedictorian of the
the course he took recently in Ottawa, this having been a course for Police Chiefs from practically all
world.
398
~
hhh r /IIcl2ull?
1?e-zOl7I~!I
.MJh J?;;>~/;rt'RA
.I'~tt'.
~""'J1, ,?elf'ws_~
:T:B.EII'r/tLffe
/Ilrs../l. b!. 4,r.y-
W'~her
1(d;tloh ,.e
.:/,6bye rl?-~o'7/~
s.~, n>eyian<</
~ilm;u~ff
:l)e?C.f sr. s,ife ; h
ll/anf- 05'1'- ,Prl j
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding the proposed re-zoning for
John Paul Realty Ltd. of a parcel of land located behind civic numbers 586 and 582 Sand Cove Road opposite
Young Street, to permit the construction thereon of a six-unit apartment building. He advised that
letters of objection to the said re-zoning have been received from Mr. J. B. Eldridge and Mrs. A. G.
Merryweather, and a petition has also been received in opposition to the re-zoning. He noted that the
letter dated April 2nd, 1976 from the Planning Advisory Committee asks that the Council extend the time
for the Committee's report on this re-zoning request for one week in view of the fact that the Committee
has had to reschedule a hearing on this matter to April 13th next as John Paul Realty Limited was unable
to be represented at the first meeting scheduled by the Committee and the said developer and the objecting
property owners are being asked to the said April 13th meeting of the Committee, following which the
Committee's report will be submitted to Council.
Mr. John F. McQuinn was present at the meeting and spoke in support of the petition above
mentioned, which states that in the opinion of the residents and taxpayers who signed this petition (320
residents who live in the immediate area of' 582-586 Sand Cove Road) the applicants' reasons for re-zoning
the area, are in no way valid and because they are not, and because of the ill effect that the const-
ruction of an apartment house will have upon that section of the city and the value of the petitioners'
properties, they are opposed to the application. 11r. McQuinn, who had been chosen as spokesman for a
citizens' delegation in this matter, to represent them in objecting to this re-zoning, pointed out that
the petitioners feel that they have 99.9% of the immediate residents to the area in question that have
signed the said petition of objection. He noted that in the first letter received by these residents from
the Planning Advisory Committee that letter stated that John Paul Realty Ltd. had made reference to why
the area should be re-zoned and they specifically pointed out three items: (1) that the property was
adjacent to the new throughway; (2) that the brewery was close, and (3) that the area due to the traffic
on Sand Cove Road could not really be considered for strictly residential'growth. Mr. McQuinn stated that
the petitioners do not find that they have absolutely any validity in this request in what it is based on,
due to the fact that since the throughway has gone in the traffic on Sand Cove Road has depleted and now
most of the traffic has been re-routed down Dunn Avenue. He advised that this is certainly of benefit to
the said residents because, at one time, Sand Cove Road was a speed area and it was certainly hazardous to
children. He stated that, as far as the brewery is concerned, that has not posed any problem whatsoever _
except for a bit of odour, sometimes; and the railway track was also brought up by the applicant, and that
has been there for years. He advised that most of the residents in the area have well-kept properties; he
believes it is one of the oldest residential areas in the City of Saint John and these residents feel that
if areas are given a chance to be re-zoned for multiple dwellings based on the said applicant's statements,
that this will certainly create industrial "sprawl". He stated that another point is that this same
matter was brought up in 1972 and it was put before the Planning Advisory Committee and they certainly
objected at that time, and he thinks, as a result of their recommendations', the Council turned the appli-
cation down. He stated that the petitioners understand that they have to go to the Planning Advisory
Committee on the evening of April 13th for the Committee's hearing, and he would like to make one comment:
there have been a lot of people worked a lot to procure these approximately 312 signatures, which in the
opinion of these petitioners is a definite indication that they do not want the re-zoning as taxpayers and
citizens. He added that, two weeks ago, they had a delegation to the Planning Advisory Committee and John
Paul Realty Ltd. did not show up at that meeting, which, naturally, caused quite a bit of inconvenience
because most of the people were very busy - the same inconvenience applies to this meeting of Council
because Monday night is a bad night for anybody as far as business commitments are concerned. He stated
that he would leave the matter with the Council to make the proper recommendation on this matter, and,
also, the Planning Advisory Committee - because it is the same as 1972 - there is absolutely no reason why
this land should be re-zoned. He further stated that he thinks the re-zoning of this land for this six-
unit apartment building would set a precent for that area because there are other areas around that
particular region that could come in under the same situation as we are talking about.
No other person was present to speak against the proposed re-zoning, and no person was present
to speak in favour of the said re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter of the said proposed re-zoning be laid on
the table and the Planning Advisory Committee be given an extension of time for submitting the Committee's
report on this re-zoning application until after the Committee's next meeting which is scheduled for April
13th, 1976.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letters from the Planning Advisory
Committee, Mr. J. B. Eldridge, and Mrs. A. G. Merryweather, and the above named petition, be received and
filed.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she is sorry the proposed re-zoning was laid on the table
because she feels the application should have been denied because John Paul Realty Ltd. had an opportunity
to be at the Planning Advisory Committee meeting last week.
At this fime, the Mayor welcomed to the meeting members of the Boy Scout Troop of the Church of
St. John and St. Stephen.
Mr. J. Harold Stafford, Chairman of the Board of Commissioners of the Saint John Regional
Library, was present at the meeting, accompanied by Board members Mrs. John Corbett, and Mr. Thomas
Crowther, and Mr. Ian Wilson, City Librarian. Mr. Stafford read a brief presented by the Board which
gives a summary of progress that has been made in plans for the new Saint John City Library and Regional
Headquarters in the Market Square development, and which advises that the Library Board is in complete
agreement with the revised plan which gives the Library a Dock Street location. The brief lists the
reasons why this Dock Street location is essential. Observing that plateau one in this project has now
been reached, the brief states that the Library Board respectfully requests, the Common Council's approval
of the Library location, in order that the actual building of the new Saint John Library can proceed in
1976.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Dock Street location for the new Saint John
Library and Regional Headquarters as shown on the revised plan for the Market Square-Dock Street devel-
opment complex, be approved.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
r"
399.
.
1
S.T~o/IM4
,,0'br~r!f
~e?CA- 51.
site
I.
#/d/,./rej S~
fJl'PJ eer
s../.1?~;();%l
.&'JI'b1I'~
. .7)~1r :5'f:
s/te
I
leI? d,:~ .../
....(."l"e'~~~u
J}qmp~"t- Ion
IU-I.:l~
.:l3r/f-';'IJ? J2.
G?rore tPn-
st,.~ctiPl1 A
.
Pkyyo<<Jtt:l
efKlf'mt>hr
tlVUff<iit/f7h.s
dI~ed
I
7e17~l?P.s
I cJct!'eptea
70,.";,, .ff.
SerVIC'e
(Jr"ve t'#hStr.
. ~T;t.
(lhl#-,c#-s
rr,6:1.) ~~L
JOhn FIt?p.{4
SoI7S(/~b/J
-f-t,t.
~
Councillor MacGowan, expressing her pleasure with the said site and to have it approve, asked how the
library will be made a reality, financially. Mr. Barfoot replied that financing is the subject of a report which
has just been received by him, done by Dr. Frank Clayton, ~nd this report,will be reaching the Council at a very
early meeting. Councillor MacGowan asked if it is possible that construction on the ,library could start in 1976;
that the funds could be forthcoming quickly enough that construction could start in 1976. Councillor A. Vincent
pointed out that we could not get the land until 1977, even by expropriation. He felt that the City made a
mistake by not asking a certain man to donate the land, and now, that man h~s his back up. Councillor Gould asked
if the Council should be approving this particular location in isolation of the total project. In reply, Mr.
Barfoot stated that the Council has approved the project about a year ago regarding the general plan; the major
change since that time has been in the location of the library - so, he thinks it is very appropriate that the
location of the library should be approved now by Council, at this time, which is really basically the only major
change in the plan since that time. Councillor M. Vincent noted that the Council members were familiar with the
change in the library location as indicated by the developer and there was no objection to it, and stated that he
thinks that the above motion is completely in line and that this is the time the Council should approve the site
as agreed to between the developer and in the interests of the Library Board, whose members are in concurrence
with it, he thinks it is the Council's responsibility to approve in principle the site, now.
Councillor A. Vincent made the suggestion that the Mayor allow a second motion,' that Council set up a
finance committee to go out and raise the money to finance the library.
Councillor Davis stated he feels it has been some time since the Council members viewed the latest
plans as prepared by Mr. Bregman, and it may not be a bad idea to look at them again; however, the plans were
satisfactory to the Councillors who saw them and they were definitely satisfactory to the developer and to the
Library Board. He stated he does not think the Council should use 1976 as the year because there is the matter
of expropriation of the necessary properties, and that is going to take a while. He stated that in approving the
location of the library, though, he wants to be sure that this does not "freeze" it because Mr. Rocca may find it
necessary to shift this library a number of feet or do some other juggling in order to fit a hotel into the
complex; so, Councillor Davis thinks that the Council should be aware that although it is approving this location
it may not necessarily be the final location, but in approving it, he assumes that work will now proceed with the
necessary engineering and architectural in-put to have it built. He stated he does not think that the Council
should assume that this is the final, absolute location for the library and that no adjustment can be made. In
reply, Mr. Stafford stated that he thinks that in line with the discussion that was held last August - in view of
the fact that the Library had some very strong views as is suggested in the Board's brief, about the specific
location - because it Was sort of lost in the complex, originally - and when it was moved around it was put in a
spot where it is a very dominant factor in this particular area - and while Councillor Davis is talking about
moving the site about 20 feet or so, the Board may be able to work out something along that line, but Mr. Stafford
certainly would not want to see this library moved from that particular location and put up in the other location
because he thinks it takes something away entirely from the whole concept which the Board is suggesting and
proposing - and that is really part of the Board's specific argument with the developers and with the architects
during their meetings in 1975. Councillor Davis stated that he feels there is a danger in "freezing" a location
on a conceptual plan - the plan was not that detailed. Mr. Stafford noted that really, what the Board is saying
is, that it wants the library right on the apex of that corner in that prominent position, really - if the Board
has to move the library one way, shape or form along the line he thinks that the Board is quite patient.
In connection with trying to raise some money for the library construction, Councillor A. Vincent
expressed the view that some private, or citizens', money should be tried to be raised and that the Mayor, within
the next two meetings of Council, should set up a special Mayor's finance committee to go out and raise a million
or so dollars from our taxpayers with the idea of having tax deductions. He asked that the Mayor take this
suggestion under consideration.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation contain~d in the report
submitted by the Commissioner of Community Planning and Development and by the Building Inspector, the lowest
tender received, namely, that of Grove Construction Ltd. in the amount of $1,484.00, be accepted for the demolition
of City-owned property located at 122-124 Britain Street.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recomm~nded in the report from the City Manager, the
bids for supplying expendable play equipment, as recommended on the submitted summary of bids, be accepted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if public tenders were called for the above named materials. Mr. Barfoot
made negative reply, noting that in accordance with Council policy, bids were called in this regard. Councillor
A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the matter be tabled and public tenders be called.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that last year he asked the same question and was assured by his fellow Councillors
that public tenders would be called this year. He felt that certain people have the license to get this, year
after year, and he asked why are not public tenders called. The Mayor noted that several companies were given
the opportunity to submit bids for this material. Councillor A. Vincent replied that the summary of bids shows
who complied with the opportunity to bid, but he does not know who has been given the opportunity, or who has
not, and he thinks that the fair way to deal with public monies is public tender.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried with Councillors Cave and A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, tenders for supplying
a towing service to the City for 1976 be awarded in accordance with the recommendations contained in the submitted
summary of bids.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted
for payment of the following named invoices:-
Grove Construction Ltd.
Chitticks (1962) Ltd.
John Flood & Sons (1961)
dated February 19, 1976
dated March 16, 1976
dated March 18, 1976
$ 2,172.75
$ 2,324.00
$ 2,509.00
Ltd.
r 400
~
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
~~~~~~e~ Seconded hy Counctllor C~ye,
-2?/e.$eJ' e~';~ RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
~ Manager, and the Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply of the Engineering and Works Department,
~~~Oc7l?~ V~ authority be granted to purchase a Detroit diesel engine from Seaboard Diesel for Fire Department pumper
,-, ~e~ number 25 (1956 La France), at a price of $6,000.00, f.o.b. Saint John, 3-day delivery, plus 8% sales tax,
~/;-6?, ~v_ money for this expenditure being avatlable in the budget under 211 3130-5652.
71.eh1~er
/It;1J"Ket ~-~
.5'-1. pl'f>jRC-c .
E?"t>j?.I"I..:l-f/OJ?
.lOin S&N~k
/!fehc"s /-1".
h?I'I"~r CMm
/fe.s ci n~;n.ff
mPl/Ph
hf71'~/d1-tI' on
/llOlrfd $,. -
:J)t:K'A' $I: ,Pre>.i tiC
?e".tt'~r ci(!t:'~d
;fool"
h'~e .91-31,,/017 ~
,(ePh..,d :;p.,~.I1S
;?/d.al ~~I?!:
/-ell.
S~r.e-Ih'hd "*~
JIVU>,t~ .T~,P1"iII'A!l
nJlRDT ..2Jei/e/o'pM6'.
, '7>/~
.
At the reuqest of Councillor Kipping, ]~. Barfoot explained that the above quotation of Seaboard
Diesel was received in reply to an invitation to bid, and that this method, as well as calling for bids by
a public call for tenders, has been approved by Council as policy, approximately two years ago. He explained
in detail the difference between the policy of calling public tenders by advertising, and the policy of
invittng bids. He added that in this particular matter, invited bids were received from the suppliers of
dtesel engines.
I
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated April 7th,
1976, advising that Common Council on November 24th, 1975 resolved to commence expropriation proceedings
for a number of properties required for the Market Square Complex, and that since that time, some pre-
liminary work has been done and it has been found that one property has been inadvertently omitted, namely,
John Searle Agencies Ltd., and one property has since been acquired, namely, 23 Mill Street, owned by Mr.
Forrester Green - and that he therefore recommends, in order to confirm Council's will in this matter, that
the said Council resolution be rescinded, and another resolution be adopted -- be received and filed and
the said Council resolution of November 24th, 1975 be rescinded.
I
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter dated April 7th, 1976 from
the City Manager, the City Solicitor be authorized and instructed to commence expropriation proceedings
under the Expropriation Act for the acquisition of the fee simple and all rights, title and other interests
of the following described properties by the filing of a Notice of Intention to Expropriate with the
Expropriations Advisory Board and causing the same to be served on the respective owners, namely:-
.
Tax Map Reference Number
F-6-19-7
F-6-19-8
F-6-19-9
F-6-19-10
F-6-19-24
Civic Address
51 Dock Street
53-55 Dock Street
57-59 Dock Street
61-63 Dock Street
22-24 Nelson Street
Owner
John Searle Agencies Ltd.
H. M. Hopper Co., Ltd.
H. M. Hopper Co., Ltd.
Frank Fales & Sons Ltd.
Irving Oil Co. Ltd. (Princess
View Service Station)
J. D. Irving Co., Ltd.
Leonard & MacDonald Ltd.
Irving Oil (Al Legere)
Ocean Finance Ltd.
Thomas S. Gorman Ltd.
Smith Brokerage Ltd.
Alban S. Emery
Eastern Trust (J. D. Irving)
Parrtown Tavern
L. R. Mawhinney.
I
L-6-19-19
L-6-19-20
L-6-19-23
1-5-1-9
L-5-1-10
L-5-1-13
L-5-1-14
F-5-1-24
F-5-1-29
F-6-11-5
8-9 North Market Wharf
7 North Market \iharf
75 Dock Street
11-12 South Market \iharf
9-10 South Market Wharf
2-3 South Market Wharf
1-5 South Market Wharf
Water Street
21 vlater Street
48 Smythe Street
In reply to questions put by Councillor Green, Mr. Buck advised that he understands that the new
expropriations procedure ts that once the expropriation has been approved and becomes effective the City
will deposit all of the offered price (previously, it was 75%) and make it available to the owner. Coun- .
cillor Green noted that he is concerned that two or three of the proprietors in this area whose property
acquisitions have been prolonged, about which he has spoken previously on occasion, for two to three years,
be given the chance under the new Expropriation Act to relocate in another location so that they may vacate
their present premises and not hold things up. Mr. Buck observed that this is one of the reasons this
course of action has been recommended because it would make money available immediately to the owners. In
further reply to Councillor Green's questions, Mr. Buck advised that the above expropriation resolution
does not affect the fact that negotiations will continue with all of the property owners to try to settle
with them before the expropriations go to court.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the bid of Leonard
Roofers & Metal Workers Ltd., in the amount of $2,370.00, be accepted for installing a new roof on Number 5
fire station, Main Street.
Councillor Hodges asked for information as to whether the above named roof work ts a guaranteed
job, or what kind of a job it is. Mr. Barfoot replied that he did not have that detail with him. Coun-
cillor A. Vtncent commented that there is no such a thing as a guaranteed roof now, because the bonding
company has gone out of business.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Counctllor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting a copy of
the South End Neighbourhood Improvement Development Plan together with a covering letter from r~. D. Buck,
Deputy Commissioner, Housing and Renewal Services, outlintng the way in which the Plan has been developed,
and what the Council is committed to by the adoption of the Plan - and recommending that the Common Council
adopt the said South End Neighbourhood Development Plan - be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if there is any truth that Mr. R. Guerette, the chairman of the
~
,...
.
1l?;v/cIqpJ',
tned4- :Jj~
C'0n?1'l7.
7(0504/ CJg;"
'/.e~/'pFJ
C/Siln-tAJ>
I o~"'fPI/~n
1((l5elrii' b!!.
. {'Co. ".;uf/g,7f'fj
(7? "PI- , ~~s <-)
~L~~
~se""enr
t%1'd C~
$.ewerS'diJb?<
&n<<!/,s
(975).!fJi.
ll?e~C'iJ1;(/J7f
h/rYbon
L~. -Prime
,r:W~/5 C-t::
/Pt-
. /111'$. h
..2)..;1&
lPest::'/n,6'nff
I h1f?~ip/'}
Em J)a/'}Q/Id
I ?kl1l7. #dvls
aM>>?,
Fpyrf- ~
~2tJ?e
~,.Jr/>>.4 ,/t
-I- af,r:iJr~r
II/s-torie
S/tPS"f-.&.
. {)(JPf",;'
(/d. t?>>
T~ble)
.....
401
committee regarding the above named Plan, has quit, and he asked if this is so, then with whom do we deal, now.
He a~ked if he can be told w.hether Mr:, Guerette has ,:esigned or~'has been J?~nsioned off for disagreement with the
Provwce on Federal funds, and there,);s no 'moneY' liya~:labl,e", 1'b:>" 'Buck. 't'~I,eCl, that he has no knowledge of that.
He advised that the last time we dealt with the South End Development Corporation, Mr. Guerette was the President.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that Mr. Buck give the Council a written report next Monday in this regard. He added
that Mr. Guerette told him in the Admiral Beatty Hotel, in front of six other solicitors, that he did resign, and
why. He asked that Mr. Buck supply the ~equested written report, so Councillor A. Vincent can make this public
information. Mr. Buck replied that he will find out.
Councillor MacGowan expressed the opinion that the above named report is an excellent one, and stated
that she hopes the Council members live to see it implemented in its entirety, and that although it would cost a
lot of money it would be money well-spent.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
. Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor MacGowan, Chairman of the
Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee, commenting on the community-spirited programme that has been
instigated by The Royal Canadian Legion in Saint John in a spring clean-up and anti-litter campaign, and a
special competition that was to have taken place on April 12th at 1.15 p.m. involving the Kiwanis and Rotary
service clubs and Council members in collecting the first full bag of litter off King Square, be received and
filed.
Councillor MacGowan noted that due to inclement weather resulting from the snowfall on April 11th, the
above named competition had to be cancelled, and that it may possibly be held on April 19th, and that the Council
members will be kept informed in this regard. She stated that she would like to bring to the attention of
Council the fantastic job that the Legion are planning for our community. She noted that this is the fiftieth
anniversary of the Legion and that its members are planning a quite involved programme of community enrichment,
and stated that she would like to commend The Royal Canadian Legion members, and The Reverend E. Lloyd Lake, in
particular .
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee advising that an easement
for the Marsh Creek sewer line is required by the City of Saint John over the property presently owned by Randy's
(1975) Ltd. and that the rate paid for other easements on this project is 10 cents per square foot, and recom-
menging that the said property owner be paid 10 cents per square foot for an easement consisting of 3,994 square
feet, and that a clause be inserted in the agreement which will properly protect the City against any liability
caused by excavation carried out in the future -- be received and filed, and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Cave
"
Seconded by Councillor Davis
;;r "'he
7' RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that on ~
~h, 1975 the Common Council adopted the recommendation of the Committee for sale of the freehold interest in
Lot 5, which measures 150 feet by 100 feet and which is located at the intersection of Rodney Street and Market
Place, West Saint John, for the sum of $7,500.00 to ~IT. L. B. Prime who, in the fall of 1975, informed the Legal
Department he was not prepared at that time, to proceed with the purchase of this interest; and advising that the
said sale price of $7,500.00 was based on a 1974 appraisal and values have increased considerably since that
time, and Mr. Prime has had sufficient time to purchase at this price and if he decides to proceed with the
previously authorized purchase, it should be ata new appraised value; and recommending that the Council rescind
the said Council resolution of May 28th, 1975 -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
sold to Mrs. Frederick Daly for the sum of $5,600.00 subject to the condition that the
the City unless this lot is developed with a single-family dwelling within one year of
approving the sale.
Lot 5 in Kiwanis Court be
land title will revert to
, the resolution of Council
Councillor Davis confirmed that the above noted sale figure is the appraised price.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation contained in the letter
from the Land Committee, which advises that Mr. Ian Donald is no longer interested in purchasing the freehold
interest at 300 Watson Street and wants to continue to pay the yearly ground rental, Common Council resolution of
August 26th, 1974 which provides for the sale of the freehold interest in this land to Mr. Donald for the sum of
$6,900.00, be rescinded.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, to whom had
been referred (as well as to the Saint John Parking Commission) the recommendation made by the Historic Sites and
Events Committee that the City-owned land on the south side of Magazine Street (whiCh is part of the Fort Howe
site) opposite the Fort Howe Apartments be considered to be a civic parking lot and that the City lease parking
space lots to persons wishing to use them in that area and that the income of such monies be allocated to the
Fort Howe operations of maintenance, upkeep and operations payment for guides in the summer -- outlining the
Committee's investigation into the matter of persons parking on this City-owned land at the present time and
making the point that some people who now park on that site are already paying $5.00 per month for parking space
at the apartment site and that the City could hardly charge mOre than the $5.00 per month for the said City-owned
proposed parking lots on the said south side of Magazine Street which is less than is normally charged in other
City parking lots, and further making the point that a person renting space from the City at this site would
normally use such space in the evenings and that if the space is occupied by someone else at that time, that
person may find it difficult to get the City to remove the offending car, and that it was also felt that the cost
of developing and maintaining such a parking lot might not justify the revenue to be derived -- and further
advising that the majority view of the Committee is that the situation remain as is but there was a strong
minority view that the area be enclosed with a high curb and landscaped appropriately -- be received and filed
and the said City-owned area on the south side of Magazine Street be enclosed with a high curb and landscaped
appropriately.
4",',>
v.....
~
h"t- //t?#~.....
/J1~;{; ne ST:
,oa;.,f/~ /P'C;
t:.'et."J/n.!l ~
/';U1,;{sea "p/nf
Plann,'?/P9J'.
~e:'n?.m.
R.;lIpJ, .TS~
C7alP(p '/h(
~i/!/tt'1:~,,//Il?
Fd4't-t!!s, "!Ji;;lse
/1/ Sd-d/v,
P;l~~1.s- /l...:B
~.l'Cel ,.c:
'pu~l/c /,UP,Pt1&e
/<<nd
Councillor MacGowan felt that if the above curbing and landscaping work is not done, people are
going to continue to use this City-owned land for parking on, and that the only way this land will be kept
looking tidy is by, the saidmea,sures. 'She pointed out that it has been said we cannot charge more than
$5.00 per lot for parking on this City land, and yet if a charge is not made for such parking, it will
continue to take place, free of charge, unless the City takes the measures proposed, to improve its
appearance. Councillor MacGowan explained that the landscaping she would be happy to see there would be
in the form of grass and bushes or trees, but she felt this would be left to the landscape architects to
determine. Councillor Green asked for an estimate of cost, and whether there is provision for such work
in the budget. Mr. Barfoot stated that in order to make this particular restriction effective he believes
you would have to curb all along the face of Fort Howe in that area from the road which leads up the hill
right along to the rock cut opposite Barker Street; this would cost a considerable amount of money which
we have not estimated this year in the capital budget.
.
I
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the Council
receives a full estimate of cost on the proposed curbing and landscaping work and a map showing the actual
parking.
Councillor MacGowan voted "nay" to the tabling motion, which was carried.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, to
whom had been referred at the Council meeting of March 22nd last the letter from Mr. Ralph J. Stephen,
solicitor for Caldo Ltd. in which the City is now requested to reassess the need for Parcels A and B of
Millidgeville Estates" Phase III Sub-division (which lies north of University Avenue and includes a
section of Woodhaven Drive and which was approved in November 1975), which parcels lie on the westerly
side of Woodhaven Drive and abut the City-owned property to the west, formerly owned by the Board of
School Trustees and which are noted on the plan "Land for Public Purposes and Future Access" -- advising
that the reason for the words "Future Access" is that Turnbull Real Estate Company (formerly owner of the
Millidgeville Estates land) and the School Board entered into an agreement in 1963 in which the Turnbull
Company agreed to supply two 66-foot street provisions to give access between the two properties, and,that
the Planning staff attempted to arrange the precise location of the two street reservations with Caldo
Ltd. but, unfortunately, at that time, Caldo Ltd. wanted an approval at the earliest opportunity and did
not want to wait for the precise location to be fixed and the company therefore arranged that these
reservations would fall within the bounds of Parcels A and B, and Caldo Ltd. was made aware that vesting
the land for public purposes meant that the City would own the land and that any attempt to acquire those
portions not required for major access would have to meet Council approval; and further advising that Mr.
Stephen, acting on behalf of Caldo Ltd., is now requesting that the City reassess the need for these
street provisions and, if it deems them necessary, have them located along the sides of these parcels and
return the remaining portions to Caldo Ltd. for residential development, and that the submitted print
shows Parcels A and B and the portions of them which would be held for future access, and noting that
Parcel F practically meets the requirements for land for public purposes and that the Parcels A and B were
created at,the initiative of Caldo Ltd., and that this means that the Common Council may, with the con-
currence of the Planning Advisory Committee, sell such land - and further advising that the location of
the land to be held for future access was determined by Planning staff after consultation with the De-,
partments of Engineering and Works and Recreation and Parks -- and recommending that the so designated
portions of land shown on the said submitted print be retained to give access from Woodhaven Drive to the
City-owned property on the west and that the remainder of Parcels A and B be returned to Caldo Ltd., which
return of the land will involve a sub-division and related legal and other costs -- be received and filed
and the recommendation adopted, and the said transfer of land be sent to the Land Committee for evaluation.
.
I
Councillor Pye felt that the Council should give the above matter very serious consideration in
view of the fact that the area in question was allocated as it previously was, and that the Council should
insist that the situation be retained as it was rather than a change at this. He added that we never know
what the future may hold, and the City may have occasion to use that area. During ensuing discussion, Mr.
Zides explained that in Parcel A the width of the reserved strip would be 66 feet (to be retained for
access ways) and in Parcel B it is believed that 60 feet in width would be sufficient which would leave a
balance of 60 feet (that is, the unreserved strip) and make it a useful lot in that area - otherwise, you
are into a substantial lot; the frontage being 120 feet in Parcel B and if you reserve 60 feet you would
have to leave 60 feet over for a usable lot. He stated that it is'his personal opinion that the price for
the lot should be left to the Land Committee to determine, but the Council has to keep in mind that this
land did not have to be deeded or vested in the City - it was just, at that point in time, a convenience
for the developer to save him time so that he could get his financing a littler earlier because, otherwise,
he would have had to go through a lot of "red tape", and it was the developer's initiative to do this over
our recommendation. With regard to the reference in the Planning Advisory Committee's letter to the
return of the said land involving a sub-division and related legal and other costs, 11r. Zides stated that
he would presume that the person who gets the land would bear these costs - that is, the developer.
Councillor Kipping felt that it should be spelled out clearly that the costs for returning this land to
the developer should be borne by the said developer, and he noted that this arrangement has been a con-
venience for the said land owner and it is his opinion that the said land owner should'therefore bear the
costs for returning the land to that owner, now, at this stage. Councillor Kipping asked for an explanation
of the wording in the Committee's letter, "It should be noted that Parcel F practically meets the requirements
for land for public purposes...", and if it means "practically" in a practical way, or does it mean
almost. Mr. Zides replied that this Parcel is so close, within a very small fraction of an acreage - it
does not happen to be precisely the figure but just a wee shade underneath it. Councillor Kipping com-
mented: as long as that is not carried to any extremes because, certainly, it is minimal in the first
place - the land that we require for public purposes, and we all know that the developer usually gives us
a chunk of land which could not be used for any other purpose, in any case - it is usually a rock-pile or
a swamp - so, he just wanted to be sure that the City was getting adequate area there and that the Committee's
use of the word "practically" was not something that would misdirect the Council members' thoughts.
Councillor Hodges and Mr. Zides discussed the policy regarding public purpose lands in sub-divisions of
developers. Councillor A. Vincent stated he wonders how accurate Councillor Kipping's statement is that
the City always accepts swamps and mountains, and stated that if that is true, he then will be very leery
in the future of land in lieu of public places. He asked if that is really a true statement, an accurate
statement, and stated that if it is, he thinks that ~tr. Zides should have his last day's pay. Councillor
Kipping stated that ,the word "always" was not used - the word "usually" was used - most frequently.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he asking that it be confirmed from the taped record of this meeting's
proceedings as to what was said in this matter by Councillor Kipping; he wants to know exactly what was
said and was he (Councillor Kipping) challenged by Mr. Zides - and if not, why not. The Mayor stated that
if the Council approves, the said tape will be played back.
.
I
I
.
~
r"
40~)
.
I
et*.h. /If.
V;J?ced-
I
.
I
.
l-Pr()dDI'+
ifed'ff,m..&
~a~
remed~-;t-
4~
I aflh7fI"t'/
.
eDloG/1,
l(/',Ppll1.!:
(/ J7ltm St:
(..2.. -t;/,sff)
~
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
qeconded by Councillor ~#een
RESOLVED that the tape of the section of the Council minutes of this
meeting that is referred to above, be played back, and the Commissioner of Community Planning and Development can
either confirm or deny the remarks.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors A. Vincent, Green, Cave, Pye, Hodges and M.
Vincent voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Gould, MacGowan, Davis, Parfitt and Kipping voting "nay", and
a tie vote thereby having been created.
Read a letter from Councillor M. Vincent, advising that he wishes to determine from Council and City
staff when the suggested teach-in for Council will take place and if it is Council's intention to have a recom-
mendation and choice of remedial steps to be taken in advance of the May 3rd meeting with the Federal and Pro-
vincial Governments regarding the Proctor & Redfern Limited water management study report regarding the Marsh
Creek watershed. The Mayor recalled that the question was asked last week by Councillor Cave regarding a date
for the said teach-in, and stated that he therefore talked with the City Manager and the date of April 14th at
2.00 p.m. has been chosen as the date they would like to set for a meeting which will also come with a recom-
mendation as is Councillors' policy. Councillor M. Vincent asked if it is the intention of the Council at that
time to decide which of the alternatives as introduced in the said consultants' report. The Mayor noted that
Councillor M. Vincent is asking Council to 'give him a decision as a Councillors, and stated that, therefore, he
will say that this is the intention as it is with Council when it meets - try to come up with a recommendation,
and this is what the Council aims for. Councillor Cave stated that this was his intent - so that when the
Council meets with that group on May 3rd the Council will know exactly where we are going, from here on in.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that is really not what he wanted to find out: he wanted to find out if it is
Council's intention to decide at the teach-in meeting on the remedial action that they decide on at that meeting
and take that decision into the May 3rd meeting. The Mayor confirmed that this is correct: the Council will take
it in as the Council's decision and looking for guidance from the others if they want to change it, but the
Council has got to come up with some decision. Councillor M. Vincent further advised that he is just trying to
find out if the Council is going to go in to the May 3rd meeting with no decision made on what this Council
decides as the best course of action to take to rectify the situation, or whether the Council is going to decide
in advance and then go in, prepared for the May 3rd meeting. The Mayor replied that he believes that the Council
comes up with a decision - this is what he would guide the Council to - and then, go in and say what the Council's
decision is and, now, what the Council is going for, is to tell them what money the City needs. Councillor M.
Vincent expressed satisfaction with this information. Councillor Gould noted that he could not say unequivocally
at tiis time that it is true that the Council at the teach-in meeting may arrive at a decision, but he hopes that
the Council will do so. The Mayor stated that his aim is that the Council will reach a decision at the said
April 14th teach-in meeting. Councillor A. Vincent asked when the City is going to find out who owns the land
out there, adding that he previously had even named the particular enquiry, and that he wants to know if he can
get the search done in this regard. He stated that he is maintaining that there are Federal Government lands in
the Marsh Creek area, and that he would ask for that information at the April 14th meeting in question. Mr.
Rodgers stated that with respect to an enquiry concerning property belonging to Strescon, which he thinks was the
property that was referred to, that Was purchased by Strescon from the Province of New Brunswick as freehold
property. Councillor A. Vincent asked if Strescon purchased all of the property, and added that he has information
and is prepared to produce it, and if he has to pay the fees to have it searched he will do it, but he is told
there is Federal land out there, and he is told by leading lawyers of this community there is Federal land out
there. He stated that his point is that if the Federal Government owns land out there it should share some of
the cost. Councillor Hodges made the point that Councillor A. Vincent could supply the Council with the infor-
mation he has in his possession regarding the land he has in mind in this regard.
Councillor Davis stated he does not see how the Council can guarantee that it will come out with a
definite plan of action afte, ft couple of hours' meeting. He stated he thinks that the City has a very complex
problem here and he does not think that the Council should make any announcements in advance of what it is going
to do. He noted that the Council would hope to come to some decision. He further noted that the consultants'
report deals largely with everything from Strescon, up - not from Strescon, down - the report practically ignores
from Strescon, down; the main thrust is storage tanks, storage areas, et cetera. He stated that he, personally,
would not like to say that Council would come out with a definite decision at the April 14th teach-in meeting.
Councillor MacGowan felt that whichever plan the Council decides would have some dependancy upon the amount of
money - then, if that money is available we might want to choose an expensive remedial action but we might only
be able to go for a less expensive course of action - so, she does not think the Council can really come out with
a definite decision - the Council may have its preference but if that money is not available to do it then the
Council might have to settle for second-best.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that his point is that the Council will have had the said report approxi-
mately a month prior to the May 3rd meeting; most of the Council members know the problems out there - the report
was obtained for the purpose of getting exact answers to the problems, and the Council has the City staff - and
he thinks it is erroneous for the Council to go to the May 3rd meeting without having a definite decision made on
the information made available to Council as to Council's choice of the best steps to take to rectiry the situation
- and he is afraid that the Council is going to go into that May 3rd meeting without having had its mind made up.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Common Council, after the teach-in that is scheduled for
April 14th next and using the Proctor & Redfern Limited report regarding water management of the /1arsh Creek
watershed as a guide, decide for Council's purposes on the best course of remedial steps Council can take to
correct the problem and take that decision and that choice in to the meeting of May 3rd next that is to be held
with the Federal and Provincial Government officials.
Councillor Cave made the point that the Council members are not engineers, with the exception of
Councillor Davis who is a civil engineer, and that therefore the Council members are going to have:.g to listen to
the advice of the engineers, and he thinks that any motion to decide that at this time, is premature. Councillor
MacGowan suggested that it may take two or three meetings before the Council really knows which is the best
remedial course of action to decide upon, and stated that she therefore has to vote against the motion.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors M. Vincent, Green, A.
Vincent, Kipping, Hodges and Pye voting "yea" and Councillors MacGowan, Davis, Cave, Parfitt and Gould voting
"nay".
Read a letter from Councillor Kipping, recalling that on February 9th, 1976 he requested consideration
of a proposal that Union Street be made two-way for its entire length, and stating that he believes this proposal
should be answered before the summer traffic intensifies and in view of the recent difficulties reported regard-
ing movement of emergency vehicles in the uptown area. He stated that he is asking for a very quick reply in-this
matter, from the City Manager. /1r. Barfoot recalled that the Council on February 9th last adopted a resolution
which requested that the Traffic and Safety Committee advise the Council at the earliest possible time on the
possibility of making Union Street traffic two-way for its entire length, and also asked the Committee to include
40.4
~~
~
I C't'-ty ~r.
7Y-~P'ie v-J:..
Cbh?,In.
e'~Il, 41'1h.f
I/n/())? U
(A-Nwy)
tJz.~~. #.I/;'~o/;
~d ?~e.
~ru.n~w/'c.f ~,
~/t7h Sr-:
Coun. tf:i'f?i>>f
C'..~a ~cke~
/-t-Il'.
/l~.?J#tl;r t9cr
.Ie.;Jse~e/l'Je.
~/'I/ /'or
./~;5/a7fu,-e
in its recommendation to Council whether or not parking should be permitted on either side of Union
Street. He stated that the said Committee considered the matter on February 17th and the Committee at
that time was in favour of having a trial period; since that time, this has been investigated by staff as
to how such a trial period could be put into effect and some of this information has been circulated to
the other bodies which are affected by such a trial, such as the Police and the transportation people, the
merchants, et cetera, who would be affected by such a trial - and it is the staff's hope that a full
report would be brought back to Council very quickly - but, in order to put such a change into effect, it
does affect the whole of the'uptown traffic circulation and besides requiring a number of other things _
such as a change in traffic 'lights - he would mention for the information of Council that such a trial
would cost the City in the vicinity of $7,000.00 to put into effect and this is the reason the staff feels
that all the implications and problems which would result from the trial must be found solutions for,
before a report comes back to Council. Councillor Kipping stated that he would ask Mr. Barfoot to provide
a breakdown of the '$7,000.00 costing for such a trial, and he wishes that would come in at the same time
as the said report comes in. He noted that there has been some talk about taking parking off Union Street
for its entire length, and all that, and stated that he certainly does not advocate that, at all - in
fact, he does not think we can abolish any parking uptown because we just cannot afford to do that. He
stated that he thinks the problem here is enforcement of the existing parking laws, and if that can be
done on both Union and Charlotte Streets (on Charlotte between Union and King Streets), we can go a long
way toward relieving the congestion and the traffic slow-down which is there. He noted that in the
morning issue of the newspaper of April 9th last, the Fire Chief made some remarks about drivers ignoring
emergency vehicles and that one of the things the Chief said was very significant as far as this particular
proposal is concerned - the Chief said that when vehicles come out of the fire station and proceed down
Union Street to Charlotte Street during the rush hour, often the cars are backed up because of several
sets of lights around King Square - he noted that that is a condemnation right there, although not in-
tended, probably, by the Fire Chief - but, it is a tacit condemnation of the snarl-up in traffic that
results by forcing the traffic to go up Charlotte Street and across in front of the Admiral Beatty Hotel
and down Sydney Street before it gets back to Union Street - he feels there is no need of that - there are
two sets of lights that traffic would have to go through instead of five sets which traffic now has to go
through as well as go all up and around the downtown area of the city - it is a very ridiculous situation
and he thinks it should be corrected - all he has asked for, in ,the first place, and all he still would
like to see, and he thinks all the Council members would like to see, is the answer - is it feasible and
if it is feasible, let us do it and please, let us have the breakdown of the $7,000.00 cost.
.
.
I
I
Councillor Cave stated that he has had calls from merchants on Union Street, and he pointed out
that what is going to happen is that they are going to be out of business with two-way traffic on Union
Street - he felt that two-way traffic on Union Street as suggested is just ridiculous, and stated that he
is going to oppose it strenuously - he is not going to put merchants out of business. Councillor Green
felt that if the Council is going to receive the above mentioned report from the City Manager that it
should obtain all the information that is pertinent to this matter, concerning the reasons why the present
traffic pattern was brought into being. Councillor Hodges pointed out that the traffic situation on Union
Street, between Charlotte and Dock Streets - which is a two-way traffic section - is a nightmare to
motorists. He pointed out that in other cities a one-way street traffic system is implemented, and stated
he feels Saint John should also employ such a system. Councillor Pye stated that the most logical solution
to that problem, it would appear, that is, providing it is feasible economically, would be the intro-
ductionof pedestrian underpasses at the junction of Union and Charlotte Streets, at the head of King
Street, and at Union and Waterloo Streets junction - three underpasses - and this would allow for a steady
flow of vehicular traffic. Councillor Davis felt that the problem on Union Street is simply that it is a
very narrow street, it is a deferred widening street, and if the Council plays around with it much longer
it is going to get even worse; the problem with on-street parking is not so much the parking of the car,
it is the getting in and getting out of the car that is slowing up and holding up traffic as a car man-
oeuvres into or out of a parking space. He stated that he thinks that probably the best solution for
Union Street would be to make it one-way, going west; if it is a through street going east, then there
will be so many left-hand turns taken from.the viaduct up to Union Street that probably traffic would be
backed up right to the bridge approaches, and that would cause another problem. He noted that the city's
streets are recorded on a computer and that the programming has not been up-dated in approximately seven
years, and that it would be very easy to run a street through a computer because it is an artery and you
can tell how many cars are going to be able to go through it and how close the intersections are together,
and it is not something that is solved by discussing it at this Council table or trying it out - you cause
difficulties for people. He noted that if there is two-way traffic on a street as narrow as Union Street
there is no stopping, at all, to let people off or to pick people up - that street becomes a "dead"
street - it is a throughway - he thinks that is a fact that has been known for a long time and that is one
reason this street is one-way. He stated he does not know what the Council expects of the City Manager in
a report on the feasibility of it, but he assumes that the City Manager will be doing traffic counts on
every corner to determine how many cars go by that street - but, he thinks that the solution for Union
Street is one-way, all the way west; he does not think we can solve the matter, sitting here.
I
.
Councillor Kipping noted that what he is asking is that the City Manager bring in the report as
was intended quite some time ago, in the very near future. Councillor A. Vincent asked that the report,
in addition, tell Council what the real picture is going to be when Brunswick Square has 400 or more cars
trying to get out at 5.00 p.m., and how long it will take the last car to get out.
I
On motion of Councillor Green
.u .,
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor Kipping advising that
since the Council discussed last week the re~uest of Canada Packers Ltd. to be relieved of their obligation
under Paragraph 21 of the Abattoir Act, he has received an enquiry from interested parties as to what
alternative means of supervised killing of livestock will be available if the legislation is changed to
allow Canada Packers this relief of their contractual obligation; and further advising that since a
service is being withdrawn which is very important to anyone raising livestock in the region, the feeling
is that the situation warrants a more complete exploration than has been provided publicly, particularly
in view of the fact that the company presently has a sub-lease effective for nine more years; and noting
that Council has authorized the City Solicitor to take steps to petition the Legislature for an amendment _
and asking if, in view of the question raised, the Council would be willing to delay this action until
more information has been made available to the public and some definition of the problems and possible
solutions has been considered by the parties concerned -- be withdrawn.
I
Councillor Kipping stated that since submitting the above noted memorandum, he has been able to
get most of the information he was looking for at this time. He felt that because the Council does not
have a question and answer period it is necessary, often, to put items like this on the agenda in order to .
get information, and if the Council members cannot take the time during the week to get information from
staff - however, since putting this item on the agenda he has received a good deal of information from the
acting secretary of the Abattoir Commission and, as far as he is concerned, he is satisfied with the
explanations he has received - it will enable him to answer the enquiries that he has had from the in-
terested parties as to what alternative means of supervised slaughter of livestock will be available if
the legislation is changed - so, really, there is no action required at this time on the part of Council -
he now has the information. He stated he will not oppose the withdrawal motion for that reason, but he
....1
r"
.
I
I
.
I
.
I C'QlL/1,~~ .;
C.;JJ1iiiJ~ /
;<.~ .
/lk#pir/!t.
~~~:%~
1
CI/h;.//~'
7>eHt-iP;' rl
.7iS5t?o/ J7
.sf,(b-~/V.
C1c!p/t-.>d I
~d'get-
.
,(Qr~;I/~~
';p",ei/i I/e
~!lel's Il.f.s~
iJa,P/t-OlI
1J~et-
.....
405
would have appreciated being consulted with, before the above motion was made. Councillor Davis pointed out
that the information that Councillor Kipping probably got was submitted to this Council and it was not secret
information, or anything of that nature - the Council considered all that information at one time - he wants to
make it absolutely clear that when he was Chairman of the Abattoir Commission the Council was fully informed of
what was going on and the implications thereof. Councillor Kipping stated that he did not say it was secret
information. Councillor Green, present Chairman of the Abattoir Commission, pointed out that the recommendation
for amending the Abattoir Act in question was in full accord by all Council members and Councillor Davis, the
former Chairman, was very knowledgeable of this and in full accord along with some of the other Councillors -
the intent of the motion as designed by the two solicitors would be that the power for action would be left with
this Council after the legislation is passed and the Council, if it so desires, can then take the course requested
by Canada Packers Ltd. - so, if, later on, any Councillor wishes to object to it, there would still be the
opportunity to do so.
Councillor MacGowan expressed the intention of voting against the motion because she thinks it is
highly irregular and because she feels that any Councillor should have the privilege of putting on the agenda
what he feels is necessary, and she thinks it is only a common courtesy to leave it there - she could go along
with tabling the item until the Councillor received his information, but she thinks the only one who should
withdraw the item would be the person who put it on the agenda.
Councillor Kipping explained that, apart from the fact that he receivedg an enquiry seeking information
which has not been made public - even though it is not secret information it has not all been well-publicized,
and that is all that his enquirers were saying - what he wanted to do was, if possible and if desirable and if
agreeable by Council, to stop the thing here so that it does not get to the Provincial Legislature where some of
these farmers who are enquiring might well mount a campaign against it, and then you get the Provincial Govern-
ment into a bind because they have to opt one way or the other either to oppose the municipal government which
has proposed it, or give in to an interested group of agriculturalists, perhaps, who have a very strong lobby -
so, it was a,means, really, of avoiding that kind of a confrontation. He stated that as far as withdrawing the
item is concerned, he would have withdrawn it on his own had he been afforded the opportunity before the above
motion was made. Councillor A. Vincent stated that on all his time on the Abattoir Commission he has never
received an enquiry from anyone. He asked from whom the enquiries came, and in which county they live. Coun-
cillor Kipping refrained from naming the enquirer, but stated that the enquirers come from the Hampton area, in
Kings County, he believes. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that at the City Hall he had explained clearly to
Councillor Kipping this stuff and had gone into the killing process very well, and that he had told Councillor
Kipping that they (Canada Packers Ltd.) were on the threshold to lose about 85 employees and a million-dollar
payroll. He stated that Councillor Kipping knows that over a year ago he (Councillor A. Vincent) complained in
this Council that the City did not connect the sewer with the pumping station into the Marsh Creek, and that it
will cost us $50,000.00 to do that - that is one thing the City is trying to save - at no cost to the Hampton
people. Councillor Kipping interjected that he has all that information now.' Councillor A. Vincent replied
that, now that Councillor Kipping has stirred it up, let the public have it. Councillor Kipping replied that he
was just given the said information tonight. Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that if the City does not do
something along the lines it is going to, that Canada Packers Ltd. is going to come in here and ask the City to
spend up to $600,000.00 to maintain it (the abattoir) and that is what he is concerned about. He stated that he
knows that this company only killed ten hogs per month last year, yet the company is equipped to kill fifty hogs
per hour, and they killed ten for a week; the calves are four and one-half for a week; one calf per week, making
fifty-two a year; we cannot afford that, he pointed out. He stated that it is his hope that this Council will
see wisely and fairly to try and keep those 85 people here; he is concerned with jobs. Councillor Cave stated
that he believes that the last year the municipal abattoir operated the loss was $140,000.00. Councillor Davis
stated that he thinks behind all this is a problem in asking questions - he does not think that this procedure
is proper at all - to have a question on an agenda, (the Council receives this question on Friday and some
Council members do not get to it until Sunday evening) is wrong because what sort of an answer can you get - the
answer you get is the type of answers that are being thrown back and forth across this table. He stated that a
question period is a good idea, but the best practice, in his point of view, is to ask the question to be
answered next week so that the public will know - if the Councillor asks a question on behalf of a citizen and
he wants a full reply, whaehter or not that information is available is a secondary question, but the procedure
is wrong - it riles up ,the committee that brought it in and put it through. He stated he feels that in the
future when a Councillor asks of the Council a question it indicates that the Councillor does not know or, that
he wants a fuller answer, to be public, and that that question should be asked and there should be perhaps a
package of questions, and the anSWers should be given the following week, if possible, so that we do not get
involved in a discussion that means so little. He stated that there an awful lot of facts that can be brought
out, and probably they should be brought out, but the problem is that the Council is dealing with a private
company that is very anxious to avoid problems with their employees; they do not want them nervous, or for false
rumours to start - and he thinks this is possibly what the Council members have done here, tonight. Councillor
A. Vincent recalled that he had the matter regarding Canada Packers Ltd. request tabled once and the Council
discussed it thoroughly in legal session and he thought that all these things came out clearly, in private
session of Council, because the Council did not, want to bring the matter out publicly, and that is why the
matter was brought back at the last meeting of the Council for approval.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with the Mayor and Councillors Green, A. Vincent, Cave, Pye
and Gould voting "yea" and Councillors MacGowan, Parfitt, Hodges, Davis, Kipping and M. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above mentioned item that was submitted by Councillor
Kipping relative to a possible delay in seeking amendment to the Abattoir Act that the Council authorized on
April 5th, 1976, be withdrawn from the agenda of this meeting.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. William H. Dupuis of 117 Josselyn
Road, Saint John East, requesting that arrangements be made to take immediate steps to correct the conditions in
the Josselyn Sub7division that are described in the petition submitted by the residents of this sub-division to
Common Council on September 23rd, 1974, to which these residents have never received reply except that the
petition at that time was referred to the City staff for a report, be received and the matter of the requested
improvements be referred to the 1976 capital budget committee for action, and that Mr. Dupuis be so advised.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor G~een
RESOLVED that the letter from the Lorneville Ratepayers Association,
tressing that the Lorneville Road needs to be improved, as has already been discussed in a letter to Council
from the Association at the Council's meeting of September 22nd, 1975, be referred to the 1976 capital budget
committee.
406
~
,(orh~r/ /k ~d'.
IY- (8."c. Pc.
,(OM~J///k "'Rd.
C'tl"Afh. .7J.;w/s
SOC'/~/ Sel'V/ct!!s
c;,u~; / "..,e
IT,.Rak,. .s:T
Yt1~l-h S?K~~
7b;;~e :7)~
CAld ,/'7b'?"
~.st!e>n ~
Co_ .It-a'.
He- ;(Ph/)?~
iP..4h1'l.4dns_
('7pmh?
/Ilp~//e ,It?me
k/5'~ ~,khdt?1?
,?/pb/le ,1Ph?~
M/I/~ /lHl'oll'J
?~~h,l9d.ws-
~.h;"""'.
'l?e-~oh/h:f
II. Ate/ &R",k
C'k1rK .LI7SK.
/lICh?//?/STNJ7ft?'s
J?e-;;ro)?/~
1f1-'J"~s/s
7?~.II!f ~-t-~.
.7OJh ~/. /lh:"h/-
-tee-#- A'~~
Pkn,/1~V'/.s: t'pm.;.,
.(1a?_H~.~~~
,hJ"'Q/c/p;i1/t~/'6'$
cA'/PI/oJ? /ost)
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Council can ask the New Brunswick Electric Power Commission
for some special dispensation towards the improving of the above named road, which has been used by the
Commission's trucks, and he added that he thinks the City should try to open negotiations for the purpose
of obtaining some kind of a grant from the Commission in this regard. The Mayor noted that the City will
look into this question.
.
During ensuing discussion, Councillor Davis commented that in Lorneville there are 275 pro-
perties, and 250 homes - there are 200 homes of which 25 are mobile homes; the total assessment is $2,370,000.00
of which the City of Saint John gets half, and the City's total tax revenue from all of Lorneville is
$16,400.00. He pointed out that it is not just a question of paving the road - the question is that if
four of the City's staff go to Lorneville to have a look and come back, it costs the City $100.00. He
noted that all these little bits and pieces are in existence allover the city, none of which are really 1
paying their way - they are a burden to the centre of the city to the other citizens. He stated that when
the Lorneville people say they would rather be alone and not part of the City, they do not know really
what they are saying, and he felt that it is time that the City looked at this whole problem. Councillor
Cave noted that there are many other areas in the City's boundaries would make the same comment as that of
the Lorneville people in this regard. Councillor Parfitt made the suggestion that the Council members
assess the condition of the Lorneville Road when going on April 21st next to the Coleson Cove project and
to the Point Lepreau project.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Social Services Council of Greater
Saint John advising that many of the agencies affiliated with the said Services Council have expressed
concern that the City of Saint John has not yet initiated a Youth Squad in the Police Department, which
has been in the long range plans for some time, and further advising that the Services Council is of the
opinion that this is an area in which the community has failed to help our young people and strongly urges
the Common Council to give every consideration to establishing a Youth Squad as an intelligent approach to
reducing delinquency, be received and filed and the matter be sent to the Chief of Police.
Councillor Parfitt advised that she understands that what is being asked in the above noted
letter is in the planning stages, already.
On motion of Councillor Gould
"
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the application from Pascon Brothers Co. Ltd. for re-
zoning of property located next to 483 Sea Street on which it is proposed to construct warehouse and
office' space, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that authority be
given to proceed to advertise this proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Elsa Johnston of 14 Sproul
Road, Lakewood, asking for an extension of one year more regarding permission granted to her for a mobile
home location at this address, be received and filed and Mrs. Johnston be granted an extension of per-
mission for one year.
On motion of Councillor Cave,
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the application from Mr. William Aucoin for permission
to place a mobile home on the property of Reginald Olsen on the Pipe Line Road, Saint John West, be
referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation.
The Mayor advised that an application for re-zoning that was proposed by ~tr. H. Mel Clark of
Clark Insurance & Administrators regarding property at 126 Duke Street, has been removed from the agenda
of this meeting by said applicant.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the application from John Large Architect Limited on
behalf of their clients, Kennebecasis Realty Ltd., for re-zoning of 7413 - Lot 74.2 on the Boar's Head
Road to "R-2" classification pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, be referred to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation and that the necessary advertising in this regard be
proceeded with.
The Mayor advised that May 10th is the date by which the names of delegates must be submitted
for the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities conference in Vancouver. He stated that it is
his view that because there is not any money in the City's budget, the Council should not send any dele-
gates. Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that no-one attend the said
conference. The Mayor advised that there was no money set aside in the budget for this purpose. Coun-
cillor Gould asked if there is money ear-marked for conferences for Councillors.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Common Council send four Councillors and the Mayor
to the forthcoming conference of the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities that is to be held
in Vancouver, B. C.'
In reply to Councillor Gould's question, Mr. Park advised that in 1976 the sum of $6,000.00 was
set aside for travel and delegation expenses for the year, covering such things as the conference that is
under discussion, and others of a similar nature; this amount is specifically for Councillors and the
Mayor, and it is not related to the budget item called Unspecified Grants, at all. Councillor Gould
commented that, in that case, there is money in the budget for such things, if the Council wishes to spend
it. Councillor M. Vincent asked if there is any other section of the budget or operational money of the
City of Saint John that has funds in it containing expenses for Councillors that might be developed
relative to attending the above named conference in Vancouver. Mr. Park replied that he could not think
of one, off-hand, but there may be - he added that it is a broad sort of question. Councillor M. Vincent
then asked if there is any portion of the City budget that has monies contained in it that Councillors
might use for'travelling from this city to British Columbia for the purpose of attending conferences or
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"""
40il
.
I
I
.
C'C'i!7, ~
~......s~
~/?/tYf4'?/m'
I
LEG A L
Cj~ySot~t'el
flfp.6; k /;4
~J"k; ~-.4
~/~
...l1ec/$/PJ? I'e
Ctif~ .,.. A1el'-
s~sd' ~
I"?etr/S ~4t.
I {!/-65
So //p/1!,pr
C-,.; f?V,ii}.J7ce
KaU/ard
,(.;:J~/I/e
I
eC?l??m. $~
S. Z""'7bb,'
~.l9s~
fV(/,6/
(}r/ev<$~&e
Er;( HSNC
....(Cilhj"//Ie
S.T71;ij~
7>l'd6t::t-, 195-
/y/?,61
G',./eYem<:,t'?
1'l'nt?5
..... ;Z>t7ijde..1J~
conventions, other than the $6,000.00 Unspecified Grants. Mr. Park replied that there is not, as far as he can
recall. Councillor Davis made the point that, aside from the question of finances, the big question is: will the
City benefit with four Councillors and the Mayor going to that convention. He felt that is the important thing:
if a Councillor feels that he is going to bring back something of benefit to the City, he should go, and we see
what he brings back - but if it is just a question of we cannot afford to go, he does not think that the Council
should compare the financial capacity of our city with other cities in New Brunswick to go - if the Councillors
feel there is a benefit to the City, they should go, and he feels that is the only criteria. Councillor MacGowan
stated that she has been an advocate of the said Mayors and Municipalities association, not regarding what
tangible benefits the delegates bring back, necessarily, but she believes that anyone who goes to these con-
ferences and participates and becomes involved is a better Councillor. She stated she feels if the Maritimes
want to be heard we have to have a lot of Councillors and Mayors from the Maritimes go and sit as a group and
make our voice heard - otherwise, they do not know we exist and we are overlooked, and only by strong repre-
sentation are we going to accomplish anything. She suggested that maybe sending four Councillors and the Mayor
is not practical, and that perhaps we should have ten Councillors and the Mayor and go cost-shared, if ten could
go. She stated that she would like to let the motion be tabled for at least a couple of weeks. Councillor
Kipping felt that when things get more complex and difficult is not the time to withdraw from talking with your
confreres on the same level across the country, and that this conference (of the Canadian Mayors and Municipalities
is very helpful in that way - however, he stated that he does not believe that there should be a large repre-
sentation - he considers four Councillors in these days a large representation - he thinks that the circumstances
dictate that there should be very minimum representation, and he thinks that should be the Mayor and one other.
He stated that he will vote against the above motion. Councillor Green spoke in support of the motion, outlining
the benefits that are derived from membership in this association. Councillor M. Vincent voiced his intention to
vote against the motion, not because he is against anybody attending the conference, because he feels if they go
to it because they have an objective to find out something that will make they more qualified as a Councillor
they have the right to go - but he is voting against the motion because it is restrictive to only four Coun-
cillors - he think it should be open to the Councillors, who are the elected representatives, and if they are
entitled by membership in the association to go and if they are going conscientiously and it will benefit them to
do a better job in our city, he feels they should be allowed to go.
Question being taken, the motion was lost, with Councillors Cave, Green, Pye, Gould and A. Vincent
voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors M. Vincent, MacGowan, Hodges, Kipping, Davis and Parfitt voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter relating to representation from the City of
Saint John at the forthcoming conference in Vancouver of the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities be
left open and that the matter be discussed between the Council and the staff and the number wishing to attend the
said conference be determined at that time.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Kipping, Davis and Parfitt voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillor A. Vincent withdrew from the meeting during the intervening Committee of the Whole session.
Councillors Kipping and Gould withdrew from the meeting during consideration of the City Solicitor's
discussion of the recent Decision of Provincial Court Judge Nave George concerning the matter of the City of
Saint John and Kierstead Developments Ltd., and the matter of the Mobile Home Parks By-Law, and the recommend-
ation that has been made by Mr. G. Christopher Collier, the solicitor representing the City in this matter, that
the City appeal the decision. Discussion also ensued regarding Mr. Collier's bill of approximately $8,000.00 and
the fact that he would be the solicitor in making the Appeal, and that the cost of the Appeal would be in the
vicinity of $1,200.00 to $1,500.00.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that an Appeal against the recent Decision of Provincial Court
Judge Nave George concerning the matter of the City of Saint John and Kierstead Developments Ltd., and the matter
of the Mobile Home Parks By-Law, be made.
Councillor Hodges voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter dated April 9th, 1976 from the City Solicitor,
stating that in Committee of the Whole held on April 5th last the motions of COuncil to uphold the'grievance and
deny the grievance of Edward Langille, after having heard the grievance presented on Constable Langille's behalf
by the Grievance Committee of the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. regarding
refusal to attend a course of training in Prince Edward Island, were lost as a result of the votes in both
instances, and further stating that the Council then asked for a legal opinion; and advising that it is his
opinion that the Common Council should inform the Union that the grievance in this matter was heard, and that a
decision to uphold or deny the grievance was not reached in that a tie vote resulted in a lost motion, and that
the Union can be informed, also, that under Article 12 of the Working Agreement, if it so wishes, the dispute may
be referred to arbitration -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the Grievance Committee of Saint John Policemen's Pro-
tective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., who presented at the Committee of the Whole session of Common
Council on April 5th, 1976 the grievance of Edward Langille regarding refusal to attend a course of training in
Prince Edward Island, be advised that a decision to uphold or deny the grievance was not reached in that a tie
vote resulted in a lost motion, and that under Article 12 of the Working Agreement of 1975-1976, if the Assoc-
iation so wishes, the dispute may be referred to arbitration.
Consideration was given to a letter, dated April 5th, 1976, from the Saint John Policemen's Protective
Association, Local No. 61, C.V.P.E., advising that the Union is willing to meet and discuss at any time the
grievance regarding payment of fines, under Article 6(4) of the 1975-1976 Working Agreement, when charged under
the Rules and Regulations of the Police Department. Mr. Rodgers submitted a draft resolution in this matter,
stating that he feels from his knowledge of the matter that this is not a matter for a grievance but is a matter
140:8
s r 1b1/t-~me'hS
;P~n6'd. /lssP'.
1Vp. 61
h'nR$
'1bj,~e .7J~
U/e:'~A-;I'I:J'
/I.ff,M6'ml?h~
G,.ieY';lnctf:
peier F. G!~
/1/UIJ/e-/f:b;/ ~
reU/ohS ,,~
concerning discipline under the Rules and Regulations, and he noted that the subject matter is not
clearly enough referred to in the said letter from the Union for the Council to deal with it properly and
that is what the discussion would bring out. He added that the Constable in question has a right of
appeal to the Council, but not the Union. He stated that he does not see anything 'wrong with meeting to
discuss the matter, but he wants to make it very clear that the Council is not meeting at this point
agreeing to meet to discuss a grievance. He recommended the adoption by Council of the said draft
resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that with respect to a letter dated April 5th, 1976 from
the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C,U.P.E. referring to a violation of
Article 6(4) of the Working Agreement, the Council is willing to meet with the Union to discuss this
matter at its meeting of April 20th, 1976 without at this time admitting the question is a proper item
for a grievance.
Councillor Parfitt voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Common Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Tuesday, the twentieth
day of April, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department,
A. Ellis, Building Inspector, D. French, Director of Personnel and
Training, D. McCaig, Parks Planning Assistant of the Recreation and
Parks Department, and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
April 5th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
April 12th last, be confirmed.
The Mayor made the suggestion that the Council give consideration at an early date to looking at
the plan presented by Mr. Peter E. Grady to Common Council for an independent bureau of municipal labour
relations. He stated that the Council is so tied up with matters at this time that maybe the Council
should be looking at the said plan for our next dealings with our Unions - have someone come in to help us
negotiate, or do the negotiating, and save our staff being tied up, and he is sure the staff could work
with them.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report for March of the Division of Technical and
t?,1e>~~~ ~~Jr Inspection Services, including Plumbing, be received and filed.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"...
:J)"/a.t,l(~
4- VaC'4nr
. b<<//,(inffs
C/tf!f ~r.
kXfr10&d-h
S-f:
I
I
.21'K'% #'Ic.
7)1".
.
~a.ff'
2n5'p9dt>r
{'it!! Soltei-
-t'or
1
.
409
Councillor M. Vincent recalled that at the Council meeting held on April 5th last, he had asked for a
report regarding the number of unoccupied buildings throughout the city that are either dilapidated or burned-out
and that are still standing, and regarding what is going to be done about these buildings, and when. He stated
that he is wondering if the said requested report is ready. Ikr. Barfoot replied that the report is being pre-
pared and should be ready very shortly - in a week or two.'
Councillor MacGowan referred to buildings on Exmouth Street (that were damaged in a recent fire) and
asked when they will be coming down. She added that these buildings look very dangerous. Mr. A. Ellis advised
that the three individual property owners concerned have been notified for the demolition of these fire-damaged
buildings; with regard to when they are coming down, he presumes these owners will have to settle with their
insurance companies, which is a big hold-up on some of the fire-damaged houses. He added that if the Council
wishes, he supposes, in another sense, he could demand the immediate demolition of these buildings if it was felt
they were dangerous enough, but sometimes it is difficult for the property owners to collect insurance after the
buildings are demolished. Councillor MacGowan asked if a letter to these property owners, with a copy of such
letter to the insurance companies concerned, would suffice, saying that these owners would have to demolish the
buildings very quickly, and perhaps this procedure would speed the matter up a bit. Mr. Ellis replied that
letters were sent to the said three property owners immediately after the fire regarding demolition of the
buildings. Councillor MacGowan stated that she can see problems arising there if there is no action soon for
demolition of these buildings, and she suggested that perhaps the Building Inspector can put the pressure on,
somewhere along the line, to accomplish their demolition. Mr. Ellis advised that he received an answer from the
owner of the centre building, and he believes that this owner would like to approach the City with the thought of
selling it to the City and the City demolish it. He pointed out that to demolish the centre building would create
a problem with the other buildings because all three buildings are tied in together.
Councillor MacGowan asked for information about the buildings on Brunswick Drive near Titus' Bakery,
and noted that apparently there have been children in there with matches and causing a problem. Mr. Ellis stated
that he would like to give a good report on the Brunswick Drive buildings in question because, as far as he is
concerned, there are very few houses there that are not in need of extensive repairs. Councillor MacGowan
replied that apparently there are some buildings on that street that are empty and boarded up, though, and these
are the ones that are creating the problem in the area, near Middle Street. She added that perhaps that problem
will be included in the whole report that is forthcoming regarding dilapidated buildings.
Councillor Green drew attention to the fact that the value of building permits for the month of March
exceed by approximately three million dollars the value of building permits for March, 1975, and stated it is his
feeling that it speaks well for what the builders have accomplished in the city of Saint John.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that the information he has is that the number of vacant and dilapidated
buildings may be in excess of one hundred in Saint John and that he is wondering if the Building Inspector has
been encountering any particular problems in the carrying out of his job, and if there is anything that the
Council should know about that the Council might be able to help him in some way in getting that work done. In
reply, Mr. Ellis advised that last fall he consulted with the Fire Department and he and the Fire Department
talked with the City Solicitor with regard to putting the Fire Marshal's orders on these buildings, and he added
that we have a number of buildings now, just waiting for the title searches, and as SOon as the title searches
are received, then the Fire Marshal's orders will be issued on these buildings, and, possibly, action taken on
them. He added that he understands that the City Solicitor's staff is short-handed, the same as other civic
departments are, and that the City Solicitor promised later on that he will complete some of the title searches.
Councillor M. Vincent noted that maybe what we are asking the Building Inspector is an impossibility, to ask him
as the Building Inspector to try to get these buildings down. He asked if there is, in fact, a delay in getting
title searches. Mr. Ellis stated that he would not say it is a delay - there is a time involvement in regard to
same and there is a number of title searches requested. Councillor M. Vincent suggested that we may be res-
ponsible for placing a heavy workload on the Legal Department in the city which, in turn, prevents the Building
Inspector from getting title searches done enabling him to carry out the authority he has as the Building In-
spector; he added that his thoughts are that if it is the Council's wish that this be done, then Council must
have a look at the staff of the City Solicitor to see if he requires somebody who can get these title searches
done, because he (Councillor M. Vincent) believes that that is the hold-up. Mr. Barfoot noted that, generally,
some of these areas will be covered in the forthcoming report, and that there are many implications in tearing
down a building, some of which are Legal and some of which are the Building Inspector's, and some of which are
financial - he feels that the said report will cover these various aspects and the Council members will then have
the whole picture before them. Mr. Ellis added that some of them are involved in the new complex in the South
End, as well. Mr. Rodgers advised that the only comment he can make is to confirm what the Building Inspector
has said: that assuming title searching and ownership could be established faster, then other agencies could act
faster, is correct.
On motion of Councillor Green
7;;~r~ Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation contained in the
~n?e'~' Po report from the City Manager and the Building Inspector, the lowest tender received, namely, that of Chitticks
13f1k1'n'1~' (1962) Ltd. in the amount of $9,800.00, be accepted for the demolition of the City-owned property located at 138
~~zL King Street East (the former Police Station).
1 (!IJrtt-ieK:i Councillor M. Vincent commented on the tremendous difference in price between some of the tenders for
("~~~)~~~. the above noted demolition work, and that it is well that the City has the type of system it has or it might very
~ well have paid something like $95,000.00 to demolish that building if that was the only bid received.
1 {>61'pit.OII
jJrtijeet-
(J/"f2el7d.~/e
Sewt!'rs
ra/(,{,;J/e
('(Jnd/'1uC'"t;.
./EA!.
.
.....
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engineering services regarding
the following named capital project:-
1.
Greendale - Phase II
Fairvale Construction Limited
Construction of 36-inch storm sewer
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated April 14, 1976
$ 89,170.00
91,218.00
4,736.54
76,661. 28
3,
$ 9,820.18
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be given for
410
~
.:z>. "R. E E:
/11il-lj,nL,dc.
~tl/l S~H/t!'r
b'tHfIs ~5&'e,
L'!fa.
,(~. ,,(a~PPJ7 A't.
Sin.
/l,$~f?r /-/L.
S/mpsl7J-? a
,(ofa.
payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services
regarding projects that have been undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic Expansion pro-
gramme:-
.
1.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 53,
dated April 5, 1976
$ 185,073.91
$ 4,521.27
Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station
(a) Asdor Ltd.
Supply of Pumping Unit
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated March 31, 1976
I
$ 72,472.24
70,932.24
10,639.84
Nil
$ 60,292.40
$ 589,600.00
65,725.00
9,858.75
16;150.00
$ 39,716.25
I
(b) Simpson Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 2,
dated March 31, 1976
~<<.s ~tlVa!? 3. Courtenay Bay Causeway
A. D. 1. Limited
/).7).r ~~L. Engineering Services for Western Approaches .
Payments previously approved $ 184,742.01
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 45,
dated February 29, 1976 $ 270.88
SfJ"~C't!' ",(~Je 4. Spruce Lake Intake
Ruliff Grass Limited
.T J7';dP/re Installing 72-inch intake pipe
Total value of contract $ 145,316.00
1?t.t//I"r ~rnS5 Total work done, Estimate Number 5 115,809.00
,,( -t ,,( Retention Nil
Payments previously approved 112,334.73
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 5,
dated April 2, 1976 $ 3,474.27
5. Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer I
/l!t1-f'f?J-d, t:-Ic. Gaspe Construction Ltd.
Cf?/!. .5l!"wer Total value of contract $1,463,230.25
C-;iiJ5,Pf!!" ah~ Total work done, Estimate Number 11 1,030,590.05
Retention 184,588.50
~f!L. Payments previously approved 977,378.08
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 11,
dated April 14, 1976 $ 68,623.47
~s~~lJ!/
.s,o"~~ ,(,nke
, Inrake
c/.,!!/ ~~
4;,ff'17ar"fH $,.
WflQ,:L~n sewers
Councillor M. Vincent, referring to the above noted payment regarding the Courtenay Bay causeway
approaches, asked if the City Manager is in a position now to tell how much money was saved by the City as
a result of penalties levied on the contractor for tardiness in the completion of the project. Mr.
Barfoot replied that, to his knowledge, he cannot give the Council that final figure. Councillor M.
Vincent asked if there is another payment to come in on the Courtenay Bay causeways. Making affirmative
reply, Mr. Barfoot noted that it is not against A. D. I. Limited, but against the contractor, and there is
still a substantial retention which greatly exceeds the amount in dispute. Councillor M. Vincent in-
dicated that he will wait in this matter. The Mayor asked if the City has a report to tell us whether the
Provincial Government is going to finance the City for the repairing of the sidewalk due to the storm
(February 2nd, 1976). Mr. Barfoot replied that that is at present being estimated and the City is in the
process of completing an estimate and submitting the proposal to the Emergency Measures Organization, and
he believes it is their intention that this is recoverable.
.
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
Councillor Green asked if the City Manager is keeping the City Solicitor informed right up to
date on the Spruce Lake intake and the state of the affairs as far as the suit is concerned. Mr. Barfoot
replied, stating he believes that this falls within the City Solicitor's department. In reply to Councillor
Green's question, Mr. Rodgers stated that he would have to review the files to determine on this matter
what has been reported publicly and what has been taking place with respect to legal session and pending
court action, so he was not in a position to give a full story on it because he was not quite clear on
what is private and what is public, at this particular moment. The Mayor noted that we can get that
answer for the Councillors. Councillor Green stated that all he is asking is that we do not lose track of
all the bills and everything that is associated with this matter, and that he wants to make sure that the
City comes out of this matter, properly looked after, that is all.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
I
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, dated April 15th,
1976, further to his report which was laid on the table at a Council meeting held on March 29th, 1976,
regarding the wooden sewers at Haymarket Square, advising that detailed information is now provided in the
submitted report from the Commissioner of Engineering Works, and that the Works Department has done a
thorough investigation of all the wooden sewers in the area and has made enquiries of those most directly
concerned with construction in the area, and have determined that there is no evidence to support any
further investigation, and that he recommends that this report be received and filed -- be received and
filed.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated April 15th,
~
,....
S7:JJ/s'l;
. .(.;lb. a~*,;1
$hpJ{/"I-/ee
t:'pqtro /
$.;!nP( v s.
I
I
G'r.,;we/ ?rt-
Grpv-e
C'~~uct-
./-t-d.
.
~/""h (J.
Rtf,
I
.
I/el?Ker
t:"",e
.(~rL.
:1Jf'?/7.1eJ//f /~
,,203 S!l~~
.9..
I
Ml?pr.s
~~-7 t:'t?h-
('e~5/"hs
treer. :7Jep-t.
Gt?I-f' t!,,~
:Po,., / J?i<>l1 -pk,
~$tfp~."
".' Ilf;spec 'P~.
. ~()r.ePfil ~u
nr:r{wntte
:/)./7. /I.,}~
~
41'1
1976, in reply to Common Council resolution of February 23rd, 1976 which referred to staff for a report a letter
from the Saint John District Labour Council, favouring the use of salt rather than sand on the streets in the
wintertime, advising that a report from the Engineering ~~ Works DeV~r~ent t&s~bm~tteavith'h~~ letter tor the
info~ation Of Council on this matter, and that it is concluded that the present policy of using a combination of
various mixtures of salt and sand should be continued -- be received and filed and a copy of same be sent to the
Saint John District Labour Council.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the last paragraph in the letter submitted with the City Manager's
letter above mentioned states that "The department should give serious consideration to the use of more covered
storage areas for salt stockpiles", and suggested that perhaps the Council should recommend that the staff do
that.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager and the Building Inspector
advising that Grove Construction Ltd. has made application to operate the gravel pit on the Golden Grove Road
(Bowes Lake) for the year 1976 and that this application has been processed and has been approved by the Planning
Department and by the Planning Advisory Committee and that the approval of the Common Council is required for the
amount of the bond as recommended by the Works Department, which is $4,000.00, for the guarantee of the rehabil-
iation of the said gravel pit, be received and filed and the amount of $4,000.00 be approved for the said bond.
Councillor Kipping asked if the above gravel pit is that pit the entrance of which is constrilcting the
flow of the stream, causing flooding above it; that is, is that the pit just beyond Superior Precast Concrete
plant. Making negative reply, Mr. Ellis advised that the pit in question is at the extreme end of the Upper
Golden Grove Road, which means it is almost outside of the limits, and is almost in Kings County. Councillor
Kipping suggested to the Building Inspector that because of the problem which has been caused by the pit just
beyond Superior Precast Concrete plant, and the fact that it is considered that the culverts that were placed at
that entrance were inadequate because of water backed up behind them, the Building Inspector might keep an eye on
the entrance. Mr. Ellis interjected, stating that he believes that that roadway has been taken out of there.
Councillor Kipping confirmed that this was correct, because that pit was abandoned, and asked that on this
particular pit would the Building Inspector be perhaps wary that no such constrhction of any stream occurs. Mr.
Ellis advised that there is a brook a considerable distance in an easterly direction from that pit but it has no
connection with the pit, at all. Councillor M. Vincent expressed his concern with the location of a gravel pit
on the Golden Grove Road because we know the condition of that road now and he is wondering what shape it is
going to be in after heavy gravel trucks will be using it while the pit is open. He stated he does not believe
that portion of the said road is scheduled for any repairs or any repaving at this time; he noted that this road
is almost impassable now, and asked what will its condition be after gravel trucks travel over it. The Mayor
advised that he had a call saying that the City uses this road probably as much as anybody, with the trucks
hauling gravel and it is in very bad shape; he added that he has had several calls on this. He asked if the City
is planning any improvement work on that road. Mr. Barfoot replied that a portion of Golden Grove Road is being
considered in this year's capital budget but the balance of it is just really normal maintenance. He pointed out
that this particular pit is away out, in Upper Golden Grove, pretty near. The Mayor felt that it is not the
location of the pit that is in question, but it is where they do travel on the length of that road and as they
get closer to the city they have created more problems - so he felt consideration has to be given to which end we
are going to put the priority on, regarding the said road. Mr. Barfoot replied that that is correct. With
regard to the situation referred to by Councillor Kipping, Councillor Cave stated that he viewed the area on
April 19th and noted that Williston has removed the obstruction - the two small culverts that were not sufficiently
large enough - and he has gone down to bedrock - that is, the bottom of the original brook. Councillor Davis
recalled that the City Manager and he were out in this area ten days ago and the level had risen to about within
six inches of the road and the road was getting damaged very badly - they were out there with Mr. Cathline - and
Mr. Williston co-operated and removed the obstruction. Councillor Cave felt that the City should seriously
consider putting a large culvert in there because, although it is on private property, it is just at the boundary
of the edge of the road; he feels that the City should consider whether or not it should put in a large culvert;
he added that Mr. Williston will backfill it. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he is not against the gravel pit
at all, but in the same respect, he does not think it is really fair to go ahead and approve this gravel pit
unless the Council has some plans from the City Manager on what the intentions are for the Golden Grove Road
because that road is almost impassable - and if anybody was to drive up and down that road it truly is impassable
and if we are going to have gravel trucks going over it and just say that general repairs are going to make it
passable, he does not think it is really justified to pass that application for a gravel pit until we know what
the plan might be to look after that Golden Grove Road. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that what the Council is ap-
proving here is the amount of the bond which covers the restoration of the pit when the contractor is finished
working there - the Council is not approving the pit operator's licence to go into business, or considering that.
He stated that the only way you could keep trucks off Golden Grove Road would be presumably to ban truck traffic
from that road and this, he presumes, could be considered, but one of the legitimate uses of that road is for
gravel trucks as there are a number of gravel pits in the area. He added that we could consider this in capital
budget as one of the priorities in the outer area of the city but there are a lot of roads we have to spend a lot
of money on and all that we can do to for most of them is maintenance. The Mayor suggested that maybe there are
some we can reduce and put more effort into the Golden Grove Road because of the usage for gravel requirements.
Councillor M. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report
from the City Manager and the Chief of Rehabilitation Services, the low tender, namely, that of Grove Constr-
uction Ltd. in the amount of $967.00, be accepted for the demolition of the City-owned property situate at 203
Sydney Street, providing that proof of the necessary insurance coverage can be provided,
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report from the City Manager, the
following bids be accepted for operating canteen concessions at various Recreation Department locations, the same
having met the conditions of the tender, and being all the bids received:-
Location Name of Bidder Amount of Bid
Rockwood Park Golf Course and
Dominion Park (combined) James M. Olive $1,910.00
Park Mrs. Lorena Young $ 400.00
isher Lakes D. A. Haggarty $3,250.00
412
~
CflI/te. GJ/,a,-e
C'.iit-€!/' / J?j'
c,.~ ~~r.
(JliI e.f'f I4A
~(.{/ / ~inf oS
(/17/~h $~,
-t11i3#/t!
"e~",/~t/O)?S
(p"~l1:$e'L ..[-
~17i~<I S~~
(?'o;n"",.
t/!p"js ~6%- ,
7i'....~l! 7Jiv.
(See' dnenL-
Pled be/au~
""'"
fhJlgn- {lJ~
(,.{/a/er!oo $Is,
i~'c r/P!'~
The above noted tender report advised that one reply, that of White Glove Catering, did not
comply with the terms and conditions of the tender and was therefore not included in the bid summary.
Councillor MacGowan felt that it would be interesting, at least, for the Council to see White Glove
Catering's submission, not for this year, but before another year, because it may be something that the
Council should be looking at, in the meantime and it may be something we could find to our advantage. She
stated that she found this company's submission very interesting.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager in reply to the
request made at the Council meeting of March 22nd, 1976 for a statement on the contracts that have been
made and the offers that have been received for any of the Old City Hall buildings during the last five
years, and noting, in summary, that the City's position up to very recently has been that the Old City
Hall buildings were a site for a new development and, now, the City is actively exploring a re-use of the
existing buildings on the site, be received and filed.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting a
copy of a tentative plan prepared by the Traffic Division of the Works Department concerning traffic
changes on Union Street and the central business district, with regard to Common Council resolution of
February 9th last which requested the Traffic and Safety Committee to advise the Council at the earliest
possible time on the possibility of making Union Street two-way for its entire length, and to recommend
whether or not parking should be permitted on either side of Union Street -- and noting that the major
points, as summarized on the first page of the report, indicate that changes should not be made on Union
Street alone, without looking at the resultant effect on the uptown traffic, and that the report further
recommends a number of parking restrictions which must be changed and enforced in order to make the plan a
workable solution, but more importantly it points out the necessary liaison and feed-back required from
all agencies and groups in the central business district in order to make the plan work; and advising that
the report has been forwarded to a number of agencies for their comments and the staff would certainly
recommend that, until these reports are forthcoming, that no changes be made to the traffic pattern on
Union Street; and further advising that, from a technical point of view, if it is decided to proceed
further with the suggestion, capacity analyses have to be carried out of all the intersections in the area
to ensure that the intersections will function when changes are made, and that a preliminary capacity
analysis; included as an Appendix to the report, of the Union Street - Charlotte Street intersection,
indicates that a simple change to a two-way operation on Union Street itself will not function in an
'acceptable manner -- and pointing out that the estimated cost of putting all the changes proposed into
effect would be approximately $7,500.00; and advising that because of the limited Traffic Engineering
staff available, the limited budget for that Department, and the need for effort in many other areas of
Traffic Engineering, the City Manager recommends that the City not proceed with two-way traffic on Union
Street, between Sydney and Charlotte Streets -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted. ' _
I
.
Councillor Kipping stated that when the above named report was first asked for, it was not the
intention that sort of a "Federal case" be made of it. He added that what has happened is that the I
Council has got really an excellent report and a thorough and very comprehensive one, and it agrees with
many of the things that have been said about the traffic problem uptown - but, it is too comprehensive and
big a report - this is not really what was asked for, and it will take some convincing to convince him
that a simple matter can be made so complicated; he knows there are other considerations any time you make
a change in the traffic pattern - that is logical - but the City Manager, for one thing, in his covering
memorandum, has made one recommendation in paragraph three, and then "kills" it in his final recommend-
ation '- that is, that~nEaragraph three the City Manager says that the report has been forwarded to a
number of agencies for their comments and the staff would certainly recommend that, until these reports
are forthcoming, that no changes be made to the traffic pattern on Union Street. Councillor Kipping
stated that that paragraph makes sense - we should wait - and he certainly would be willing to wait for
reports from other agencies uptown, and agencies that are interested in the traffic problem of the city,
as every citizen is, and we want all the in-put we can get. He noted that the City Manager's memorandum
then goes on in the final recommendation, that has just been moved in the above motion, to recommend that
because of the reasons listed in the said memorandum, the City not proceed with two-way traffic on Union
Street, between Sydney and Charlotte Streets. He stated that he goes along with the reason "and the need .
for effort in many other areas of Traffic Engineering" cited in the said memorandum in this regard. He
commented that the said recommendation "kills" very effectively the whole question - in other words, even
after the agencies that have been contacted, report, there is no avenue open to consider the matter
again - and if that is the wish of Council, he would like to move the following amendment to the motion.
Moved in amendment by Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the following words be added to the above motion,
"at this time, but that the proposal be brought forward by staff for reconsideration as soon as reports
are received from the other agencies which have been contacted".
I
Councillor M. Vincent observed that the area of Union and Sydney Streets seems to be the problem
area as it relates to his support of the matter, in one sense. He stated he is curious about where the
down-flow of traffic from Charlotte Street, along Union Street, heading towards Sydney Street goes when it
rosses the intersection, because if the traffic is coming down Waterloo Street and takes a right-hand
turn on to Union Street, according to the drawing that accompanies the report, the traffic coming down
Union Street is going to meet head-on. Councillor Parfitt noted that the City-owned property at the corner
of Union and Waterloo Streets (the former E. Clinton Brown building) was demolished for the purpose of
facilitating traffic movement at this corner and stated she would like to see something done in this
regard, and that she is wondering when the right turn into Waterloo Street will be recommended that the
said building was demolished for. She added that the power poles are still there, but you could almos~
make an entry into Waterloo Street, the way it is. In reply to the point made by Councillor M. Vincent
regarding the said drawing, Mr. Barfoot advised that the arrows on Union Street on the front page of the
said report have been placed on the wrong side of the street. Councillor Higgins felt that the problem is
solved, regarding the right-hand turn from Union Street in to Waterloo Street, because you go from Prince
Edward to Dorchester Streets before you can make a right-hand turn - and that that is where the big
traffic clog is. Councillor Kipping advised that the intent of the amendment is that when we hear from'
the said other agencies, the matter be brought back to Council for reconsideration the whole matter.
I
.
Question being taken to the above motion, as amended, the said motion as amended was carried
with Councillors Kipping and MacGowan, the Mayor and Councillors Higgins, Gould, Parfitt, Pye and Green
voting "yea" and Councillors Cave, Davis and M. Vincent voting "nay".
~
r"
'41a
.
I
I
.
I
.
{,(/elf!/-
1(k~tr'-d;~
21~- 4"a.
I {}'ty 3b!;;;.fit;.
~1717.,.?e.&/S.
CU/1?"'.
7f'e-;?ohinq
Joh" ~u7
l7?e....~.,(-f~.
1E>,?"4l9'htS in.
/'fZlt .~?~/A
,Ptd.~ /DJ.
().J::8'/PI!'I t!.
Jrt"n&'.on
. ",.,
k5-1-...7},klh.
~xeh
lIl....
Councillor Kipping, in connection with the above disucssed matter, asked that the City Manager see that
he is supplied with the names of those agencies which have been contacted, because he wants to follow up on it.
Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply.
A revised draft of the proposed Weight Restrictions By-Law was considered at this time.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Weight Restrictions
Within The City of Saint John Enacted Under Authority of Section 262(1) of The Motor Vehicle Act" be read a third
time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Councillor Higgins expressed the view that there are times of the year in Saint John when very stringent
by-laws should be in effect involving weight restrictions applicable to vehicles using city streets and highways,
and that anybody would go along with such measures for a certain period of time that we might be in harmony with
the weight restrictions dicates of the Provincial by-laws, but he cannot see such restrictions being imposed for
twelve months of the year. He noted that this would have a restrictive effect on business operations such as the
ready-mix company located on Somerset Street, if these restrictions were imposed for a twelve-month period each
year. Mr. Barfoot noted that it was the intent, he believes, that this by-law (which is actually modelled on the
by-law that was previously enforced, which had a twelve-month life) would only require to be enforced when the
Provincial weight restrictions were enforced. Councillor Higgins replied that if that is the intent of this
proposed by-law, he would like to see it spelled out in the by-law that such is the intent. He asked the City
Solicitor to state whether the draft by-law sets forth the said intent, or whether such intent should be set
forth in the said by-law. Mr. Rodgers replied that the by-law does not state the said intent, and that the
previous by-law did not say it - what has been happening, he believes, is that the by-law is only being enforced
this time of the year and not being enforced during the remaining period of the year, the same as the Motor
Vehicle Act is not being enforced for ten months of the year. He stated that if the Council is afraid of the
fact that the by-law will be enforced rigidly twelve months of the year, then he can see the by-law creating a
problem, and a section can be added that this by-law is to be effective and to remain in force and effect until
such and such a date, if the Council so wishes. Councillor Higgins stated that he would like to see this by-law
in harmony with the Provincial weight restrictions, and that the City Solicitor prepare the proper wording so
that he can move an amendment to the by-law to that effect, so that it can be spelled out in the by-law that the
restrictions only apply for a certain period of the year. He noted that what the Council is trying to do is save
the roads in this city at the critical period of the year - not to strangle the construction boom in the city _
and he thinks there is another facet the Council has to look at. He wants to know if something can be written
into the by-law that is commonsense and can be observed. Councillor Davis interjected that notice can be inserted
in the newspaper regarding the times the by-law would be in force. Mr. Rodgers advised that you can put the
effective period of time for the by-law in the by-law, or you can instruct the staff to bring in a recommendation
to have the by-law repealed within six weeks. He stated that he would suggest that the recommendation come forward
within two months, if two months is satisfactory, that the by-law be repealed. Councillor Higgins proposed a
motion, that was not seconded, that the by-law be amended as suggested by Mr. Rodgers. Councillors MacGowan and
Higgins noted that it should be worked in that it is very plain that although truck routes and weight restrictions
are two different things, this is the truck route for the city and these are the weight restrictions between cer'.
tain dates. Councillor Higgins added that that is what he is after in the proposed by-law, and in two months we
should come in with maybe two different by-laws - one, setting truck routes, and one, setting weight limitations
and the times involved. Councillor Green spoke in support of the points made by Councillor Higgins. Councillor
Kipping stated he had thought that section 3(b) of the draft by-law was the one that the Council was concerned
with, and that was a provision so that those who were violating could pay their fines voluntarily, and that was
the reason for the new by-law. He noted that all the rest of the by-law has been in force and effect since some
period of time, so that the only real change we are making in the by~law is so that the voluntary fines can be
paid by those who have violated and are caught, to the Chief of Police or other person authorized by him. He
stated that he, too, has been in touch with some of the concrete mix people and they have a real problem - the
ones on Somerset Street, for example, under the provisions of this by-law, will not be able to come out of their
plant with their trucks if this by-law is enforced the way the law says it should be enforced - so there is going
to have to be a lot of judicious reasoning used in the enforcement of it or there will be no houses built, or no
anything built, in the City of Saint John, during the period which the weight limitations are in effect. He
asked the opinion of the City Solicitor, if the proposed by-law is going to be put through, on the addition of
four words to section 3(b) after the word prosecution at the end of that section, namely, "regarding that specific
'violation". He stated that if those words are not added there is an enormous loophole there, in his opinion.
Mr. Rodgers stated that he believes that if Council is going to get into this area, and the Council has every
right to, the by-law should be referred back for re-study and re-drafting, because he does not believe this is
the area to draft and re-draft by-laws.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for re-drafting of
the proposed Weight Restrictions By-Law by the Legal Department.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee recom-
mending that the Council not approve the application of John Paul Realty Ltd. for re-zoning of a parcel of land
behind 582-586 Sand Cove Road (opposite Young Street) from the present "R-IB" One-Family Residential to "RM-l"
Multiple Residential classification, for the reasons given in the Committee's letter dated April 14th, 1976, be
received and filed and the said recommendation be adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Advisory
Committee, the Common Council accept the following sums of money in lieu of land for public purposes with respect
to the following named sub-divisions:-
1. from Gre~ory C. Renton, L-29 - the sum of $456.00 (the Renton property at 264 Sherbrooke Street, West, consists
of a 100 by 100-foot lot which contains Mr. Renton's home; the Committee is allowing the division of the property
into two 50-foot lots, one of which will contain a new dwelling; the now vacant lot has been appraised by the
Property Management Branch at $5,700.00 and the sum to be paid to the City at 8% of the market value is'$456.00);
2. from the Estate of D. Kin~ Hazen, S-29 - the sum of $360.00 (the proposed D. King Hazen sub-division lies on
the westerly side of Red Head Road and includes a portion of the Hazen Creek estuary - the proposal is to divide
41:4
~
SoT //sf' ah7.M
l~ee '? #/6')
C'eLal" n:
;?!Q.6//4 Home
'P~/"A-
it into three lots; at its October 28th, 1975 meeting, the Planning Advisory Committee granted approval to
the sub-division, subject to the approval of the Department of Health and to a note on the plan with '
respect to lot 75-3 stating that no building or structure shall be erected on lot 75-3 because, in the
opinion of the Committee, the site is marshy, subject to flooding and otherwise unsuitable by virtue of
its soil and topography; because lot 75-3 is unsuitable for building purposes, the Committee dealt with
the proposed sub-division as if only two lots were being created out of the single one that is there now _
the money in lieu of land for public purposes may, therefore, be charged against only one lot which is one
of the resulting lots - the value of that lot is $4,500.00 and at 8%, the sum to be paid to the City is
$360.00) .
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission,
dated April 12th, '1976, further to the Commission's request made at the meeting of Common Council of March
8th, 1976 that the Commission lease the City-owned mobile home park at Cedar Point from the City to allow
the Commission to operate this mobile home park at the existing income as set forth in the City budget _
which request was set over pending receipt by Council of further information - advising that the Com-
mission has made enquiry and has determined the information set forth in the letter of April 12th, 1976,
and further advising that the Commission therefore again raises the question as to why the said mobile
home park, which in fact is a form of housing development, should be the exception to the normal rule of
City policy -- and respectfully submitting that with the said information the Council will be able to give
a policy decision on the Commission's request, and that the Commission be allowed to operate the said
mobile home park for one year on a trial basis -- be received and filed and permission be granted for one
year on a trial basis.
During ensuing discussion the Council members asked the following questions and made the fol-
'lowing points: what is the purpose of the Commission's request, bearing in mind that they would still have
to use City staff and if we need more money to even break even in the operation of the said mobile home
park, cannot the City, under Mr. Buck, move that the increases (in lot rentals) take place; when the
matter was before Council at a previous time there was a report from the City staff which gave what was
considered sound reasoning as to why the Housing Commission should not be involved in the mobile home park
and, after reading the items listed in the above mentioned presentation from the Commission, there is not
any reason why any of those items should change Council's mind in this regard; does the City Manager know
if there was another meeting held in the Housing Commission? who was present? was there a motion prepared
that the said report from the Commission be prepared the way it was and forwarded to Council, or whether
it was prepared from one or two people's thoughts, only?; it is not acceptable to set up another organ-
ization and employ more staff to administer this park because it is bound to cost more money to do so -_
the City, through the Real Estate Department, is able to have this park administered in accord with what
is asked for by Council -- the Council tried to go ahead and make this particular mobile home park pre-
sentable under the Mobile Home Parks By-Law and two years ago the rents of the residents of the park were
raised, and the thought was that the City as a land owner should set an example for the rest of the mobile
home park owners in the area in improving the City-owned park, which is what the Council did -- it is felt
that if the administration of this park is turned over to the Rousing Commission it will only cause "head-
achesfl -- if the Council so wishes, in o~der to increase the revenues from this park it can raise the
rents on the lots in this mobile home park; the Council should very seriously consider the accusations
made in the above noted memorandum from the Saint John Housing Commission that are levelled against the
group in the City which is presently responsible for the operation of the said park, and Council should
hear answers on it and must not pass it off very lightly by saying that Council should not make any
change, because, sometimes, a change very drastically needs to be made, and one of our problems, it seems,
is that we do not like change enough to make enough; it is not true that the Land Committee has extended
its terms of reference to include management of its mobile home park - the management of the said park is
by the Real Estate Department and the Land Committee has taken it over because the Housing Commission
would not take it over - they would not take over the management of any of the City's properties - it is
the same staff involved, it is the Real Estate Department - the Land Committee has so much to do that it
is certainly not anxious to get involved in trailer parks or residences, or anything of that nature - but
there is a gap, and the Rousing Commission will not use the Real Estate Department - it is not known why _
the City has a complete and totally knowledgeable staff in the Real Estate Department, and there is an
aloofness, and the Housing Commission is trying to say that the Land Committee is making all these false
statements -- the Land Committee does not make these statements -- the Land Committee was not involved in
the matter before but the previous Council did a lot of work on this Cedar Point'Mobile Home Park (and it
was not a unanimous decision, at all, by the Council) and decided to go into debt -- the Land Committee is
totally innocent in this matter and it does not want to have anything to do with anything except City-
owned lands or City-owned easements or rights-of-way or anything that is involved with that -- where does
the Housing Commission get the information that is quoted in the Commission's letter of April 12th,
1976? -- it is suggested that if this sort of thing continues that something should be done stop it _ it
is not right for two City agencies to get into conflict like this - it should not be condoned, and it
should be settled and settled once and for all -- if the Housing Commission which says it has been oper-
ating for decades managing a group of homes in Rockwood Court, is so experienced it should know how to
handle this -- it is not known what the Housing Commission wants in this particular matter before Council.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
Councillor MacGowan, a member of the Saint John Housing Commission, spoke in reply to question
of experience on the part of the Housing Commission, which was. raised by Councillor Davis, advising that
the said Commission has had experience and has operated the houses in Rockwood Court very satisfactorily
for a number of years. Councillor Davis asked who has been operating this housing. Councillor MacGowan's
reply was that it was the Housing Commission that operated the said housing. In reply to the question
raised by Councillor M. Vincent regarding who was present at the Rousing Commission meeting, and who was
the author of the Commission's memorandum, Councillor MacGowan stated that it was the Chairman of the
mobile home parks committee of the Housing Commission and he submitted this report and the members who I
were there are in favour of this report - the chairman of the said mobile home parks committee is Mr. Eric
Teed. With regard to the statement that this was turned down by the Council, Councillor MacGowan stated
that in that first paragraph if this is correct - and she stated she believes it is - the Rousing Commission's
request was set over pending receipt of further information, and the Commission, she believes, has been
waiting almost a year for that information, and that is why the Chairman decided that he would get out the
information because staff apparently was too busy to do it - she added that this is the understanding of
the Housing Commission members. Councillor M. Vincent noted that his question was: was this a report or a
further correspondence from the Rousing Commission, or from a member of the Commission? Councillor
MacGowan replied that this was submitted to the Housing Commission, and came to Council with the Com~
mission members' approval.
The Mayor asked if Mr. Park could add any information regarding this matter, that might be of .
help to the Council. Mr. Park recalled that a year ago, at the request of the Housing Commission, the
Finance Department submitted a report on the operation of Cedar Point Trailer Park covering the period
1965 to 1974 - the same report was later submitted to Council, just for information purposes - in that
report, when the Finance Department prepared it, it was pointed out that it gave substantially a picture
....1
,....
;4"5
, A
I
of the whole operation - there were a number of items not included because it is, from some points of view, a
relatively small operation and from its inception 'there had been no attempt made to cost its expenses ,completely
separately from other department functions where they are handled by one department: for instance, supervision,
billing and collection are handled by Real Estate or by the Collections section of the Finance Department, just
as part of their general activities, and there was not at any time an attempt made to separately determine the
cost of those operations - but, substantially, the report showed the'rental income from the operations and it
showed the expenditure for real estate taxes, water and sewer rates, and the maintenance costs, and repairs - and
it showed the capital cost and the quite considerable debt charges that are related to the expenditure that has
been made over a period of eleven years or so on that area. He stated that the report itself pointed out the
lack of information in certain areas and the report now in front of Council from the Housing Commission is simply
repeating what had been said in that report that was given to Council. He added that his recollection is that
about two years ago an extremely detailed report was prepared on Cedar Point Trailer Park by the staff of the
Planning Department dealing with the operation more from an economic point of view rather than an accounting
point of view, and that dealt with the trailer park operation as it had been from its inception in 1962 or 1963,
onwards, and it at that time analyzed the economic benefits of the considerable capital expenditure that was
being discussed in relation to that park at that time. He stated that he therefore thinks there have been a
considerable amount of information put together, and he does not know that there is anything new in the letter
that is presently in front of Council - but he felt it might be worthwhile to have this letter compared more or .
less item by item with the contents of those two reports to which he had just referred that had gone to Council _
to see if there is any conflict. He added that he does not really think there is any conflict, but it is a
question of determining how the Council wants to manage that particular park. Councillor Kipping felt that the
Council should get copies of the reports referred to by Mr. Park and make the comparison with the Housing Com-
mission's submission so that Council can determine its veracity, and when Council does that, he believes the
Council will be in a better position to discuss the implications of this, which could be quite serious. Councillor
Gould asked if it is a true statement that the projected loss for 1976 will be some $18,000.00 (as set forth in
the Housing Commission's letter), and Mr. Park replied that he would not dispute that - it is probably correct.
Councillor Gould noted that the reference in item 22 of the Commission's letter regarding the Council having a
policy of subsidizing a mobile home park by taxpayers' money is obviously true. He asked when that policy was
established. Mr. Park replied that he believes it was established in 1962.
I)
.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the Council receives
the details of the two reports that were referred to by Mr. Park in the preceding discussion.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
On motion of Councillor Davis
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that on
~~)?#l' ~~Pr December 19th, 1975 a recommendation was made to Council to purchase 9,000 square feet of land owned by Varta
Batteries Ltd. on Fairville Boulevard as the land was required to provide access to land to the rear being sold
~~~, to Streb & Little, and that on January 26th, 1976 the Committee requested that the City provide Varta with a
~~/~ revised survey plan and also provide that water will not drain onto Varta's property and the Council tabled this
~~~ request pending receipt of a report from the Works Department estimating the cost of acceding to Varta's require_
~1 ,j. /~/~ ments respecting drainage of surface water from their property (WhiCh report was submitted at the March 1st, 1976
Q/~~e~~/~~ Council meeting); and further advising that this matter became unnecessarily complicated by a misunderstanding
of what was intended and that to clarify the situation the Committee's recommendation should read that the City
bear the cost of the revised survey and that the roadway be designed and constructed in such a manner that the
present problem respecting the drainage of surface water onto Varta's property located on Fairville Boulevard
will not be aggravated by the presence of the proposed roadway -- be received and filed and the Council accept
the said recommendation of the Land Committee, namely:- that the City, at the City's expense, provide Varta
Batteries Ltd. with a revised survey plan and that the roadway be designed and constructed in such a manner that
~et:::!~ ~~ the present problem respecting the drainage of surface water onto Varta's property located on Fairville Boulevard
;W~ will not be aggravated by the presence of the proposed roadway -- this wording being an addition to the recom-
?,P~ ~~ mendation made by the Land Committee to Council on December 19th, 1975 regarding the City purchasing the said
d~ ~~V/~ 9,000 square feet of property on Fairville Boulevard and continuing along the City right-of-way.
.
2J/vd.
Councillor Davis explained that what Varta Batteries Ltd. wanted in the above matter was that the water
running down the road should not spill on to their property, and that the Committee has been assured now that
this company is agreeable to what the Committee has recommended as noted above, and that everything would be just
fine. Councillor MacGowan asked if the City can guarantee that it will not be aggravated - that if it is des-
igned as we think it is going to be, there will not be a problem. She felt that this is a ticklish thing to deal
with, and stated she does not like the City committing itself. She added that we think we are going to do it and
we are going to endeavour to build this roadway so it will be constructed the right way, but to say it will not
be aggravated, she does not see how that can be promised.
I
Councillor MacGowan voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Pye
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
. . RESOLVED that the letter from the Minister of Environment, Province of
~q.~P'/~- New Brunswick, advising that the period from May 8th to 29th, 1976 has been designated as clean-up time in New
~eJ.1~/?~ Brunswick and that the Department of the Environment, in co-operation with other government bodies, will conduct
'PPfll/, t:Tt1vi: a province-wide clean-up of highways and public places, with a view to making New Brunswickers more aware of the
th?~).7-~~ importance of a clean environment, and inviting the support of the City of Saint John by having Saint John
~~~;~~ participate in this campaign, and further advising that regional committees are being set up to co-ordinate the
jf campaign and members ~f these committees, the Provincial Co-ordinator, and members of the Provincial Steering
Committee will be available to help in any way possible, be received and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent asked when the report he had requested regarding the City's curbside garbage
collection system, will' be available. Mr. Barfoot replied that the report is in the process of preparation and
will be in, very shortly, in one week.
.
Councillor MacGowan stated that she feels it is most appropriate that this Council go on record at this
time of commending Radio Station C F B C for its project of citizen involvement along with that station in
encouraging the citizens to clean up the area, and that she feels it is a "fantastic" project.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
t't1h?~d~~'
(1FJ}c
C'!eeil#-U-,t?
t!8n'lf?aqn
C F B C
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that a letter of
for the Station's pilot project in cleaning up the city.
commendation be forwarded to Radio Station
It....
418
~
.7:'fl///';;'titI /'~I'~
~seb// -//e/L,
,tahCH~t~ r,
G!Mt'17t16~k C~(
71et'n~ ~rh r
J?e- At?h/J?..%-
KD/~rl7 ~
men6 '<-6(:
P/~lJn, ,.9~V'/S" .
Ci?m_ ,
t"t? /7;m, VP' hole
LEG A L
C7/-t-/? Spbc/CPJ
Gr/evcWce
~hUh Lhal"/61,
s.r ,ci';.e H.7:. -.~
/J~$O~. /YO- 77/
Ill'bl'n..i>l'hp17
tJ,m-m. #he>/e
Councillor Davis commented that he does not feel it is necessary to commend a radio station on
such a matter because he thinks it is a radio station's duty, as well as it being the duty of every
newspaper, citizen and Councillor, to try to keep this city clean. Councillor MacGowan pointed out that .
we have asked for the co-operation of the media in this regard.
Councillor Kipping withdrew from the meeting.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried.
Councillor Kipping re-entered the meeting.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from,Mr. J. Wilfred Turner of 194 Greendale
Crescent, Saint John West, with regard to the location of the baseball diamond adjacent to Greendale
Crescent, be referreQ to the Recreation and Parks Department for a report, which report is to include
information regarding how long the said baseball diamond has been there, and regarding the people who are
complaining about its location.
I
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
I
Councillor Kipping stated he had asked the Recreation and Parks Department whether somebody
would be present at this meeting in public so that some of these questions could be answered so that it
could be made public at this time. He recalled that the matter has already been made public, two or three
times, and the answers are very clear. He asked if the questions that are raised in Mr. Turner's letter
could be answered, and he noted that, apparently, the question is: can the baseball diamond be relocated
to the other end of the field. Mr. McCaig replied that the Recreation Department has attempted on several
occasions to look at other ways of providing two baseball fields in that area, and from the shape of the
City-owned parcel of land it is impossible to move the field away from the residential are~- so that is
why the plan that the Department has now is the best solution that it could come up with, with the existing
parcel of land. With regard to the request that home plate be moved from one corner of the field to the
other corner, he advised that the Department tried that, and to get the softball and the baseball field in
there, it is impossible to switch it around because there is not sufficient land. Councillor Kipping
stated that he understands that the arcs of the two playing fields overlap. With regard to the point made
in Mr. Turner's letter regarding parking being available by the location of the baseball diamond at the
other end of the field (adjacent to Dever Road), thus saving the City the expense of having to duplicate
parking and Mr. Turner's information that the two vacant lots adjacent to Dexter Drive are City-owned and
are to be made into a parking area, Mr. McCaig replied that this is not correct: there are two City-owned
vacant lots there, he added. Councillor Kipping stated that he understands that one of those two vacant
lots is a right-of-way for a sewer. Mr. McCaig confirmed this, and stated that it is not the intention
that those two vacant lots be used for parking.
.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Kipping and MacGowan voting !'nay".
Councillor Gould advised that a re-zoning application has been received from Eastern Investments I
Ltd. and he asked if the Council would consider it at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the said application be added to the agenda at this
time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the application submitted by Eastern Investments
~ Ltd. for re-zoning of property on the Latimer Lake Road, comprising half an acre, for the purpose of
converting the building used in a poultry business to future use for the making of trusses chiefly for the
construction business of the said company, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recom-
mendation, and authority be given to advertise this proposed re-zoning.
.
Councillor Cave advised that he understands that the above named firm is very anxious to get
started at making trusses' under a contract with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to erect over
twenty homes in the area where there are services, and that the poultry building in which these trusses
would be made is located 400 feet from the main road. He suggested that we do as much as possible to get
this operation started, which is a carpentry business and does not create any noise.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole during which Councillor Hodges entered the meeting
and Councillors Green, A. Vincent, Parfitt and M. Vincent withdrew from the meeting, the Committee arose
and the Mayor resumed the Chair in legal session of Common Council, at 9.10 o'clock p.m.
I
CQnslderation was given to the letter from the City Solicitor, dated April 15th, 1976, which
refers to the grievance submitted to Common Council in Committee of the Whole on April 5th, 1976 by the
Saint John Fire Fighters' Association, Local Union No. 771, on behalf of Lieutenant Gordon Charlton, and
the decision made by the Fire Chief that Lieutenant Charlton was responsible for the loss of the equipment
concerned in the grievance. The letter recommends that the Council reverse its decision, in view of the
points made in this letter, and request that the Chief and Lieutenant Charlton discuss this matter within
the confines of Section 22 of the Rules and Regulations. The letter outlines the procedure that can then
be followed, thereafter, if the Fire Chief is of the opinion that the lost article is personal equipment.
I
Consideration was also given to a letter from the said Association, dated April 10th, 1976,
advising that in regard to the decision of Common Council in Committee of the Whole on April 5th, 1976 to
deny this grievance of Lieutenant Charlton, the Association is proceeding to arbitration; and to a letter
from the Association, dated April 12th, 1976, advising that the Association's nominee to the Arbitration
Board in this matter is Professor P. J. Fitzpatrick of Fredericton, N. B.
Considerable discussion ensued, during which the point was made by Councillor Gould, in regard
to the recommendation made by the City Solicitor's above named letter for reversal of the Council's
decision made in Committee of the Whole on April 5th last regarding the grievance of Lieutenant Charlton, .
that only those members of Council who should reverse their decision should be those who heard the griev-
ance on April 5th last, and that it should be determined at this time who was present at that April 5th
hearing when the said decision was made to deny the grievance. Mr. Rodgers, in light of the point made by
Councillor Gould, suggested that maybe the matter should be laid on the table for a week. He noted that
his letter is recommending that the Council reverse its said decision of April 5th last on the way that
~
JII"'"
.
1?es~/IJ~/J?
me?t/t?>7
r:J,./efldlJee
GenLt?n
tY;ar/-t--pn
5TI'li.e/i'
t9>5()(:!, o,m
I F,',.e Ch/e
1f~/p:l5 CJI-
'Rt?fK/d-i
F,,,e :7Jt;d:
(;! r//?(/ci1 J7ee
I
S:T1b~:
1f.utBL4.ss"C'
/Ytl,6/
rPl'/wanee
I'e t!()It.~S
p<<.tfs/d'e II .
. eAI'pf' 7b~a-
/l,.b/~Nd/{)
:l31t .
/ll'thW,..1. .
C-ou/d
1r~~~c-
5'.,fef'-,~e /7
ah~~t:
ep, Ltc
I
.
1
I
LEG A L
,(e~/.7J'fPc.
1f, ~k
searc./es ~
ct/~1'4
lfao/~rdUS~
e,t!! ~c/..,ft1
.~Uh. ~/1.
.....
ill:&'
the matter was interpreted and the way it was proceeded with.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the resolution adopted by Common Council in Committee of the
Whole on April 5th, 1976, to deny the grievance presented by Saint John Fire Fighters' Association, Local Union
No. 771, on behalf of Lieutenant Gordon Charlton, be rescinded, and that the Fire Chief and Lieutenant Charlton
be requested to discuss the matter in question within the confines of Section 22 of the Saint John Fire Depart-
ment Rules and Regulations:
AND FURTHER that the Fire Chief and the said Association be advised that if the Fire Chief, as he has
stated, is of the opinion that the lost article is personal equipment, then it is not a matter of discretion with
respect to a decision by the Chief but an automatic responsibility on Lieutenant Charlton to pay for the lost
article, and if that occurs then a grievance can come forward under that section of the Rules and Regulations and
the issue may proceed without any reference to a disciplinary offence, and if the Chief wishes to pursue the
disciplinary action, and a penalty is warranted, as well, he is obligated to impose a penalty within the limits
of Section 62(a) which defines the penalties and remedies available for the offence under the Disciplinary Code.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter dated April 19th, 1976 from the Saint John
Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. advising that the decision of Common Council in
Committee of the Whole on April 5th, 1976, to deny the Association's grievance which charged a violation by
management of Article 6(1) of the 1975-1976 Working Agreement between the City of Saint John and the Association
in that orders given by the Chief of Police instructing members to attend courses outside the boundaries of the
City of Saint John are unlawful, is not satisfactory to the said Union and that the Union is, therefore, prepared
to go to arbitration as per Article 12(1) of the said Working Agreement, and further advising that the Union's
nominee for the Arbitration Board is Mr. Robert Lockhart, 1005 Kennebecasis Drive, Saint John, N. B., be received
and filed and Mr. Arthur L. Gould be the nominee of the City to the said Board.
Prior to the making of the above motion, Councillor Pye nominated Mr. Arthur L. Gould for appointment
as the City's nominee to the above named Arbitration Board.
Mr. Barfoot advised that he intends to submit a recommendation to the next meeting of Council with
regard to making a slight variation in the contract provisions on asphalt prices between the City and Stephen
Construction Company Limited. He explained briefly the details in this regard.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Commo
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-sixth day
of April, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
;
Councillors Cave, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye, and A. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, and. H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager
Mr. Rodgers had placed on the agenda an item relating to Legal Department staff, and he explained that
he did so mainly to make comment on the fact that title searches are required with respect to properties in
enforcement of the fire prevention regulations and with respect to dilapidated and dangerous buildings. He noted
that Councillor ~I. Vincent, who had raised the question about taking, action regarding the number of dilapidated
or burned-out buildings in the city and about this being expedited when it is possible to search property titles
and establish ownership more quickly, was not present at this time, and stated that he would prefer to discuss
the matter when Councillor M. Vincent would be present. Mr. Rodgers then proceeded to discuss the difficulties
e was experiencing in obtaining prospective solicitor staff for the Legal Department. The Council members
agreed to postpone further discussion of the matter until Councillor M. Vincent was present.
Councillor Higgins entered the meeting during the aforegoing discussion.
Consideration was given to the letter from the City Manager dated April 23rd, 1976, which submits
correspondence from the Commissioner of Finance regarding payment by the City of a total of $7,809.19 to the City
418
.Lh.5 ar.;l /J~ e
C/dl/??S
Tlt~:; ~.fe"
f(el7/li!?t-h
~~ fr.///yrey
12:r?~I/JI/1C'(/ 5.7.
~::::'hSl'l/lh '/'
/lri-6KI" .(, ~
{1~,s Ol(-I~hte
t!lt-fl; ?,D~~e 'JJe.
OAt e--r ,?o~'ee
/J"bl'in;;r&-IOJ? Jj,t'.
Jkh77/$ kh;~t
~/J?Q t'ek>sle J
PeIfHr E CrC1A:!/
71Q1?las C~Jier
CrP-.!t /iffI'!
Cf6~ ..)b;/4rior
C,.lel/J1l?~e
S. 7:1b//(!~m!?h;
?,.u/t?ct-" #S.5~-
Fines ('pa~
-f.!OI"'~/'u fie)
l1uksd~~
cr~1t?P~
t'tlh?m, ~t11e
1?"!p1 ~hnL/.
s~ t:b,u-t-a.
.J/.A14.s! 7? o/~!I
/Y4YffJ~ ~
C'/t?.3h-H'p
Cti1/7?'pi!I/ffh
71"r/ 6J7ad/~~
,,( i!f/()J7
1?o-tal'~ e/u.b
If?wtiil7/s CIu.t
{!,,~-t-r.ilC: t
.s~(),.,e- t:>fe,eks
/l /'I~hii1 S
s. :T ::iJevere?fes
1fec/'lA1J~$ ~
~
insurers for claims paid under the 1974 and 1975 Comprehensive General Liability Insurance policies, as
the City's share regarding these claims. It was noted that one of the 1974 claims payable was that of
Titus Bakery (sewer back-up) and the City Solicitor stated that he would like to check this item as
questioned (by Councillor MacGowan) was the claim had been denied by the City's insurers. Another item
that was questioned (by Councillor MacGowan) was the claim of Kenneth MacGillvrey in 1975 for "changed
rotary without proper notice", and information regarding what happened to cause this claim was asked for.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
, RESOLVED that the matter of payment of the sum of $7,809.19 to the
City's insurers relative to Comprehensive General Liability Claims for the fourth quarter of 1975, be laid
on the table for further information regarding the claims of Titus Bakery and Kenneth !lacGillvrey.
Councillor Higgins voted "nay" to the above motion, having suggested that the claims be paid
with 'the exception of the two under question.
Mr. Barfoot reported that Mr. Arthur L. Gould was approached, following Council resolution of
April 20th last which named him as the nominee of the City to the Arbitration Board with regard to the
dispute with Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. in which the Assoc-
iation's grievance charged a violation by management of Article 6(1) of the 1975-1976 Working Agreement in
that orders given by the Chief of Police instructing members to attend courses outside the boundaries of
the City of Saint John are unlawful, which grievance was denied by Council. He advised that !1r. Gould
does not wish to act on this Arbitration Board. The Mayor suggested that Mr. Dennis Knibb be considered
as the City's appointee, and Councillor Hodges suggested that Mr. Lino Celeste be considered in this
regard, as well. !1r. Barfoot advised that two other names that have been mentioned as possible appointee
to the said Board are Mr. Peter E. Grady of Fredericton, and Mr. Thomas Crowther of Saint John.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the City Manager be authorized to approach each of the
above named nominees and make the arrangements for one of the said nominees to be the nominee of the City
of Saint John to the above named Arbitration Board.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated April 23rd,
1976, with reference to the contention of Saint John Policemen's Protective Associatiqn, Local No. 61,
C.U.P.E. that because the current Working Agreement provides for a regular duty day and a regular duty
week, for a weekly rate of pay based on a 40-hour work week, the penalty provision in Article 46(19)(d) of
the Rules and Regulations, that is, forfeiture of pay not to exceed 10 days, is repugnant to the Working
Agreement and therefore invalid -- advising that it is his opinion that Article 46(19) of the Rules and
Regulations, outlining the sentences which may be imposed by the Chief of Police in disciplinary matters,
is not repugnant to the Working Agreement, but stands on its own under the authority of the Rules and
Regulations -- be received and filed and a copy of same be given to the Saint John Policemen's Protective
Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, the Committee arose at 7.00 o'clock p.m. when
there were present Mayor Flewwelling, and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Mac~
Gowan, Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent, and Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commis~
sioner'of Finance, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C. Mac-
Kinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel,
Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector, D. French, Director of
Personnel and Training, 'and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police.
The Mayor withdrew from the meeting and re-entered, escorted by a Colour Guard from the Royal
Canadian Sea Cadet Corps "Rodney".
A prayer, which opened the meeting, was invoked by Captain H. C. Quinn, C.D., Chaplain to Royal
Canadian Sea Cadet Corps "Rodney".
The Colour Guard thereupon withdrew from the meeting.
The Mayor thanked the members of Royal Canadian Sea Cadet Corps "Rodney" for their attendance at
this meeting in observance of Navy League Week, and noted that the Corps receives training through H.M.C.S.
"Brunswicker" in Saint John. Councillor A. Vincent noted that the Cadets are participating in the citizen
clean-up campaign and are to be congratulated for their initiative and effort, which involves doing what
clean-up is needed at'Rockwood Park such as broken glass, et cetera on Saturday next, May 1st.
The Mayor announced that this was the day that the Royal Canadian Legion, along with the Rotarians,
the Kiwanians and some members of Common Council, started the clean up at King Square. He noted that it
is a nice start, and that it is nice to know that citizens are starting to take interest, and he added
that other groups have come forward and have said they will do certain shares - and, here, this evening,
there has been made another offer, and the Council congratulates them for being interested and getting out
and doing the work.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Director
of Recreation and Parks, whose letter of April 20th, 1976 advises that authority was given by Common
Council on September 15th, 1975 for the obtaining of score-clocks for the new City arenas at no cost to
the City and that public advertisement was made in this regard and one offer was received and accepted in
consultation with the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board -'namely, the offer of Saint John Beverages, who
donated all three clocks which have been in operation this past winter -- the Legal Department be requested
to prepare a formal contract for signatures by the Mayor and Common Clerk of the acceptance conditions
between the said donor and the City of Saint John regarding the said donation of score-clocks.
Councillor Parfitt recalled that the clock that was in King Square was a donation to the City
but the City had to expend more in maintenance than the gift cost, she feels. She asked if the gift
score-clocks are guaranteed over a number of years without maintenance. Mr. Barfoot replied that in this
~
.
1
I
.
I
.
I~
I
.
~
,...
.
C','-6~ ,dJfr.
;Pp/ie~ ,.e
I t~I1.t1~l'iJ7q~
'1UcrtdTOh
p,.~t9,tuPe
I /I!.;J/'$h
.f!Ir:,pL
oPl%l"p/
j?Ps/l/nJ
p"QC'/()Y' 9-
7?e~-/'R/'n
'J? 9tll't-
'f1.f7I/, Cod:
· 1I1~I'Y/~
~
,eeL bfwt-.
C,k);/ ~//s
I pOQa a~~
CQI4/7,/l,
(//nt?e nt-
C/i~S~~
F4t Con-. I
/.;Jh,:(, flal\Sl'l
C'~
.
761/(#;/&{
cro5Srn,ff
5j~J?als
e. P. R.
I $..;;"d awe
-;7?,L.
~n.~
(?On1n1.
I
(',t!! 4.fr.
""POll'lrjl7f or-
tlt!IYR/o 1'J91e h-t-
ff 0~);/6rdJ/
N!Jj J[t!'$:;
cClffrict-
. Y. ~Ile
3.T (}Zl1r I'bll
.23(;( S/I?e:iS
.2>E-~,It,1' W?{?I?
C'pr,P-
~III -POI"
/e.!islod'ti-re
.....
4;19,
case it is not quite the same conditions as the clock was in on King Square -- it is one of the contract con
ditions that the City will maintain, whatever the maintenance requires. Councillor Green noted that the gift of
these score-clocks is another example of a good, public-spirited citizen, ~d he felt that the said company is to
be cOngratulated for its stand in being helpful in many areas of the city in having put these clocks in the
arenas.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager in reply to the request
made at the April 12th, 1976 meeting of Council for a report on the City's current procedures on quotations and
tenderings, advising that the current quotations procedure is working well and that it is inexpensive, quick,
covers all local merchants in their lines, and provides the Purchasing Agent with competitive prices and com-
petitive dates of delivery, and further advising that where large items or unusual purchases that might not be
readily available on the local market are requisitioned, the procedure of public tendering as approved by Common
Council is carefully followed - and that the City Manager is satisfied that purchasing procedures are well
handled, the City is well served, and that local merchants are fairly treated -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation contained in the
letter from the City Manager dated April 23rd, 1976, the following position be adopted with respect to Marsh
Creek flood control: the Common Council agrees to adopt Scheme 4.4, as recommended in the Proctor & Redfern
Report of Marsh, 1976, as the Scheme for flood control in the Great Marsh, namely, up-stream reservoirs, channel
improvements, and floodways, for a 100-year design flood, at a total capital cost of $4,400,000.00, under the
following conditions:
1. That discussions be entered into with the Province of New Brunswick to secure funding for the structural work
under the Federal-Provincial Flood Damage Reduction Agreement and any other applicable programmes.
2. Contingent upon successful negotiations for funding, that a staged programme of land acquisition and structural
work, as recommended in the Proctor & Redfern Report, be commenced.
3. Concurrently with the previous steps, that the programme of storm sewer improvements already started to
relieve local flooding problems in Rothesay Avenue and Glen Falls, be continued.
4. That as an interim measure, until the recommended reservoirs are constructed, greater use be made of Mystery
Lake for flood control by draining the Lake to a very low level, and that the Lake be kept empty so that the
total capacity is available for flood storage.
5. That such land use controls as are permitted under the existing legislation be implemented in the Great Marsh
area.
And Further, that priority be given by senior levels of government to work out an acceptable method of funding of
the necessary flood control works in order that funding may be finalized within six months or, if not finalized,
that interim financing be made available so that work on the Scheme can commence during 1976.
Councillor M. Vincent noted that the Council members had been supplied with copies of a letter, dated
April 23rd, 1976, from the Glen Falls Flood Committee, and he stated that in going over the items in the said
letter, and in th~ above noted position paper as introduced by the City Manager, he would like to suggest that
perhaps there might still be some areas that might need further resolve and that if the Council were able to
arrange another meeting between the Mayor and Council and staff as well as the Glen Falls people that it might be
most opportune if this could be done prior to the meeting to be held on May 3rd next - the purpose of such
interim meeting would be to perhaps make sure that we have complete agreement in some of the areas that are going
to come up for discussion. He stated that if the Council would see fit, and if it would be the Council's wish,
to have another short meeting he thinks it might be advantageous. The Mayor agreed with this view. Councillor A.
Vincent asked if the City Solicitor has made a search of the information that he supplied the City Solicitor
with, where there is reason to believe that the Federal Government owns land out there. He noted that he de-
scribed as best he could, without having a jurisdiction dispute with the Bar Association of New Brunswick, where
the City Solicitor would find this information. He stated that he wonders if the City Solicitor has satisfied
himself that the Federal Government does, or does not, own land from Marsh Creek to Russell Street. Mr. Rodgers
replied that the study is in the process of being made; preliminary indications show that the land has been
conveyed away by the Federal Government - however, that is not a firm, final search, as yet. Councillor A.
Vincent asked if the Council will have this information before it meets. Mr. Rodgers made affirmative reply.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is still of the opinion, along with some solicitors in the city, that the
Federal Government does have a legal obligation there because it is a land holder.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that the Canadian
Transport Commission has recommended that two flashing light signals and a bell be installed at the Canadian
Pacific Railways level railway crossing at Sand Cove Road, and that the last estimate of cost by the said Railway
for installation is reckoned in the vicinity of $16,800.00 with annual up-keep at about $650.00, and that the
Commission wishes to know whether or not the City of Saint John will accept twelve and one-half per cent of the
installation cost and fifty per cent of the annual maintenance cost - and further advising that highway traffic
is now quite heavy in this area with numerous gravel trucks, school buses, and private automobiles, the latter
carrying passengers to the Dr. William F. Roberts Hospital, and that railway traffic may be expected to increase
because of the power developments at Lorneville and at Point Lepreau -- and stating that, considering the Canadian
Transport Commission's advice that protection at this crossing is warranted, the City Manager recommends that the
City of Saint John share in the capital and maintenance costs as indicated in this letter, and that the Canadian
Transport Commission be so informed, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that for some years
there has been a growing concern about parking in the central business district of the city and the effect of the
availability of parking on the vitality of the said central business district; that there have been a number of
reports dealing with the said district, including the Comprehensive Community Plan, the Saint John Central Area
Urban Design, and several other reports on the parking aspect of this area; that there are many organizations
concerned with the vitality of the said district, including the Council, Parking Commission, the Planning Ad-
visory Committee, Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee, various other civic committees and commissions,
the Board of Trade, and other private organizations, but there has not been anyone group whose only concern has
been with the central business district; that the Board of Trade is now proposing to present to the current
sitting of the New Brunswick Legislature an Act to incorporate the Saint John Central Business Development
Corporation, and the concept being proposed has been developed in consultation with members of the Parking
Commission and City staff; that the proposed corporation would not be a City commission Or a Board of Trade
committee, but a private organization set up to assist, promote, encourage, co-ordinate and advance the com-
mercial, residential, recreational, cultural, and Civic development and economic welfare of the central business
district; that it could act as an expression of central business district opinion on matters affecting that area,
142.0
~
.zw: 7fflLt!'
~//I /'01" .&#/$4
-t<< Nt?
.5'.:7: ct?~T~ I
~aslJ?Pss.2)e~
"'f!!nr- CO"?_
Jt;,r/rfn1'. Kltb/'
K/n5 ~U.i1l"e
ll~hGlIt- 1'(7.
Slepien ~
(?o, ~&L
C..,,.J~~ ~p~-
-1-/17/7 9jIsie/>1
e'(/.;l/ Kdt-/pn
a~h, t1I V;i7c~J7
OI€$IJ?-K~ (>d"F'
lI17'ydl 't:1~ldi
./~/Im
{'/v/e.L ~~
ZJea~/.,P. a.-H?
,("'~r /,I"~khr
Ph d~1f.s
.&': ~d'e
cree
it could appear before Councilor the Parking Commission, it could engage in promotion work or in devel-
opment work in connection with the central business district; that it is proposed that the said cor-
poration be deemed to be a municipal non-profit corporation and that three Directors of the corporation
be appointed by the Common Council; that the corporation could be somewhat akin to a body such as the'
South End Development Corporation; that the proposed legislation has been reviewed by the City Solicitor
and it is his opinion that the Petition in its present form does not impose any legal liability on the
City; that the City Manager believes that the Council should encourage and support this proposed cor-l
poration as the vitality of the central business district is absolutely essential for the well-being of
the entire City, and the proposed corporation is a means of involving the people most concerned with the
central business district in the planning and realization of its development -- and recommending that the
Common Council support the Board of Trade in its Petition to incorporate a central business development
corporation for the City of Saint John -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Parfitt noted that when we think of the up-town area we think of the parking, and
she asked if there was any talk of using King Square, or underneath it, for a parking lot, would the City
have any say in same. The Council members commented that the City would have all the say in that regard.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
.
1
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the contract with
Stephen Construction Company Limited for the supply of asphaltic mixes be renewed at the following listed
costs per ton, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the renewal of the contract
Tor the period from January 1st, 1976 to December 31st, 1977, the 1976-1977 prices being'-
Type 'of Mix Price per Ton
Binder $11 . 09
Government Mix $11.71
3/8-inch Seal $12.42
Sand Seal $13.06
Councillor MacGowan asked what the going rate for asphalt is, for the homeowner, and for ~
government. Mr. MacKinnon replied that it is approximately $15.00 per ton to other parties and to the
government.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the joint report from the City 11anager and the
Commissioner of Engineering and Works, submitting an evaluation of the present curbside collection system
for garbage of the Sanitation Department, and drawing the conclusion that it is believed that the facts
submitted in this report indicate the worth of the present system - however, the time period involved for
comparison is rather small, and statistics drawn from the programme to date are somewhat suspect, but,
however, they do show trends that are definite, and it is expected that the Department will be able to
further reduce programme expenditures, and that it is expected that a more detailed report could be
prepared at a later date, if required, that would contain more accurate statistics, but a period of some
four to six months should be allowed for study; and advising that it is also believed that it is im-
portant to mention the street cleaning programme which is running concurrently with the garbage col-
lection programme - at the present time, the streets have a great deal of the debris resulting from the
winter period - in addition to the sand and grit, et cetera, the streets are also littered with debris
thrown there by the citizens, and this certainly reflects as a sad commentary on their interest in
keeping a city clean; and further advising that the unclean condition of the streets should not be
confused with the garbage collection programme - only in some instances is garbage being blown on and
around the streets - the co-operation of all the citizens is required in order for both these programmes
to be truly successful -- be received and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that when he requested the above report, he had in mind just
getting information, as is contained in this report. He added that he thinks the report answers some of
the questions that perhaps have arisen since the inception of curbside garbage collection, and some of
the benefits and some of the problem areas, and, also, it touches on the cost factor. He stated that he
thinks it also points out quite clearly to us that perhaps it is too soon to tell just how effectively
the programme is working; he thinks it may very well prove eventually that there may very well be re-
sidential areas of the city where curbside garbage collection will, in fact, work - we may also find out
that there are portions of the city, where there is heavy pedestrian traffic, that the curbside system
simply will not work. He stated that one of the thoughts that he wanted to suggest to Council for its
consideration, and particularly when there are so many groups coming forward now, offering to help; in
the face-lifting of our city at a time when we are being accused of having a city that requires some
uplifting, is something that is done occasionally in the fire services when there is a Provincial em,.
ergency exit drill from people's homes: at a certain day and a certain time the residents of the Province
are asked to practise a method of getting out of their homes in the event of an emergency - and he was
wondering what would happen if, through the efforts of the Council and City staff and perhaps the news
media people, we set a certain day and designate a certain hour in that day when the Council might ask
the citizens of the city to go out in their front yards, back yards, driveways and sidewalks - perhaps in
front of the churches, the schools and even the playgrounds - and have the citizenry pick up a bag of
garbage, ' and handle that in such a way that the next time the garbage trucks come around, depending on
the day and time, that would be put out for collection. He stated he thinks that in that way, we can
involve a tremendous number of people, and it might act as a complement to what was done at the Howe's
Lake dump this last week-end, and in this way it would perhaps involve an entire cross-sectional clean-up
of the city. He suggested that the Council might consider this suggestion and perhaps ask staff to look
at it and see if it is possible and feasible, and bring in a day and an hour when the Council might
consider having it advertised and carried out. The Mayor noted that such a campaign is what the Royal
Canadian Legion is leading in, which clean-up campaign commenced this date.
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's suggestion, Councillor MacGowan, Chairman of the Civic
Improvement and Beautification Committee, pointed out that on either May 21st or 28th next there will be
a clean-up day in the schools of the city, so the schools are already organized. With reference to the
paragraph in the above noted report which comments on the fact that city streets are littered with debris
thrown there by the citizens, Councillor MacGowan pointed out that cigarette butts are a part of such
litter and are'difficult to clean up, and stated she felt that if the citizens would not throw these
butts on the streets the result would be much cleaner streets. She noted that the Saint John Board of
Trade is also getting involved in the current city clean-up campaign, and she felt that it sounds like a
fantastic response to our request. She stated she would like to make special reference to the wonderful
response that took place on Saturday, April 24th last, to the clean-up campaign, when the Howe's Lake
dump was kept open that afternoon to receive garbage brought in by citizens. She stated that in addition
to the letter that Council by resolution of April 20th last directed be sent to Radio Station C.F.B.C. in
I
.
I
I
~
~
,..-
">)'1,.
~,lQ,I...
a.-o/.m'e'J?~IDI
.
I
I
C'~-~g
~hJFifl?
. cY/v/e
~i()l1.s
$..1. ::lJwc-'-
/-6~.-:I
/liXvere/
;17 e"'''?P/'~4
t-/pn
/f;(p/ Ckl?
/ll}'l Ca/e~s
I
U/etj,hf-
1(eSCl'/(d/fJh
:lJy-~.;;J1'f/
. c/tfY.
St?Re;-!pr
1
1
.
~
commendation of its efforts regarding the said April 24th clean-up, she would like to see that a letter went from
Council to the four Civic Unions who were involved in this clean-up (she noted that the said Unions enjoyed this
campaign immensely and got a great deal out of, it, and that the participation was fantastic). She added that
Saint John Beverages Ltd. provided soft drinks for all the people who came in to the dump, and that the citizen
participation in the campaign was fantastic - she believes 20,000 coupons were given out; the amount of litter
that was gathered is unbelievable; so, she would like to have all these groups receive a letter of commendation
from the Council, commending them for the effort they put forth in the said clean-up last week.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he read the above named report and sees no provision for certain
citizens dumping and not being fined. He stated that it is well-known that a well-known resident of this city,
of Millidgeville, was caught dumping out at the Howe's Lake dump and we could not charge him and we know that a
poorman from Harding Street was caught and was fined five dollars. He stated he wonders if the City Manager
would consider recommending that we treat everybody the same, or is it because the first mentioned person lives
in Millidgeville that the Millidgeville citizen was not charged. He felt that the charge was not laid by the
City department against the first man because he was from Millidgeville, and was well-known and wealthy. Coun-
cillor Higgins pointed out that it was the decision of the City Solicitor that the charge was not laid, no matter
where the person came from, and not necessarily a "crack" about the charge laid against a person from one section
of the City and not in the other section; he added that the said "crack" is a lot of nonsense. Referring to
Councillor Higgins' remarks, Councillor A. Vincent asked for a legal opinion that the by-laws do not come under
the City Solicitor, but under the Common Clerk, for the enforcement - or maybe he (Councillor A. Vincent) was
lied to by the Chief Minister of this Province, care of Justice. He asked for an opinion on that, because he
still believes the Common Clerk has the right to enforce the by-laws, not the City Solicitor. The Mayor stated
that we have a question, and we will get the answer for the asker, right away; that is, the asker is going to get
a legal opinion, this evening, if possible. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he was not trying to hold up the
meeting, and that he therefore did not require the legal opinion at this meeting - he would like the legal
opinion within a month.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
~ RESOLVED that a letter of commendation be sent by this Common Council to
the four Civic Unions, to Saint John Beverages Ltd. and to the citizens of Saint John for a job well done in the
clean-up campaign that took place on Saturday, April 24th last when garbage collections were deposited at the
Howe's Lake dump.
Councillor MacGowan added that in the above regard, the citizens of Saint John will be commended by
means of the insertion of an advertisement in the local newspaper. Councillor A. Vincent asked what Radio
Station C.F.B.C. would have done that warranted a letter of commendation, as referred to by Councillor MacGowan,
nd as directed by Council resolution of April 20th last. The Mayor replied that the said Radio Station organ-
ized the April 24th clean-up campaign. Councillor A. Vincent advised that the Royal Canadian Air Cadet Squadron
delivered 62 bags of garbage to the dump site on April 24th and were only allowed 9 tickets on the coloured
television set that was being drawn in connection with the said clean-up campaign. He felt that the Squadron was
entitled to receive 62 tickets and should receive them. He stated that he represented the City at a banquet last
week that was held by the Squadron and that was attended by the parents of the Cadets, and that he was asked by
those parents what the Council's position was in this matter and he promised that he would raise the question at
this meeting of Council. He stated that all he could say was that the Radio Station ran out of tickets on this
coloured television set drawing and that was why the Squadron did not get more than the 9 tickets - and he thinks
the Squadron should get the tickets, and that the members of the Squadron should be congratulated for its ef-
forts.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Weight Restrictions
Within The City of Saint John Enacted Under Authority of Section 262(1) of The Motor Vehicle Act", be read a
third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the City Solicitor, submitting the final draft of the above named by-
law, and advising that he has included in same as Section 2(b) the time period in each year in which the by-law
becomes operative and that he understands from the City Manager that the time period of the first day of March to
the last day of May is appropriate for this matter, and further advising that he has added the word "therefor" to
the end of Section 3(b) which word was inadvertently omitted at the time of the original redrafting of the by-law
several weeks ago, and further advising that Section 262(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act requires that notices of
prohibitions covered by this by-law "shall be given by signs posted in appropriate places throughout the Munici-
pality of through the limits of the local authority where the restrictions apply to the highways in general,
otherwise on or near the highway affected", be received and filed.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting Weight Restrictions Within The City of Saint John Enacted
Under Authority of Section 262(1) of The Motor Vehicle Act", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of
the above resolution.
Councillor Hodges recalled that when the proposed by-law was discussed at Council previously he had
asked the City Manager if one of the City's employees violated the by-law regulations, who will pay the fine, and
the City Manager said he would look into the question and inform Council. Mr. Barfoot replied that he was sorry,
that he has not followed up that matter. Councillor Hodges stated that, in that case, he will have to vote
against the motion because he does not think that an employee should have to be paying a fine for something he
has no control over. Councillor MacGowan asked how the City protects its streets the rest of the year (during
the period from the first of June to the end of February) - this is her concern - how do we keep the trucks on
the truck routes? The Mayor noted that Mr. Rodgers replied that there has to be another by-law. Councillor
MacGowan asked where that matter stands, because this is our concern. ){r. Rodgers replied that, as he understands
it, truck routes are covered in the Traffic By-Law which has been adopted. The Mayor commented that, in such
case, it is just a matter of enforcing the truck routes. Councillor MacGowan stated that she understood there
was a problem there, and she thought this was going to cover it. Mr. Rodgers replied in the negative, noting
that this is a separate matter, altogether. Councillor Cave felt that this final draft now incorporates what the
Council asked for, because the Council, in the first instance, was concerned about weight restrictions during the
spring of,the year when the frost is coming out of the ground, and asked that the by-law be revised to include a
time period regarding such restrictions. Councillor M. Vincent, stating that he liked the draft by-law that was
submitted by the City Solicitor the first time to Council, felt that a lot of the City by-laws should not be
brought in with time factors on them - instead, he feels they should be brought in and then the Council announces
the dates of enforcement. He noted that the Council, in the present draft of the by-law, is saying that the only
time this by-law will be in effect and will be of any value in the city is between the first day of March and the
last day of May, and he further noted that if, because of weather conditions, the period has to be any longer,
the by-law would then have to be amended. He made the point that if the by-law draft had not been revised from
its first form, the Council would have proclaimed that the by-law would be in effect for a certain period of
time, whenever it would deem it necessary to so proclaim. The Mayor noted that this is correct. Councillor
/'
422
~
tf/a'f,A -r
7(t!? tJ'triel/p/?s
2J!/-4'~ w
C1Qmm. whole.
&$e'lnLI;n
mt:l6f OJ?
~II/ ~r./'!!f/$,6
~"I'B
~17$;oJ7 /ie-t-
C;I/;~ e"7/,/~S
/,1U'~;;rse D-f
"-175/0/7 5 BI'y/(?e
~,.e
.2)0.1 :7&'- ~ w
.7)~ 2'y-~w
J)f?.! ;Dy-~01W
Gould asked if the eighty per cent restriction is consistent with Provincial regulations. Mr. Rodgers
made affirmative reply. Councillor Gould asked if the City is required to post signs to let motorists
know that those are the restrictions at that time. Mr. Rodgers made affirmative reply. Councillor Gould
stated that he does not understand why we have streets with exceptions. Mr. Barfoot replied that in the
streets with exceptions and on the streets with eighty per cent we are following the Provincial highways,
generally speaking, which already have those particular limits on them - these roads which we have listed _
for instance, Dock Street, Main Street, Chesley Drive - they are all part of the main roads through the
city on which one hundred per cent weight is allowed during the season; some of the other streets are
streets which lead to heavy industries and which it is necessary to keep up at one hundred per cent and
which, generally speaking, have been built for such loads. Councillor Gould stated he does not under-
stand, since the whole purpose of the by-law under discussion is to cut back on the weight so that the
heavy vehicles do not tear up the highways, why one street should be excepted from the by-law when other
streets are not excepted; he does not care if it is a truck route, or not - it does not matter, he felt.
Mr. Barfoot replied that the philosophy is that you can only spend so much on highway maintenance and so
you build certain highways so that they are resistant to frost damage because of the way'they are built,
and this is the policy of the Province as it builds and rebuilds roads it brings them up to the one
hundred per cent limit. Councillor Gould asked how do we expect to enforce this by-law as far as weight
restrictions are concerned - do we now possess proper scales, and are they properly located throughout the
city. The Mayor advised that there is mobile scales equipment that will be used. Councillor Gould asked
how this equipment will be used: is it to be set up in a certain area, and everybody on a certain road on
a certain day to be checked? The Mayor replied that that is the problem of the civic administration to
deal with. Councillor Gould stated he would like to know they are going to enforce this by-law, and he
asked how can a Council member support a by-law when the Council member does not know how it is going to
be enforced. The Mayor replied that it is the duty of the civic administration to enforce it, and he
'would say that they will do it. Councillor A. Vincent commented that the City could not change the weight
factor on the through highway through the city, if it wanted to, without the approval of the Province -
and that if the City did so, it would lose its grant from the Province that runs over $200,000.00. ~w.
Barfoot confirmed that this information is correct. He added, in reply to a question that was raised: the
dates that the by-law goes into effect go probably two weeks on either side of the Provincial proclamation
which has been much the same over many years, and so the dates in the by-law are meant to cover that
entire period. In reply to the point made by Councillor M. Vjncent that the by-law should not contain the
dates of the restriction period, in the event the Council, for any reason, should wish to impose a restr-
iction period during, for instance, the fall of the year, by merely proclaiming same, Mr. Barfoot stated
that the only problem with that is that the City sometimes has difficulty in forcing these emergency by-
law changes through.
Councillor Hodges voted "nay" to the above motion.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Tuesady, April 20th, 1976, when there were
present Mayor Flewwelling, and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Par-
fitt, Pye and M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation,
namely:-
1. That Common Council resolution of March 8th, 1976, which provides that legislation be sought in
1976 to amend the Pension Act, with regard to members of staff who became employees of the City of Saint
John through the Act of amalgamation in 1967 being enabled to acquire the right to purchase past service
for pension purposes to the date of entering the service, be rescinded.
26th April, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the
recommendation contained therein adopted.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report from the Council Committee that was
appointed to study the Dog By-Law, submitting a proposed new Dog By-Law and outlining the basic changes
that are being recommended by the Committee and that are incorporated in the said new by-law, and re-
commending first and second reading at this time, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting the Control of Dogs in The City of
Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 97 of the Municipalities Act 1966 and Amendments Thereto",
be read a first time.
.
1
I
.
I
.
I
Councillor Cave noted that the amount of the fine has been increased in this new by-law from
$10.00 to $25.00, and stated that he is going to oppose it, because he feels it is too much of an in- I
crease. Councillor MacGowan replied that it was considered that possibly we should be charging $40.00 for
them to get in what it cost them (the Animal Rescue League) for their truck and the two men and the time
spent - it costs at least $25.00 and possibly more.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Cave and A. Vincent voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting the Control of Dogs in The City of
Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 97 of the Municipalities Act 1966 and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting the
Control of Dogs in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 97 of the Municipalities Act
1966 and Amendments Thereto", be read a second time.
.
......
I"""
42H
.
1,,(c/J1i,( a~h'J.
k'itPm?/s c;.-t:
71u6sli'//
l-lig.J'/HS
I
1(oy W
4?c I(/'n~!f
..4l?~~~ e
~5ein )Jj
C'.t'o. <l It>,
(f16 f . t.f'h',
t-1//5 .7JOt1A-)
I
f?efSt:'!nL!/?
md/tlJ?
.1..23. 7J./m
I~+~
L-'Oh7P?-
IJ'/,.~ltffe ~
~~/4'?e
#t?m'N-~6
~SSi!Pt!'.
r~ '~
.~ S ---ver-
S..I. '1i;rt-
~~I',ah#l.
s.7:e'v/e/A
I R"'p/o~' yh,
frt?,,/~
ksf~//~IGJ
,/! o/v/e
e"",P~!lees
1JJ,.l?tec.ti Oi?
t?OHJ~
(}''6!1 f'l1 j'P.
IJo-Pn:t1 ;,Q/-;,
fb/Q/l?d ewe
(4;t1J?s
1blJee Sfn.,
. tt/esZef'n
....
Councillor M. Vincent asked who is going to be responsible for enforcing the Dog By-Law.
noted that the by-law provides for this in Section 6(1) thereof, and that it is the Saint John City
that enforces the by-law. Mr. Rodgers explained that the Animal Rescue League enforces the running
under this by-law, and the Police Department enforces the dogs that are not licensed and creating a
by barking - these are Police matters.
Mr. Barfoot
Police Force
at large
disturbance
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Cave and A. Vincent voting "nay".
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting the Control of Dogs in The City of Saint
John Made Under the Authority of Section 97 of the Municipalities Act 1966 and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the sale
of Lot 4, Kiwanis Court to Mr. Russell Higgins for the appraised value of $8,000.00, which was authorized by
Common Council resolution of August 25th, 1975, has not been completed and another application has been made for
this lot, and it has been learned from Mr. Higgins that he is no longer interested in the purchase of the said
lot, and recommending that the said resolution of August 25th, 1975, be rescinded, be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, Lot 4, Kiwanis Court, be
sold to Mr. Roy W. McKinney for the appraised value of $8,000.00, on the condition that the title to this lot
reverts to the City unless it is developed with a single family dwelling thereon within one year of this Council
resolution.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee,
Lot 1, Kiwanis Court, be sold to Mr. Leo P. Pye for the sum of $8,500.00, which is the appraised value, subject
to the condition that the title to this lot reverts to the City unless it is developed with a single family
dwelling thereon within one year of this Council resolution.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, further to Common Council
resolution of April 12th last which rescinded, on recommendation of the Land Committee, the Council resolution
which provides for the sale of the freehold interest in Lot 5 which is located at the intersection of Rodney
Street and Market Place, Saint John West, to Mr. L. B. Prime for the sum of $7,500.00 as Mr. Prime in the fall of
1975 advised the Legal Department that he was not prepared at that time to proceed with the purchase of this
interest, and Mr. Prime has had sufficient time to purchase at this price and if he decides to proceed with the
previously authorized purchase it should be at a new appraised value -- advising that the date of the original
Council resolution was June 9th, 1975, and not May 28th, 1975 as referred to in the Committee's letter that was
before the Council on April 12th last, and recommending, therefore, that the said June 9th, 1975 Council re-
solution be rescinded -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report from the Traffic and Safety Committee in reply to
the requests made to Common Council on March 8th last by the M. Gerald Teed Home and School Association for
several changes on Millidge Avenue, submitting five recommendations in this regard, be referred to the Works
Department for a report, and that the M. Gerald Teed Home and School Association be so advised.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report covering the activities of the Saint John Port
Development Commission, from January 1st, 1976 through March 31st, 1976, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Civic Employees' Union, Local
No. 18, C.U.P.E., advising that the Union once more requests a copy of the establishment list of all employees of
the civic departments covered by the current Working Agreement between the City and the Union, be received and
filed and the necessary information be given to the Union after the said establishment is finalized.
In reply to Councillor Hodges' question as to when the establishment will be available, Mr. Barfoot
stated that it has been prepared and is ready for submission to Council for the Council to examine.
Consideration was given to a letter from the Four Civic Unions which asks for information on the status
of the Western Police Station, and which advises that, knowing that Saint John Policemen's Protective Assoc-
iation, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. is opposed to the closing of the Eastern and Western Police Stations, the said
Four Civic Unions are also opposed to their being closed, for the protection of all the citizens of the City of
Saint John, and that the Co-Ordinating Committee would like to know if there has been a tentative date set for
re-opening the Western Police Station, and, if not, could the Council possibly ascertain the date. Councillor M.
Vincent advised that the Protection Committee had made a tour of both the Fire and Police facilities and the
report in this regard is almost finished and when it goes back to the Protection Committee the Committee is going
to take the report to the City Manager for discussion. He added that the said Committee was looking at the
Western Police Station and is going to suggest a recommendation from that which might very well cover the content
of this letter from the Four Civic Unions.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above noted letter from the Four Civic Unions be laid on
the table.
I 4~1
~
Cl-tJr/; '7~/h,f
a.h;.m. ~eV/(!'
t/n/tlJ?$
$<<1'j"!'d/OhS 7f.
e/~y m~r.-+
~/J'f. ~J"5M~/'9'
/rev/h/n!}
$~A- /eeiilt/~~
:JJim-c-,ii/ f?/G;J?
t:JI'~~j7 .t~
;J1s~n.:ln<!.e
C;iy /Il~r.
2JemRf,7!/oh
3/ ..(e/d.5kr
37/e/J?5-te... st-.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Co-Ordinating Committee of the Four
Civic Unions, advising that suggestions were asked for by the City Manager and the Personnel and Training
Officer and were submitted to them three months ago by the Four Civic Unions and the Unions were left with
the impression that they would be notified regarding what suggestions were implemented and what suggestions
were not implemented, but this has not been done, and the Four Unions would ask the Council to advise them
of the status of these suggestions, be laid on the table until the information is presented to the Council.
.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the civic staff could not be asked to bring in the answers to the
above question of the Four Civic Unions, by including this in the above motion. The Mayor noted that the
motion implies this, by laying the letter on the table until the information is made available. Coun~
cillor MacGowan expressed the view that the motion should include the provision that the civic staff be
asked to provide the information that is being sought.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Four Civic Unions expressing
dissatisfaction with the way in which City management has put off the bargaining of the Sick Leave, Dental
Plan and Group Life coverage, and stating that such action on management's part can only lead to the
unresolved fear the Unions have that the City of Saint John, namely, the Mayor, did not bargain the 1975-
1976 contracts with the four civic Unions in good faith, and stating that it is hoped that this situation
can be resolved by the Common Council ordering management to sit down and seriously bargain these items,
be referred to the City Manager for a report next week on what action has been taken, to date.
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked for a list of everybody who has been sick in the last six months, by
numbers of persons rather than by names.
Councillor Higgins asked if the City Manager will be able to have the report to Council in one
week, in accordance with the above motion, considering the scope of the subject matters, and he asked if .
there is something in the offing that maybe more than a week might resolve the situation a little better.
Mr. Barfoot replied that he is not quite sure what this group is. He added that management has been
negotiating with each of the individual Union Locals and not with any group called the Four Civic Unions,
and that he does not think this group could be very well informed about what we are negotiating with the
various Locals; he added that, however, he can cover this in a report to the Council, because all of the
Locals have been negotiated with on this question. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he does not under-
stand how three Canadian Unions can sit down and negotiate with one International Union - he added that
that is not the way it is done - he understands that the Firefighters' Association is an International
Union.
The Mayor noted that the City Manager wished to introduce an item regarding tenders for demolition.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges 'I
RESOLVED that the item regarding tenders to demolish properties
located at 31 and 37 Leinster Street, be added to the agenda of this meeting.
Mr. Barfoot pointed out that there are really two parts to this matter of demolition tenders:
the contract which is awarded for the demolition of two buildings on Leinster Street in connection with
the fire station construction - one of the buildings to be demolished is wooden, and the other is of
brick; the brick building is-now to stay and the wooden building is to come down - because of the time
involved and the need to get the wooden building down, the successful tenderer has been contacted and has
agreed to demolish the smaller building (that is, the wooden building) for the sum of $2,250.00, and the
recommendation of the Building Inspector is that the bid of Mr. Paul Daeres of Paul's Trucking & Demol-
ition Co. Ltd. be considered and awarded. He noted that the tender for demolition of the said two buildings
was awarded to this company on December 22nd, 1975, and the Land Committee of the City has now decided not
to demolish or remove the brick building at 31 Leinster Street, and has requested the said contractor to
adjust his bid; he further noted that at the time the contract was awarded, Mr. Daeres was requested to
hold up on the demolition of 37 Leinster Street as it was occupied at that time, as well as the tran-
saction not being quite finalized and, therefore, it was not possible to demolish 37 Leinster Street in
December of 1975; due to the extra work now involved, whereas the brick building at 31 Leinster Street is
not coming down and in view of the fact the construction of the new fire station has now commenced, the
demolition cost to remove the said wood frame building would be $2,250.00 (the amount of the tender bid
for demolition of both buildings, as accepted by Council resolution of December 22nd, 1975, was $4,600,.00).
Councillor Hodges noted that because there were four bids at the time the demolition contract was awarded
by Council on December 22nd, 1975 for this demolition work, the City is placed in a rather precarious
position because the other three tenderers may want to submit tenders on the demolition of the said
building that is to be demolished at 37 Leinster Street. Mr. Barfoot commented that that is the alter-
native - to go to a re-tendering. Councillor Hodges stated he feels that the City, therefore, should be
consistent, as much as possible, whenever it is possible. Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to
direct a question to the Chairman of the Land Committee (Councillor Davis) because he understood that
these two buildings were going to remain. He asked if the City needs the land contained in these two
properties for the new fire station site. Councillor Davis replied that it was the Committee's under-
standing that the wooden building did not really warrant too much expenditure. He noted that it is an
economic decision, and it is not a decision for the Land Committee. Councillor A. Vincent interjected
that the City needs bedrooms for occupancy by~citizens. Councillor Davis agreed, noting that the cost per
bedroom is a critical figure and we have'~ estimate whether it would be worthwhile to retain the wooden
building and make it habitable, or just retain the brick building. Councillor A. Vincent asked if we have
the alternative figures. Councillor Davis made negative reply, adding that it can be delayed until the
Council gets those figures. Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the'
matter be tabled until the Council can have the Saint John Housing Commission consider the cost of bringing
this other building up to standard because we definitely need bedrooms in the City of Saint John. The
Mayor stated he believes the building has to be taken down soon in order to allow the contractor on
construction of the new fire station to move ahead. Councillor A. Vincent replied that he understands
they do not need either of these two properties for the fire station site. Mr. Barfoot stated that he is
not aware whether this property conflicts exactly with the building line but it certainly conflicts with
the parking area behind the station, and without this building down, you have kind of eliminated the
parking, there; therefore, it is the plan that eventually this building would have to come down. Coun-
cillor Davis pointed out that the wooden building would stand for a much shorter term than the brick
building - the City has had 31 Leinster Street for a good many years - the City acquired 37 Leinster
Street as part of the fire station property - it is not essential - it is part of the parking lot but we
do know that we will need parking there sooner or later and that that building will be demolished, and
that was the reason - it was a shorter term investment - it is too costly for that; he added that he did
.
I
I
.
....4
r"
11)-
~:W:b,
.
I
I
.
7e11,cCl'd'5!'!
'P.;,,,,/~ ~11.f
:De",,,11f1617 ./
C(Jf.t:r~.
1?r!se;IJIi;J11
1 .. m'7b 1>/1
3/+ Q7
,idl7ste'1" S-f
7e"uI"S ~o
call
:lJe""tI'/,"-t"~~
37 LeiJ?5ter
S-t.
.
1
,c".~(l;{'H7
o-/' C'1-6-.1
'Rot~J'f#
IJ1 H..P' I' _!/
'Pt?l7dl'tj)"
1l7.:J}. C. h1.
1
.
'.
~
not have the figures with him, in this regard. In reply to Councillor Gould's question, Mr. Barfoot confirmed
that the tender for these two buildings, to demolish same, was submitted as one package in December, 1975.
Councillor Gould made the suggestion that when we have two buildings at different addresses, that they can come
in in one bid but they should be bid separately so that the City would know which bidder was the lowest tenderer
in each individual property - and this would preclude the present predicament occurring. Councillor Parfitt,
referring to the wooden building at 37 Leinster Street, noted that the occupants were given notice to move some
time ago and on the last check-up she had, three had found accommodation but they would rather have stayed there
"
because the rents were quite reasonable. She asked: what would you do if you were to fix this up, bearing in
mind that these occupants have already gone, and maybe the last occupant has gone.
Mr. A. Ellis advised that the tender call for demolition of these two buildings evoked several bids
from contractors and the tender mentioned above was the low tender for 31 and 37 Leinster Street demolition, and
the bid was awarded to this low tenderer; once the decision was made not to demolish the brick building he
contacted Mr. Paul Daere of the said contracting firm and Mr. Daere requested that this bid be put in at this
time" stating that with the erection of the other building next to 37 Leinster Street, and leaving the brick
building, made it that much more difficult to demolish 37 Leinster Street, and, therefore, $2,250.00 was the
price established - otherwise, it would have been cheaper.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the matter before Council in this regard is the question of rescinding
the December 22nd, 1975 resolution, and she added that over the past week, she has received a call or two about
the demolition of the police station (138 King Street East) from citizens who are concerned about demolition of
the police station and who suggested that that building should have been retained and given an opportunity for
development. She asked if that property is needed for the fire station, and if it is not needed, would it be
practical ~o save the building, at all. The Mayor noted that it is required for a parking lot for the fire
station. Councillor MacGowan stated that that is what she understood, but she would like it verified. /1r. A.
Ellis replied that according to the plan layout of the new building going up (the new fire station) it is de-
signed for a parking lot, where this building (the old police station) is, and the fire station site could not
get along without the 138 King Street East side - otherwise, you would have trouble with the entrance to the fire
station site.
Councillor Green recalled that it was originally, anticipated that both 31 and 37 Leinster Street would
be required for the new fire station and parking, and so on, and after closer scrutiny, it was found that 31
Leinster Street, which is a good brick structure, was not needed and it was felt, therefore, that it should be
retained and maybe to be made available for housing, and therefore it was suggested through the Land Committee
that the City would retain 31 Leinster Street; the wooden house is needed for parking, and therefore it must come
down.
Councillor M. Vincent asked whether the Works Department could demolish that building at a lesser cost
than the price submitted by the afore mentioned contractor. Mr. Barfoot replied that it could be looked at.
enoted that the present status of the matter is that the City has a tender to demolish two buildings. He felt
that if the Council is uneasy about this process it would be better to rescind the previous motion and ask for
tenders on the one building, alone.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that Common Council resolution of December 22nd, 1975, which
awarded the tender for demolition of 31 and 37 Leinster Street to Paul's Trucking & Demolition Co. Ltd. for the
sum of $4,600.00, be rescinded.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that 37 Leinster Street be demolished and that tenders be called
for demolition of same.
Following a brief recess, the Council members resumed their places at the Council table, and Mayor
Flewwelling was escorted into the Council Chamber by Mr. F. S. Haycox, Sergeant-at-Mace and Chief of Police E.
Ferguson, Marshal, and proceeded to call the Common Council to order.
At this time, Dr. R. M. Pendrigh was escorted to the Council Chamber by the Sergeant-at-Mace and by the
~!arshal, and was greeted by the Mayor on behalf of the Common Council.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"BECAUSE The Council of the City of Saint John, New Brunswick, is empowered by statute to confer, for
Honourable Distinction, the Freedom of the City;
AND WHEREAS Robert Murray Pendrigh, M.D.C.M. has been able in his lifetime, to combine a distinguished
career in General Medical Practice, as an Army Officer, a member of the Legislature Assembly, a Coroner and as a
promoter, administrator, advisor in community organized sports and an active participant in many;
AND WHEREAS Doctor Pendrigh, because of his medical ability, his boundless good humour and genuine
concern for his fellow citizens has become an integral and well loved figure in what used to be called Carleton
and now Saint John West;
AND WHEREAS Doctor Pendrigh during a busy and productive lifetime, displayed a sure and gracious
facility of extending and receiving friendship in a very wide and varied spectrum of people:
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council of the City of Saint John, New Brunswick, by the
rights and powers in it vested do create, constitute and make Doctor Robert Murray Pendrigh a Freeman of the City
of Saint John, giving and hereby granting until him all and singular the rights, privileges, franchises, pre-
eminences, immunities, profits, emoluments and advantages, which to a Freeman of the said City may, can, or of
right out to belong or appertain.".
Mayor Flewwelling thereupon presented to Dr. Pendrigh a Freedom of the City certificate, framed in
black and gold, together with a copy of the aforegoing resolution, similarly framed, with words of tribute to Dr.
Pendrigh and of the high regard held for him by citizens in all walks of life in this community, and of Dr.
Pendrigh's years of service to Saint John in many capacities. Dr. Pendrigh, in accepting this honour, expressed
his deep appreciation and pride in having been selected to receive the Freedom of the City of Saint John, and he
thanked all the citizens of Saint John who have been so good, so kind, and so generous to him for Over half a
century and without whose assistance and support he would not be receiving this honour.
1426
?,,()V:; Gov!.
;::e~. ~vt:
lYkl'sh (},.~t'J
;:1"6~ (!pdrp/
~~'7"'IJ?~
J>1"f1(/, ~t>vt-,
'PI'Pd-t?J<</- '7?~A-.
$~~el'l?~
j:"il1c;nai p /
5-&-~r6'l7;l!!?ds
~
A large number of friends of Dr. Pendrigh were present at this ceremony, and the Mayor extended
an invitation to all to participate in a small reception that was being held immediately after this
meeting in honour of Dr. Pendrigh, the City's new Freeman. .
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Common Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on !londay, the third day
of May, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer of Operations, of the Engineering and Works Department,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
C. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, P. Clark, Fire Chief,
and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police
The meeiing opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Joseph D. Woods, of the Parish
of the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception.
I
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges .
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of April 20th last, be con-
firmed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of April 26th last, be con-
firmed.
The Mayor advised that a meeting was held this afternoon with members of the Federal and Pro-
vincial Governments and with citizens from the Marsh Creek area concerning the improvement of the Marsh
Creek, and that meeting came to a conclusion that, unfortunately, meetings have to continue. He stated
that, therefore, he is asking for a motion in this matter from Council.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the Common Council instruct the appropriate staff to
immediately arrange a meeting with the necessary Provincial department to work out the funding programme to
enable the implementation of the Proctor & Redfern Scheme as adopted by Council on April 26th, 1976 in the
amount of 4.4 million dollars with respect to Marsh Creek flood control.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the months of January and
February last, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that authority be granted to pay the following in-
voices, as recommended by the City Manager:-
1
I
.
~
r"
S. 7: T,.ol7 ~
-< -t-P{ .
..st~;.> t:;n-
S#~_cp,~-t.
Seab,a~u
.2)"es~/ Ar-.
1 e;.>"ter.../
.at:'t:'~Rt~.I'f-
*./rnci
t()r wa//s
Ilf/.I/Y. C;;rlJ
/h;:$pc.
I
Pol/&!f re
!Jl'iiJ;"c-s t-o
. clP/?vel7t-/(lJ?,
rtr;4I!
~el"ht/174-1/".
,~ .saIPi)
~J?dln#.
VCjJt. .t:e&?n
7)et/R/of/men
I
.
t:! /i-!t. fJ'/f r.
Co --tJ.ntflwt-
/11~ CoMh1.
"T C?;'I/ie
{//7loll s
$/~k /eare
I :J)eJ7~1 ;:;/aJ7
(J/"t?K. j? I,;t"e
InS~~htJt!?
I
J: W/l!'r4'd
/t-t.rl?er
J).il5eb~//
. -h~/'"
6?,.eeH~k
e~c.
/8~. g1~
Fle.U
~
4')"",'
'..., 6
Saint John Iron Works
Stephen Construction Company Limited
Seaboard (GM) Diesel Ltd.
dated March 31, 1976
dated April 27, 1976
dated April 6, 1976
$ 2,082.03
$10,747.44
$ 3,642.53
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager and
the Works Department engineers, the only bid received for the construction ,of masonry walls at Number 1 incinerator
Pokiok Road, namely, that of M. W. Garnett Associates, in the amount of $8,875.00, be accepted.
Councillor Hodges asked if the above named company is the only company that does this type of work in
the City of Saint John. ~~. Barfoot replied that in the past, normally more than one bid has been received, and
he cannot explain why only one bid was received on this work. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the Works Department
engineers who reviewed this bid and recommended its acceptance had costed the item. Mr. MacKinnon advised that
the original cost was a little higher than the estimates. Councillor Kipping asked if this work is required
every year. In reply, Mr. MacKinnon advised that there are yearly repairs, but not the same repairs: last year,
some work was done on the other incinerator; the work on Number 1 incinerator has been required for some years
and we are just getting around to repairing it - actually, this job should have been done last year - this work
is not just an interim type of repair to keep the incinerator going rather than do a bigger and more costly job -
there was damage done on one of the doors because of a fire and this destroyed some of the mortar around the
brick work, and the present work is being done as a result of that damage and destruction of mortar.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that during the
period since the Common Council adopted on January 3rd, 1972 the policy regarding civic receptions and convention
assistance the said policy has been reconsidered at various intervals but no change was felt necessary until the
present restraints and restrictions of the 1976 budget became apparent, and further advising that the Commissioner
of Economic Development, and ~tr. S. MacDonald and Mr. R. Butler of his staff, are in complete agreement that
financial assistance does not make any difference to serious organizations as to whether or not they will come to
Saint John, and that they recommend, then, that Common Council terminate the policy of cash grants to conventions
for a limited trial period - and that they do feel, however, that a more forthright policy of convention as-
sistance should be offered by uniformed and attractive members of City staff, and that on many occasions the
donor of cash grants gets little acknowledgement, whereas efficient, attractive registration, information, and
promotional assistance is very evident to all visitors to the city - and that if a "no grant" policy is adopted,
staff would anticipate a continuing solicitation of conventions through normal channels but service would be
their policy rather than cash grants -- and recommending a trial period of one year without cash grants, except
in extreme cases when, in the opinion of Common Council, the City could suffer adverse national or international
publicity, and further recommending that the Tourism Section of the Department of Economic Development be granted
full scope within the brackets of economic restraints to provide attractive, uniformed, and friendly service on a
work-day basis, scheduled to be most advantageous to visiting groups and conventions -- be received and filed and
the recommendation adopted.
In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's question as to whether, under the above recommendation from the
City Manager, this means that all requests will now come before Council, Mr. Barfoot stated that the requests
would not come before Council unless by some reason the body requesting the grant was dissatisfied with the type
of service, and he believes they always have the channel of appeal. Councillor M. Vincent stated that his reason
for asking that question is because the recommendation is that there be a trial period of one year without cash
grants, except in extreme cases, when in the opinion of Common Council.... so, if they are not going to come
before Council, he wonders how is the Council going to be able to decide whether they are, in fact, extreme
cases, or not. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that the intention is that staff would examine each application and if
there was one which, for these reasons, was recommended for a grant this would be so recommended to Council.
Councillor Gould commented that, normally, grants go to a certain limit and if an application exceeds that limit
and the department thinks that it is worthwhile, the department often has sent the matter to Council for the
Council's approval - and that that could quite easily happen.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager with regard to the letter
received at the April 26th, 1976 meeting of Common Council from the Four Civic Unions expressing dissatisfaction
with the way in which City management has put off the bargaining of the Sick Leave, Dental Plan and Group Life
coverage and the hope that this situation can be resolved by the Council having management seriously bargain
these items, advising that negotiations on fringe benefits are in progress with C.U.P.E. Locals 18, 61 and 486,
and with I.A.F.F. Local 771, as provided for in the Working Agreements executed with these Unions, and that
before these negotiations can be finalized, a great amount of information has had to be, and is being, gathered,
and the Unions have traditionally relied upon the City to do this work - and further advising that a further
meeting is anticipated with each of the four Locals as soon as this information has been gathered -- and further
advising that, however, the Working Agreements made no mention of a group known as the "Four Civic Unions", and
it is not management's intention to sit down and seriously bargain with such a group -- be received and filed.
Councillor Parfitt, a member of the Finance Committee, advised that with regard to the above noted
fringe benefits, the Dental Plan alone is horrendous, and that she would ask any member to have a look at that
Plan before it is adopted, in view of the many aspects of coverage it contains. Referring to the above letter
from the City Manager, Councillor Gould asked if the City Manager intends to bargain with each Union individually
regarding these fringe benefits. Mr. Barfoot replied that that is what the Working Agreements make provision
for.
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting at this time)
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, with reference to the letter
received by Council on April 20th, 1976 from Mr. J. Wilfred Turner of 194 Greendale Crescent, Saint John, West
with regard, to the location of the baseball diamond adjacent to Greendale Crescent, submitting a report from the
Director of Recreation and Parks which report points out that the Lancaster Memorial Sportsfield in which this
baseball diamo~d is located was in existence long before the residential properties, but that improvements are
being made to correct many of the problems which are the present concern of the residents, be received and filed
and !4r. Turner be so informed.
~,.tM II/aneu:'~r 1976, ,be received and
:/ J Councll:-
(1) Weight Restrictions: Further to the question raised by Councillor Hodges, the driver of a City vehicle
is responsible for the vehicle, and if the vehicle is stopped by the Police and is found to be overweight,
then it is the driver who would be responsible for the penalty; this matter was brought to the attention
of management by a Works Department chauffeur last year and strict instructions were given at that time to
the supervisor that trucks were not to exceed weight restrictions.
(2) Medical Examinations for City Employees: The question was raised at Council in early April as to
whether all policemen and firemen receive City medical examinations before joining the force; all persons
entering the Police and Fire Departments do received medical examinations from the City Doctor before
entering the force, except for those candidates from the Atlantic Police Academy - in the case of these
candidates, they have to pass a medical examination before entering the Academy and these medical reports
are made available to the City interviewers at the time of screening - the candidates selected for the
force are advised that they must further pass the medical examination of the City of Saint John in order
to gain entry into the Pension plan.
(3) Vacant and Dilapidated Housing Report: Common Council has asked for a report on this matter; the first
draft has been prepared of the report but this needs further staff in-put prior to presentation to Council.
428
I
{'~h-t-I"~~
$" t!P/?d- t!/t1~s
/p" .:117(!?hd;S
(5.7: ~(Jy,m~.ff<!'$)
!I1a,.,/f/rr;e /
~epd~j'e.$ /-'-t-.
Je;,~t!'r dl&'&'e.
:J}<9/J?t?;;-.c/ PI?
.t'1 13 I'Ddil;tt' s-c.
>>-1 SJ'Me'~ S-c.
tflrr.:7a T~.;;>~
a. /:c,c.
vrHlfJ;t- re~-6-lc
?f/tI'ns OJ? .d""
C'IY/C eh7?;'f~s
",<</~/ t!yam/
-hi?J?$
V~J?t- +rk/'a,P.
blt/I,t/n.2. oS
"9't?,;t-
CI.ran-u/:
aCih?f'd/Njh
Wf?e/('
O/t;l S,~c/t~
.JJy-/aw v/,I.f/
/dy/nf ;I7/o"'~-
-!i,ns I'e 5aP7~
~
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, with regard to
Common Council resolution of April 26th, 1976 which authorized the preparation by the Legal Department of
a formal contract for signatures by the Mayor and Common Clerk of the acceptance conditions between the
donor of score-clocks for the new City arenas at no cost to the City and the City of Saint John regarding
the said donation, advising that it was erroneously reported at that meeting that these score-clocks had
been donated by Saint John Beverages when, in fact, the donor is Maritime Beverages Ltd., be received and
filed and the said formal contract be executed in this matter with Maritime Beverages Ltd., and that this
firm be thanked for donating these score-clocks.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Seconded ,by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City'
Manager and Building Inspector, the low tender received for the demolition of the City-owned properties
situate at 29 Broad Street and 229 Sydney Street, namely, that of Gerald J. Ryan Co. Ltd. to demolish each
property for the sum of $1,000.00 each, be accepted.
Councillor Hodges asked how long, after awarding of the demolition contract, the contractor will
take to commence demolition. He noted that the Council had awarded tenders for demolition on April 26th
last, and that the buildings in question are still standing, in the South End of the city. The Building
Inspector replied that in some cases the contractor commences to demolish the following day, and in other
,cases the contractor does not commence until he receives notification from the Council meeting of the
tender award. He added that there has been a delay regarding demolition of one of the properties involved
in the April 26th tender award.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by
Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, dated April 30th,
filed, this report advising as follows in reply to reports requested by Common
.
I
Councillor MacGowan asked when the report regarding vacant and dilapidated housing will
complete. Mr. Barfoot stated that it would be at least two more weeks before the said report can
finalized. Councillor MacGowan commented that there are some houses that need to come down, very
gently. /1r. Barfoot replied that there are a lot of vacant houses, allover the city.
be
be
ur-
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, stating that
because of budget cut-backs this year, no funds were included, in the budget for the regular Spring Clean-
Up Campaign, and that, however, the Commissioner of Engineering and Works is recommending that a clean-up
be carried out this year, but not to include the free pick-up of abandoned vehicles and parts, the cost of
which work will be approximately $5,000.00 to $6,000.00 and will be made up from other parts of the
budget - and recommending that the week of Hay 10th to 14th be set aside as "Spring Clean-Up Week" in the
Inner Tax Zone, and the week of May 17th to 21st be "Spring Clean-Up Week" in the Outer Tax Zone -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
Noting that abandoned vehicles or those that are left lying around their properties by people
are creating another eyesore in the City of Saint John, Councillor Higgins felt that those responsible
should possibly start issuing notices that within a certain period of time the abandoned wreck has to be
taken away or the City will haul it away and charge the owner. Mr. Barfoot confirmed that such provision
is still in force in the City's by-laws and that the Building Inspector is involved in this enforcement.
Mr. Ellis, in reply to the question of taking action regarding such vehicles, advised that the Unsightly
Premises By-Law requires notification by the Common Clerk to remove the cars, and failing such removal,
the Council has to be asked for permission to prosecute. Councillor H. Vincent expressed gratification
that the clean-up week is now going to be held, after all. He asked if there is going to be an advert-
ising campaign to notify the citizens that it is going to be held, or is the only publicity going to be
this announcement, through this Council meeting. Mr. Barfoot replied that ,it is intended to carry out a
thorough promotion before the week starts in order to obtain a maximum effect from the clean-up campaign.
I
I
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated April
30th, 1976, in reply to the question raised at the April 26th last Council meeting as to the jurisdiction
of laying informations for by-law prosecutions, advising as follows:- that Section 101 of the Municipalities
:Act states, "An Information for breach of a by-law shall be laid in the name of the Clerk of the Munici-
pality or such other person as is designated for that purpose by the Council."; that, generally speaking,
the enforcement of which he would term as "police power" by-laws under the Municipalities Act, is the
responsibility of the Saint John Police Force - other by-laws, in which an enforcement officer is speci-
fically named, come within the jurisdiction of the City Manager; that while an Information for breach of a
by-law is laid in the name of the Clerk, the Clerk does not, on his own initiative, lay an information in
Court, without first being made aware of the facts and circumstances surrounding a particular offence;'
that inasmuch as the Legal Department is responsible for prosecuting by-law offences, the Police Depar~-
ment usually refers the matter to the Legal Department for examination following their investigation; that
following examination, and if sufficient evidence exists, an information is then prepared and laid before
.
~
r"
,429
.
('/-,!-:t
S".1tdi/pr
/fj.;J~h C't'U1r
lan,ts
1 Plun ~I/s
-I'/gpfi'/J'lff '
J?J'1t?v. Gt:!vt'.
,Ltz,C, ~Pvt-.
I
. 1'9j7'17e<zme./A
IrvlJ?f
;t? ,/In /I7.5,ft.
Ct?uPld~f/
:P.;lff
II/.iil~b
C"'dA- Jd
1
.
I
I
.
ll...c,
the Court by the Clerk -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated April 30th, 1976,
with respect to land and land covered by water from the present Courtenay Bay causeway to the Marsh Creek
bridge, noting that the Council has requested the information contained in this letter in the light of thepre-
sent meetings and decisions taking place among the three levels of government concerning the Glen Falls flooding,
and advising the area that was received by the Federal Government from the City in 1927 known as the Saint John
Harbour included an area from what is presently the said causeway, north to the Marsh Creek bridge, which was
defined as the southern side of Rothesay Avenue, and at that time, the centre of Marsh Creek comprised the
eastern boundary of the City limits; and further advising that the eastern half portion of the Creek and Courtenay
Bay above the said causeway made up of land covered by water and land between high and low water mark was
vested, at that time, in the Province of New Brunswick, and that in 1930, the Province conveyed to the Federal
Government this land using as part as its boundary the centre line of the Creek and Courtenay Bay above the
causeway northerly to the point of conflusion of Dutchman's Creek and Marsh Creek - this, in 1930, the land in
question became vested in the Federal Government; and further advising that in 1960 the New Brunswick Legis-
lature ratified and confirmed the following two agreements:- (1) the 1959 agreement entered into between the
Municipality of the County of Saint John, the City of Saint John, the Simonds Highway Board, the Simonds Sewerage
Board and Irving Refining Limited, dealing with the construction of the Courtenay Bay causeway (Which agreement
was ratified and confirmed by the Provincial Legislature in 1959) - which agreement was amended by an agreement
of 1960; (2) an agreement of 1960 between'the Federal Government and the Municipality of the County of Saint
John (the amending agreement provided, among other things, that the County of the Municipality of Saint John
would convey to Irving Refining Limited land known as Courtenay Bay north of the present causeway location in
exchange for construction of the causeway; - the 1960 agreement contained the description of the property to be
conveyed); and further advising that in 1960, the Federal Government granted Letters Patent to the Municipality
of the County of Saint John of the lands described in the agreements, and the Letters Patent granted, contained
118 acres and a second parcel of two acres being all the land north of the present causeway and extending to the
Marsh Creek bridge - in order for a conveyance in this area to contain 120 acres such conveyance had to include
land covered by water, and further advising that in December, 1960, the Municipality of the County of Saint John
in accordance with its agreement with Irving Refining Limited conveyed all the area it received from the Federal
Government to Irving Refining Limited - the deed of conveyance used the same description as the description
contained in the deed from the Federal Government to the Municipality of the County of Saint John - this deed
was registered in the Registry Office in and for the County of Saint John on July 31st, 1961, in Book 384, Page
298 - a search of the records from that date does not indicate any conveyance of the area from Irving Refining
Limited which subsequently became known as Irving Oil Limited; and stating that from the aforegoing, and from
the title search carried out by the staff of the Legal Department, it is his opinion that the land covered by
water, and land not covered by water to the line of occupation from the present causeway site to the 11arsh Creek
bridge is vested in Irving Refining Limited, and adding that, however, research is continuing on whether the
City owned the bed of the Marsh Creek above the bridge in 1927, and included such land to the Federal Government
in the 1927 conveyance, and that further research should reveal ownership of the bed above the bridge and any
connection with the Federal Government -- be received and filed and research continue, and, also, that the Legal
Department pursue the question of the effect of possible non-fulfillment of conditions of the agreement with the
party involved as to where title to the land presently'vests between the causeway and the Marsh Creek bridge.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if, in effect, the City Solicitor in the above report is saying that
because of the courses of action that have taken place over the years it has, in all probability, become very
difficult for the City to gain access to that land in the forebay (that is, Courtenay Bay) that is owned by the
Irving interests. Mr. Rodgers replied that he believes that the difficulty that anyone faces with having access
to someone else's land exists - nothing different than that, though, and that is what his report is saying with
respect to the land that is covered by water and the land between high and low water mark from the present
causeway to the bridge, where it presently vests in Irving Refining Limited. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the
City Solicitor, in the above report, is suggesting that it is going to be perhaps impossible to do that - for
the City to gain that property because of previous agreements or arrangements. He stated that his point is, he
does not know what the Council is going to do with further research. Councillor Higgins noted that the further
research relates to the area above the Marsh Creek bridge, which is the area that Councillor A. Vincent was
referring to, and the question as to whether sections of that Marsh Creek stream above the said bridge are on
Federal Government property. Councillor Higgins recalled that a previous Common Council passed an amendment to
the Zoning By-Law of that time, placing a Heavy Industrial zoning classification on the land between the causeway
and the Marsh Creek bridge that was given to Irving Refining Limited because that company built the causeway,
and stated that he doubts very much that the Irving interests are going to be very interested in having the
forebay in that area that has already been zoned by the Common Council for industrial expansion. He stated that
he wants the research to continue regarding the question of City ownership of the bed of the Marsh Creek above
the bridge in 1927 and whether such land was included in the 1927 conveyance to the Federal Government, and he
'_ wants to know where the Federal Government comes anywhere along the Marsh Creek waterway.
Councillor MacGowan recalled that the meeting held this afternoon with the Federal and Provincial
Government representatives, it was intimated that the terms of the agreement had not been fulfilled and that,
actually, ownership would have expired on that. She asked if that is true. Mr. Rodgers replied that if the
question is because the party, as the Councillor suggested, may be defaulted on a clause in the agreement, where
does the title to the land vest - that would not affect that - that is another question, altogether. He stated
that there is nothing in the documents to say that title to land vesting is conditional upon the party having to
perform an action - so, whether the party is in default of some agreement in 1960 is a separate question altogether
as to where title to the land presently vests between the causeway and the Marsh Creek bridge. Councillor
MacGowan asked whether Mr. Rodgers will be pursuing that question further, also, that is, the effects of the
violation of, say, some part of the agreement. Mr. Rodgers replied that that is another question, and he asked
if the Council wants him to pursue that. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the Council is asking the City Solicitor
to look into the five-year aspect of that agreement, and if that is going to be done. Councillor Pye stated
that according to Volume 19, Page 369, of Maritime Provinces Reports involving the case of the Attorney General
of New Brunswick versus the Town of Newcastle and Flett, unless fill was due to gradual accretion which is a
gradual increase in size, and not by dumping, the title to this filled-in land would not accrete to the owner of
the land - which is now K. C. Irving - above the high water mark and would remain in the Crown. He noted that,
in other words, anything the other side of the original summer normal high water mark - in other words, any fill
that has been dumped and caused an extension of that area - that belongs to the Crown and not to the man who
dumps. The Mayor stated that he will not try to answer that point, but he thinks there was an agreement between
the Crown and the owner of that property now, as to what he could do and could not do. Councillor Green recalled
that at the time the said agreement was negotiated the Irving interests had offered to the City of Saint John
that they would build a four-lane highway there at the time and the arrangement called for a two-lane highway,
and the Council of the City of Saint John of that day turn the offer of the four-lane highway down, figuring
that if Irving could do it he might make some money at it and they (the Council) would wait for a period of time
until it was needed. He felt that it is too bad that the four-lane highway has not been done because we have
now enlarged both ends of the causeway and the City has to negotiate a piece of land in the centre now to have
it widened; with the cost today, he felt it will run into a large sum of money to do this. At this point, the
mover and seconder of the motion agreed to include in the motion that the point regarding the effect of an
agreement and conditions which someone believes have not been fulfilled - which point was raised during the
430'
~
J)Pff .zy-4'~w
{!/fI?7/;>? Wh,k
31 SOliJ?~:Ji,hn
S(f!lrn~ ~I/
(;lre.5r
C",J>7)>J. WbP!e
c-l7. Fe/.1'~e>15'
tlfu l'J/c;Pdh' hes
aforegoing discussion by Councillor MacGowan - be pursued by the Legal Department, as well.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting the
Control of Dogs in The City of Saint John Made Under the Authority of Section 97 of the Municipalities Act
1966 and Amendments Thereto", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law Respecting the Control of Dogs in The City of Saint John Hade
Under the Authority of Section 97 of the Municipalities Act 1966 and Amendments Thereto", was read in its
entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
Read Report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, March 15th, 1976, when there were
present Mayor Flewwelling, and Councillors Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and
M. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
1. That the letter from 31 Saint John Service Battalion, advising that the unit has been directed
by Headquarters to prepare a unit crest which would be unique (geography, history, origin of place name,
et cetera) and that since the unit's name bears the words "Saint John" it has been proposed to incorporate
the Coat of Arms of the City of Saint John as the centre of the crest, as shown on the submitted design,
and that subject to the Common Council's approval to incorporate the Coat of Arms of the City in this
crest, the design will then be forwarded to the Governor-General of Canada and to Her Majesty the Queen
for final approval, and further advising that the unit would be greatly honoured to have this opportunity
to incorporate the City's Coat of Arms into its Crest, be received and filed and the necessary approval
from Common Council be granted in this regard.
3rd May, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the re-
commendation contained therein adopted.
Read Report of the Committee of the Whole
(as fOllows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, April 26th, 1976, when there were
present Mayor Flewwelling, and Councillors Cave, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and
A. Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
1. That four members of Common Council be authorized to attend the 1976 conference of
Federation of Mayors and Municipalities that is to be held in Vancouver, British Columbia.
the Canadian
3rd,May, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recom-
mendation contained therein adopted.
Councillor Gould enquired if there was a motion in open session of Council that sort of con-
tradicted the above motion recommended from the April 26th Committee of the Whole meeting. The Common
Clerk, referring to Common Council minutes of April 12th, 1976, advised that a motion to send four Coun-
cillors and the Mayor to the said conference was defeated, and that the following motion was then adopted,
namely, "That the matter relating to representation from the City of Saint John at the forthcoming con'-
ference in Vancouver of ,the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities be left open and that the
matter be discussed between the Council and the staff and the number wishing to attend the said conference
be determined at that time.". He added that, preceding the said two motions, a motion proposed by Councillor
A. Vincent that no-one attend the said conference, was not seconded. The Mayor pointed out that the
Council then went on in Committee of the Whole (on April 26th last) and passed the recommendation that is
reported in the Committee of the Whole report in question, and he therefore felt that same was apparently
not contrary to the said April 12th last motion of Council in this regard, because the Council subsequently,
at the said Committee of the Whole meeting, determined the number from Council that would attend the
conference. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he thinks that the course of action that Council took in
this matter in Committee of the Whole, at which meeting he was not present, perhaps might not quite be
right - he noted that the motion that four Councillors and the Mayor be allowed to go, that was proposed
at the April 12th meeting in, open session, was defeated, and that as a result of that motion he made
another motion that it be left open that whoever wished to go from Council be granted permission or be
authorized to go. He felt that from that said motion in open session to this motion that is before
Council now~ which is a repeat of a similar motion the Council entertained in open session on April:12th
last, it is his opinion that the Committee of the Whole motion is changing the intent of the motion
made in open session on that date. The Mayor, in referring to the motion that was adopted on April 12th
last, as quoted above, stated that he believes that the Council carried out the action of that April 26th
last report that the Council did in Committee of the Whole, to get it ,over with. Councillor Gould com-
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
JII"'""
431
.
1
,,(Dl;'~ am
c. s . c.1f'/;1~-
", f2"r- ~ -t-.:t.
I $p6eff S
stores ~.ht
/Il//I/aje /14
ht-
.
mented that the said April 12th motion says "left open.. . and discussed" and then a motion was made as to limit
them again, and he felt that is not the same thing as that intended motion, at all. The Mayor recalled that the
Council had a deadline date in which to reply as to the number of Council members who are to attend this con-
ference and it had to be finalized in order to report it out and proceed with the bookings.
Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting during the preceding discussion.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green, Pye, MacGowan, Davis, Hodges and
Kipping voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors M. Vincent, Gould and Parfitt voting "nay". Councillor
Parfitt stated that she feels attendance by one Council member at this conference is sufficient.
Councillor Higgins re-entered the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, to whom had been
referred the letter from C.S.C. Management Limited of Stellarton, N. S. with reference to Lot A on Millidge
Avenue that is owned by Sobey's Stores Limited and the desire of that company to dispose of this undeveloped site
with the City providing the company with a complete waiver of all of the City's rights under the existing option,
advising that in 1965 the City of Saint John entered into an agreement with the said company to sell a parcel of
land to the company on Millidge Avenue, the said parcel of land being shown on the submitted plan as Lot 22, and
further advising that the condition of sale was that during the third and twenty-second year the City had the
option to purchase the land back from Sobey's Limited for the sum of $10,000.00 should the company not build
commercial buildings of a cost value of at least $25,000.00, and further advising that on March 25th the said
management company acting for Sobey's Limited, wrote to the City and said that Sobey's Limited had not carried
out nor did they intend to carry out any development on this site -- and recommending that the City exercise its
option to repurchase Lot 22 on Millidge Avenue from Sobey's Limited under the conditions of the agreement entered
into by the City and Sobey's Limited on October 6th, 1966 -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
With regard to the above matter, Councillor Davis recalled that Sobey's Limited asked the City's
permission to retain the ownership of the said Lot 22 so that it could sell the lot, and he stated that the Land
Committee feels that this property at the moment is worth considerably more than $10,000.00 and that the City
should therefore purchase back this land.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with regard
~~~.I1~V/' .to the application from Mr. William Aucoin for permission to place a mobile home on the northern side of Pipeline
COb?I17. Road (off Gault Road), advising that the area is zoned "RS-2" Suburban Residential in which the Committee may
~A~,"e ~_ permit a mobile home but Pipeline Road is not included in the list of streets located within areas designated for
"/vP,li ~~ mobile home location on individual lots; and further advising that Mr. Aucoin wants to locate his mobile home
~I'jj' behind the house of Mr. Reginald Olsen on the site which is presently occupied by ~~. Olsen's recreation trailer
/ /~In and which will become vacant when the trailer is moved to the country by Mr. Olsen, and that in that location,
I9b<CQIJ? sub-division of Mr. Olsen's lot cannot meet By-Law requirements (and advising that the said lot, which has an
area of 113,316 square feet, can be sub-divided because the minimum required lot area is 43,560 square feet for a
one-family dwelling or a mobile home, and the lot measurements would meet the minimum requirements); and further
advising that Pipeline Road is not a public street but is kept open by the City merely to provide access to the
water pipeline for maintenance and repairs and the Works Department advised that the type of pipe used in this
pipeline is not one that can take a lot of vibration and that Department does not advocate increased traffic
along this right-of-way; and further advising that if and when the proposed Rocca new housing development at
Nelson Vale is developed, a new street will be built parallel to and adjoining the Pipeline Road on the south
side; and further advising that the Committee would not agree to a mobile home at this location on a permanent
basis, which it is empowered to permit and it was felt that this area should be developed for conventional
housing; and further advising that the question of a temporary location which is within Council's jurisdiction
was then discussed by the Committee but the Committee recommends that the application to locate a mobile home on
the said Olsen Property be denied -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
.
I
/lsse~-#- #0
'8 (7hOl/d +-
.Ter'Y, $.67' r~
SUb-a/v.
'PuJt'e
~u.p'p"$es
/OII?At
U,{. e?J1
t-a.tle)
I
I1ss6"n1f- ~o
.6/,;,r ~
$~-r4(/,
Ptdt'c!
'pur~:$e$
/Cina:
......
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
Advisory Committee, the Common Council assent to the Ronald and Jerry Smith Sub-division which comprises ap-
proximately 30 acres of land on the northerly side of Golden Grove Road and which extends to within 150 feet of
Irwin Lake -- and that the letter from the said Committee in this matter, dated April 20th, 1976, advising that
the proposal is to divide this property into three lots of approximately equal acreage, and that the Planning and
Recreation and Parks Departments staff discussed the matter of land for public purposes or money in lieu therefor
and the Planning Advisory Committee felt that the land for public purposes could be an access strip (about 83
feet wide and about 950 feet long) on the westerly side of the property leading from Golden Grove Road to the 150
foot side strip of land surrounding Irving Lake that is owned by the Town of Rothesay, be received and filed.
Referring to the map which was submitted with the above named Planning Advisory Committee letter,
Councillor Gould raised the question as to how access is going to be attained to Lot 3 shown on the sai'd map, off
the Golden Grove Road. Mr. Zides replied that he thinks that the intent is to sub-divide this land into two
lots, actually, instead of three as shown on the said map, but that he cannot answer the question because he does
not know the answer. With reference to the notation on the said map, showing "land for public purposes" as being
a strip of land the same depth as Lot 1, Mr. Zides explained that it is land to be vested in the City as land for
public purposes, and that does not include streets.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter 'from the Planning Advisory, Committee, advising
that the Filippo Rocca Sub-division property comprises about four acres and lies on the northerly side of Dever
Road opposite its intersection with Roderick Row; that the proposal is to sever two lots from it (Lot 76-1 has an
area of 14,422 square feet and a frontage of 112.1 feet - Lot 76-2 has an area of 9,243 square feet and a frontage
of 78.8 square feet - the remaining parcel, Lot 76-3 is 3.5 acres in area and will probably be sub-divided in the
future involving a new street for access); that the Recreation and Parks Department recommended that a parcel of
land at the rear of Lots 76-1 and 76-2 and to the east of Lot 76-2 in the amount of 10,400 square feet comprising
six per cent of the total areas to be accepted as land for public purposes to be held in trust until such time
1432
~
?Pu.t//c /,"'''Iu:>.s
4'7/
?41;/7, /lM/s.-
LbJt,?n .
;Zo~/J'l5 ~-...(Q;!
/I!,'17I'/I?Ofh7
S/~I!'S ~r /o7f.s
?"Or::"/ama-I-J e,J?
C1.~/".. WeeK
tl: .7Jp~j;;s 67(8)'l
~~meht' in /,'
'pfK,.Jj/'c ~,.-
?I7Si!! /.;:In;!
j?/.;,nl7. /lp(l//5.
aMb?
that a more suitable piece of land is provided when the 3.5 acre Lot 76-3 is sub-divided, and that the
parcel now proposed to be set aside contains the area required for all three lots - however, the further
expected sub-division of Lot 76-3 would permit the land for public purposes to be relocated and put into a
more regular good-sized lot 10,400 square feet) which is suitable for a tot-lot, for example; that the
area proposed to be held by the City is shown coloured yellow on the submitted plan; that in the event the
Planning Advisory Committee might prefer to recommend money in lieu of land for public purposes, an
appraisal was obtained from the Property Management Branch and the valuation of the two additionally
proposed Lots 76-1 and 76-2 at this time was given as $8,200.00, which means that $656.00 (8% of this
value) would have to be paid to the City in lieu of land for public purposes -- and recommending that the
City assent to the proposed sub-division plan in respect of accepting the proposed 10,400 square foot area
as land to be held in trust until such time that a more suitable piece of land is provided when the 3.5
acre Lot 76-3 is sub-divided -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
In reply to Councillor Green's question as to whether the above named parcel of land is satis-
factory to the Recreation and Parks Department, Mr. Nicolle advises that it is satisfactory. The Mayor
noted that the said 10,400 square foot area is down over a steep hill and added that once that land is
filled in he does not see how this public purposes land could be used; he added that there exists now a
little park on Roderick Row, quite near this site, as well as a big sports field in that area, and he
therefore does not see why the City just does not take the money in lieu of public purposes land. Mr.
Zides pointed out that there is always a gamble when things like this are done because there is nothing to
prevent a man from changing his mind; but, at the moment, what is happening is that there is a road being
developed along the right-hand side of that property and that road is going to provide the opportunity for
opening up all of that land - Lot 76-3 - for a further sub-division and there would be a number of lots in
there and it would be possible to get a lot of about 10,400 square feet, which is something just a little
bigger than 76-2 which could be used by the City for a tot-lot, for example. Councillor Kipping stated he
wonders if it is legally possible to make such an arrangment - that the City can hold this land in trust
until such time as a more suitable piece of land is provided, when the sub-division takes place. Mr.
Zides replied that you can require an individual to vest in the City a certain amount of land and by pre-
arrangement if he vests something else afterwards you can swap it. He added that you can sell the land
provided that that is recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee. Councillor Kipping noted that, in
other words, it is possible just to trade land later but on agreement of the two parties. Mr. Zides stated
that is so, if this was a prior agreement that this could be done. Councillor Kipping noted that in this
particular case, because this is actually an unsatisfactory piece of land, he felt that you (the Planning
Advisory Committee) would want a more suitable piece, later. ~IT. Zides confirmed that this is the intent.
Councillor Kipping asked if that kind of clause is going into this particular agreement. Mr. Zides
replied that it would be, as part of any arrangement. He stated that there have been many precedents for
this, elsewhere in the city - that the City took title to the land which was held in trust until such time
as further sub-division took place - one such instance was the Ellerdale Place development, and another
such instance was the Harbourview Sub-division. Councillor Green explained that his reason for questioning
in this matter was to determine that the piece of land that would be reserved in trust for the City in the
matter now before Council would not be a piece of land that would be unusable for public purposes and that
the, land,that the City is to eventually receive is compatible for the recreational use of the area.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that with regard to proposed amendments to the Zoning By-Law which the Committee recommended to
conform to new Provincial regulations on minimum sizes for lots to be used for on-site sewage disposal and
which the Council on March 1st last referred to the City Solicitor for legal review, that notwithstanding
that the By-Law had not been amended, the new Provincial regulations came into force within the City and
the application of these regulations raised several questions on the proposals, and the key ones dealt
with whether parts of the Rural zones regulations should not have been included, whether the proposed
regulations adequately protected smaller lots included within previously filed sub-division plans and
whether lot depths (including the Sub-division By-Law regulations) also needed to be covered; and further
advising that the City Solicitor was made aware of these possible changes and that they would be taken
back to the Committee and subsequently Council; and further advising that rather than work piecemeal over
the previous material, the submitted is a new or revised draft which is now being recommended by the
Committee for enactment by Common Council, and copies of this letter and the submitted material are being
sent to the City Solicitor -- be received and filed and authority be granted to proceed to advertise the
proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law and the proposed amendment to the Sub-division By-Law regarding
septic tank lot sizes.
Read a letter from Mr. Jopseh R. Mullie, National Chairman of Canada Week which is sponsored by
The Council for Canadian Unity, advising that Canada Week is to be observed June 25th to July 1st and its
theme is "Canada - We love it!", and that the support of the Common Council is requested in that the
Council officially proclaim Canada Week, and invite service clubs and other voluntary organizations in the
community to form committees for Canada Week as soon as possible - and advising that The Council for
Canadian Unity (formerly The Canada Committee) would be most grateful for anything the Common Council can
do to publicize, promote, and encourage participation in Canada Week 1976. Councillor Kipping advised
that he is involved in the said Council for Canadian Unity, and that Canada Week is one of the projects of
that Council to engender pride in Canada, promote national unity and encourage dialogue and understanding
among Canadians. He noted that the local co-Chairmen of the Canada Week are Messrs. Frank Ervin and
Robert Hoyt, in addition to the Provincial Chairman, Mr. Jack E. Stevens.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that Canada Week, June 25th to July 1st, be officially
proclaimed in the City of Saint John and that the Common Council invite service clubs and other voluntary
organizations in this community to form committees for Canada Week.
'c
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. G. Douglas Queen of 131 Golden
Grove Road, Saint John East, advising that on February 10th, 1976 he was required to submit a payment of
$536.00 to the City of Saint John as payment in lieu of providing land for public purposes regarding Lot
C, Plan 252 on sub-divided property of C. Bertram Queen, and advising that he objects strongly to this
payment as this property is not being used as a sub-division as the fee would indicate, but this lot was
sub-divided only as a family gesture, and that he would therefore like to have the opportunity of dis-
cussing this matter if a refund is not permissible, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for
study and proper response.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
r"
:BJ?~~ J:
. Si-eyel7S
7?l?-.UI7/hl"
?4'Jt?1'96'/$-
C'e>"?h7 .
1.6~r~
11e-zoH/hf
?%>~n. h'd'VIS
C'pmh?
:a4~h
I ;=-",art tvh/~e
~r r~/"'s
11'11 5/~<<Ik,
.s~-t/ol7 .$i
~/lee Chi
,(,1<< C'~~A
/#/.5m-t-/e
./V.#/..G-A,,;t.
rC'O->>.p?i
I
I
I
.l3p('5 sel'v/
~.se.ffJ1(fre1'J
hfA.~M IY~'
/1S5D~.
7f.9'I?:i ~,..fOJ
~"~J7 (!p~h?
.
'PI'OI/_ ~.
i-~o/"P':~01-
-t-I Ph ::--t~
lI....
43~)
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application from Mr. Bruce J. Stevens for re-zoning of a
parcel of land situate at the southeast corner of Lowell Street and City Line, Saint John West, comprising 22,005
square feet, on which to construct a 12-unit apartment building for rental, be referred to the Planning Advisory
Committee for a recommendation and that authority be granted to advertise the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application from Mrs. Eileen Fudge for re-zoning of
vacant land situate at the corner of Sandy Point Road and MacLaren Boulevard on which she proposes to establish a
building containing bachelor apartments and stores, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recom-
mendation and that authority be granted to advertise the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Miss Blanche G. Jones of 126 Station Street,
advising that she and her sister are very much disturbed by the garage next door to them, owned by Mr. Fred
White, in that he parks his cars under the bedroom window and also parks on the sidewalk and does his work on
them so that when they want to walk on the street they have to telephone to him to have the car removed, and
expressing the view that Mr. White is breaking the law, and asking that remedial action be taken regarding this
situation, be referred to the Chief of Police for a report.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. L. W. Crandall of 999 Seawood Lane,
Saint John West, submitting a number of questions pertaining to information he would like to have on the Atlantic
National Exhibition, be referred to the Mayor's Committee on the Atlantic National Exhibition.
Councillor Kipping asked when the Council might expect a report from the Mayor's Committee on the
Atlantic National Exhibition. Councillor M. Vincent, Chairman of the said Committee, advised that the Committee
was appointed by Council resolution of November 26th, 1975 and the Nominating Committee brought forward the names
of a number of people who, indicated an interest to serve on the Committee; the Committee was formed without,
specific guidelines as to its terms of reference and operation; the Committee has met a number of times and the
primary course of action that the Committee has taken is to establish a sub-committee consisting of Dr. Henry
Wattas as chairman, and Mrs. Mildred Crawford and Mr. Norman Jackson as committee members; the over-all committee
had directed that the sub-committee meet with the Board of Directors and interested officials of the Atlantic
National Exhibition on a fact-finding mission, and after having gathered the necessary facts that they bring back
to the over-all Committee the information they had gathered; there has been no meeting held between the sub-
committee and the Exhibition officials; the information he has is that the chairman of the said sub-committee,
Dr. Watts, has been unable to arrange for a meeting to be held, for numerous reasons, and he was advised today
that Dr. Watts has had some meetings with the City officials of various capacities and that as a result of this
meeting the over-all Committee will be advised in the not-too-distant fUture on what decision he (Dr. Watts)
wishes to make when he receives the answers, to a number of questions he has raised. Councillor M. Vincent stated
that the second major problem is that the Committee has had a very poor attendance from the people who accepted
and who agreed to serve on that Committee as introduced by individual Councillors and by the Nominating Com-
mittee. He stated that, as a matter of fact, at four particular meetings there were three members of the Com-
mittee present. He stated that, as the person asked by the Mayor to chair the Committee, if he calls another
meeting of the over-all Committee and they meet with the same negative results as they have met, to date, it is
his intention to report back to the Mayor and Council as a whole that the Committee either be done away with and
a new committee formed, with additional or new members brought forward who wish to serve on the committee,
enabling it as a functioning Committee to try and do the job that it was originally set up for. He added that
this report will give the Council some idea of what the said Committee has been doing and has been trying to do,
since November 26th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the following correspondence be received and filed:- (1) a
petition from citizens of Simonds Junior High School, expressing their concern for thorough pOlice training and
that the City of Saint John must demand and make full provision for a Police Department which is well trained and
adequately equipped to fight the criminal element in today's complex society, and expressing commendation of the
Chief of Police for his good leadership and of those policemen who have accepted the responsibility of their
positions by taking training whenever and wherever necessary, and stating that other types of individuals are
unacceptable; (2) a letter from Mr. Edward A. Farren, Jr. of Simonds Junior High School, noting that some dis~
sident members of the City's police force are attempting to take issue with the matter of police training, and
urging that the Mayor and Common Council give full support to the present programme of police training as an
enlightened and well-trained police force can do much to gain public respect and in crime prevention, and stating
that the City's present Police Chief deserves a great deal of credit for the improved quality of the City's
police force and that the many policemen who have taken further training deserve praise for their commitment to
the responsibilities of a police officer in these complex times and that, consequently, he has seen an improve-
ment in relations between the police and some of our youth, and this can only reduce the incident of our young in
conflict with the law.
Councillor Parfitt asked if the Chief of Police in the years ahead would look to the schools for future
recruits for the Police Department, and commented that she thinks the writers of the above named petition have
the right idea.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. J. B. Griffin, President of the Federal
Superannuates National Association, Saint John, N. B., Branch, requesting that the bus transportation service of
the City of Saint John be fully restored as several elderly citizens of Saint John, including members of the said
organization, have been molested while walking on the streets, due to the lack of public transportation, be
received and filed and referred to the Transportation Committee and to the Chief of Police.
,
..
Counci~lor Kipping stated that it is his understanding that the Provincial Transportation Study is now
completed and will be in the Council's hands within two weeks. He asked if it is correct, then, to say that when
~he Council has that Study it will analyze our local problem and arrive at a course of action intended to relieve
the burden which our admittedly unsatisfactory transportation service now is placing upon many of our citizens.
He stated that he would hope that would be the Council's intention: that when the Council gets that Study that it
'434
,
~
LEG A L
KtW:iin/s C'd-
/I?r
/ep 'P 7J:t ~
C'pUH. ~....
~'?fy ..)Qtc-I=t-o.
'j(e~in~/~
hJeri-;;Cn
aiel? ~
will go ahead and deal with it, because we do have an unsatisfactory transportation service _ he thinks we
all admit that. With regard to molesting on the streets, he stated that he understands that more police
are walking beats now, and this is something which most members of Council, he is sure, and citizens
favour; so, we are expecting very significant results from such improved, effective use of police.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Mr. Rodgers at this time discussed with Council his letter of April 20th, 1976, addressed to
Council regarding the Council resolution of April 26th, 1976 whereby the City has agreed to convey Lot 1,
Kiwanis Court, to Mr. Leo P. Pye - that is, to Councillor Lep Pye, he understands. The letter states that
insofar as Councillor Pye did not disclose his interest in this matter, and is recorded as voting on the
issue, it is the City Solicitor's opinion that this transaction is wrong as being against the general
policy of the law. The letter states that as far as the City Solicitor can determine, there is no statutory
law in New Brunswick prohibiting such a transaction; however, the common law is against such practice, the
most relevant case being the 1946 Supreme Court of New Brunswick case of the Attorney General of New
Brunswick versus the Town of Newcastle and Flett where the said Town leased a parcel of land to Alderman
Flett, and Mr. Justice Harrison, in the course of his judgment said, "If the Town of Newcastle had any
interest in the land covered by the Lease to the Defendant Flett, the Lease must be set aside as a breach
of fiduciary relationship between the Defendant as Alderman and the Town". The letter further advises
that the leading text-book on Canadian Municipal Law titled, The Law of Canadian Municipal Corporation, in
dealing with contracts between Council members and the corporation states, "it follows that a contract
with a Council member is liable to be impeached as constituting a breach of the fiduciary relationship and
being against the general policy of the law.", and that the author relied on the 1946 Supreme Court of New
Brunswick case. The letter advises that, as it now stands, it is the City Solicitor's opinion that the
resolution authorizing the conveyance of title to Councillor Pye would be declared void, and, in view of
the foregoing, he is recommending that Council rescind its resolution at its open meeting of May 3rd,
1976. The letter further advises that if the City is still desirous of conveying this parcel of land to
Councillor Pye, and Councillor Pye discloses his interest and does not vote on the matter, the City
Solicitor still cannot assure Council that the transaction is proper in the light of the position taken by
the common law on this kind of transaction; and that, consequently, if such a transaction takes place
between the Corporation and a member of the Council the risk still exists that there is a breach of the
fiduciary relationship between the Councillors and the ratepayers and all members of Council are thus
implicated - however, the risk is somewhat lessened by the member involved disclosing his interests and
not voting on the question. Mr. Rodgers explained that he had hoped that this matter could have been
discussed in legal session, preceding the open session of this Council meeting, but it was not possible.
I
I
.
Considerable discussion ensued, during which Councillor Green advised that when the vote took
place at the Council meeting of April 26th, 1976, Councillor Pye had tried to get the attention of the
Mayor regarding the fact that he moved his seat back from the Council table and did not vote either for,
or against, the' said resolution. Councillor Green stated that at the time of taking the said vote, he had
told Councillor Pye not to abstain from voting, but to withdraw from the Council table, and he feels that
is what Councillor Pye intended in moving his seat back from the Council table, and that this information
may throw a different light on the matter. He noted that he was seated next to Councillor Pye at the Isaid
meeting. Councillor Pye confirmed that at the said meeting he had pushed his chair back from the Council
table and abstained from voting on the motion, and had been unable to get the Mayor's attention to notify
him of this fact. He noted that the Land Committee had dealt with this proposed purchase by him of the
said lot on two occasions and both times the legal representative of Mr. Rodgers was at the Land Committee
meeting and said nothing except to the effect that there might be some question raised - so, he (Councillor
Pye) naturally assumed that there would not be. He stated that it is rather annoying that this matter has
gone this far for him becuase he engaged a draftsman to draw the plans and he understands the cost in that
regard will be between $100.00 and $150.00, and as the draftsman's work was three-quarters finished it was
too late to stop him; so, that is the position in which he (Councillor Pye) is placed. Mr. Rodgers noted
that it is very simple for the Council to correct the situation - that is, the Council rescinds the said
resolution and then the matter comes before the Council for Councillor Pye to declare his interest in the
matter and not vote. He stated that, however, he is saying to the Council that the risk is somewhat
lessened if it is done that way;, right now, the way it stands, everything is absolutely clear that it is
wrong because of the fact that the records can well show - even though, as Councillor Green says, this was
sort of taking place - that Councillor Pye voted because he did not vote "nay" - the regulations say that
silence means an affirmative vote, at that point; the second point of it is Councillor Pye, himself. He
noted that Deputy Mayor Higgins during the aforegoing discussion, had stated, in all sincerity, that at
the April 26th last Council meeting he had voted on the matter thinking that the purchaser of the lot was
Councillor Pye's son.
I
.
Mr. Rodgers advised that, with regard to the question raised by Councillor Gould - that if the
Council rescinds the said motion and Councillor Pye leaves the Council Chamber and does not vote, who is
going to challenge the ruling? and does the City Solicitor think anybody will? - he does not know, and on
that point, he has already suggested to Councillor Pye that if the Council rescinds the resolution that he
seek legal advice on whether he should buy the property with that hanging in the balance - in other words,
Councillor Pye has got to be aware of the fact that a court could grant an injunction restraining him from
going on the land and the court could grant an injunction against the City to prevent the transfer. He
advised that the aforegoing advice he has given regarding the element of risk is based on the fact that as
elected people the Council members are merely private persons performing duties - the Council members are
not a legislative'body in this aspect, but are private persons, and in dealing with public monies and
public lands are holding same in trust. He stated that these comments would have to apply, even if the
wife of Councillor Pye were to purchase this lot and retain ownership of it and build her home on it.
I
I
Councillor Higgins suggested that the course of action to follow would be for the Council, under
the legal advice that it has, to rescind the said April 26th, 1976 resolution, and then Councillor Pye
state his interest publicly and withdraw from the meeting, and the Council then votes on the matter.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Council at the next public session of Common
Council, rescind the resolution of April 26th, 1976, to sell Lot 1, Kiwanis Court, to Mr. Leo P. Pye.
.
It was noted that at the next meeting, after rescinding the said motion, it is then the pre-
rogative of Councillor Pye to at that time declare his interest in the property and withdraw from the
Council Chamber and it is up to the Council to make a motion; on the other hand, if Councillor Pye does
not say anything, following rescinding of the said motion, the matter would just drop.
~
"""
~/'71 el/.;ldde
.s.o/. ?t1h~
'Prut'e:4,/ls$.
/ytl,6/
/!f?b#,...;d;o
::B~
.7J6'QI?/s
Kh/66
I
I ~tllA!?pi 3.
$t-a~h,
1i}~ff' t?!~
r $t-ad())?
tJr/e/l'd9nce
S.T Fi"Y'€
. F/~kfl"'
/15St1e ./Yo, 77-
. (fo",{()J'1. '
C?/;Ol/1/ipJ'/
~#~
S"Ze/-tpJ"
C'~PI.
W6A/e
I
.
I
I
.
l1H/e$-rI-
7?ey'fU/.
H'l"e 2),
~
43;;
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the copy of a letter, dated April 28th, 1976, from the
City Manager to Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61; C.U.P.E., in reply to the Assoc-
iation's letter to legal session of Common Council of April 26th last in which the Council was advised that the
Union is not satisfied with the Council's decision on, the grieved Article 6(1) of the current Working Agreement
and has named Mr. Robert Lockhart as the Union's nominee for ,the Arbitration Board in this matter -- advising the
Union that the City's nominee for the said Arbitration Board is Mr. Dennis Knibb of 41 Ocean Court, Saint John,
N. B., be received and filed and Mr. Knibb be confirmed as the City's nominee to the said Board.
Itr. D. French, who had withdrawn from the meeting at the commencement of the legal session, re-entered
the meeting just prior to this item.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors M. Vincent and A. Vincent voting "nay".
Mr. P. Clark, Fire Chief, who had withdrawn from the meeting at ,the commencement of the legal session,
re-entered the meeting at this time.
Read a letter from Mr. Robert D. Stanton of Riley, Mosher & Stanton, Barristers, dated April 26th,
1976, advising that with respect to the Common Council resolution passed on April 20th last to send the grievance
of Lieutenant Gordon Charlton of the Fire Department to Fire Chief Clark, they feel that the said act is not
allowable according to the Collective Agreement between the Saint John Fire Fighters' Association, Local 771 and
the City of Saint John, and that they would ask that this matter be reviewed by the Common Council in light of
the fact that the grievance procedure had been fulfilled correctly and that the next proper step would be ar-
bitration, and that, accordingly, they feel that there are only two alternatives - one being that the Council
reverse its decision and award the grievance to the union - and the other being to appoint an arbitrator -
failing either of the above, the union will have no other choice but to approach the Minister of Labour in order
to have him appoint an arbitrator on behalf of the City.
Read a letter from the City Solicitor, dated April 30th, 1976, with reference to the above named
letter, recalling that the Common Council on April 5th, 1976 in Committee of the Whole denied this grievance and
then rescinded its motion with respect to this matter with the expectations that the Fire Chief and Lieutenant
Charlton would pursue the matter under Section 22(e) of the Rules and Regulations concerning the loss of personal
equipment, and further recalling that the grievance, when it reached the Council level, contained two issues, (1)
'the issue of the loss of personal equipment and (2) the issue of an offence against discipline in which the Fire
Chief found Lieutenant Charlton guilty of negligence. The letter states that in view of the points outlined in
his letter to Council of April 20th, 1976, expressing the concern over the way the disciplinary matter was
handled, and now having regard to the request contained in the last paragraph of the above named letter from the
solicitor for the Union, Mr. Robert D. Stanton, the City Solicitor requests that he be given the
opportunity to discuss this further before Council makes a decision.
Mr. Rodgers noted that at the Council meeting of April 20th last, the Council rescinded its oplnlon
regarding this grievance instead of reversing its opinion with the said rescinding resolution including provision
that the Fire Chief and Lieutenant Charlton get together and discuss the matter of these items from personal
equipment, and he further noted that the Union's solicitor has raised the point that in reversing its decision
the Council has reached the stage where it has heard a grievance and it has not upheld or denied the grievance.
He stated that he is agreeing with that opinion - on the face of it, that is what happened; however, when the
letter came in from Mr. Stanton, he called Mr. Stanton on a solicitor to solicitor basis and advised Mr. Stanton
what he would be recommending to Common Council:- that the Council uphold the grievance with respect to the
disciplinary matter and deny the grievance on the personal equipment issue, and then proceed to arbitration on
whether the mask is personal equipment, because, under the Rules and Regulations, the two matters are divisible
one, where it says that if you lose personal equipment, the member has to pay - if the Chief decides it is
personal equipment, the member pays - it does not automatically follow that he has committed an offence against
discipline - but that is what came before the Council - these two issues - he is saying they are divisible, and
the Council can uphold one and deny the other. He stated that the solicitor for the Union got back to him and
said that the Union prefer to go to arbitration on the complete matter. He stated that he is still recommending,
however, that the Council deal with the two matters separately in that if you go to arbitration on the one issue
as it stands, and that has got then to be a question of the disciplinary matter, that the procedure was bad in
that sense because the letter that was sent by the Fire Chief in the first instance to Lieutenant Charlton
outlined two sections, two charges - personal equipment, plus the offence - it outlined the finding by the Chief
at that point in saying Lieutenant Charlton had to pay, and the letter closed with telling him that he was
entitled to a hearing. He stated that the City just would not succeed with that procedure - however, if the
matter goes before the Arbitration Board on whether that mask is personal equipment or not, then that is just a
decision that the Chief believes it is personal equipment and Council believes it is personal equipment, and the
Board will decide whether or not it is personal equipment.
At this time, Councillor Gould moved a motion, which Councillor Kipping seconded, that the Council deny
the grievance of Lieutenant Charlton regarding the personal equipment issue, and uphold the grievance with
respect to the disciplinary matter. This motion was withdrawn by these Councillors preceding the proposing of
the motion that was adopted later in the meeting regarding this matter.
Chief Clark was asked if he had any additional thoughts or comments with regard to dealing with the
grievance as a personal equipment issue and taking out the disciplinary aspect of the matter, altogether. Itr.
Rodgers stated that there are two separate questions involved: (1) that he lost personal equipment - the Chief
says this mask is personal equipment - and if it is personal equipment, the Rules and Regulations say that he has
to pay for it, and therefore the Chief says this man has to pay - that is clear; (2) did Lieutenant Charlton
commit an offence against discipline - which the Chief says he did - and there was a procedure followed; Mr.
Rodgers stated that he is saying that if the City goes to arbitration on that issue the procedure that was
followed will not be upheld; whether or not the City will be successful in dividing it at the Arbitration Board,
he does not know - but the Council can, at this stage, where the Rules and Regulations divide it, anyway _ it
came in the correspondence, divided - if the Council can uphold the grievance on the disciplinary matter and if
the Council believes it is personal equipment, deny the grievance on personal equipment - then, they cannot go to
arbitration on the disciplinary matter because Council would have already upheld that, and they can only go to
arbitration on the question of personal equipment.
Chief Clark stated that he thinks that the individual involved is guilty under both sections of the
Rules and Regulations of the Fire Department, and he somewhat questions now the ability of the City to separate
one from the other before the Board of Arbitration because what will be dealt with at that Board is the charges
laid, be it right or wrong. He stated that it would seem to him that if the Arbitration Board found that the
charge was improper - and that appears to be the opinion of the City Solicitor - then he thinks that the City is
in a very poor position to go to arbitration. He stated he was never one to recommend going to arbitration and
realizing in the back of his mind that he was going to lose, and that, for that reason, he'would recommend to
anybody he was representing - and he has done this, before - that if that persons has a very poor case that he
not go to that final step. He stated that if that is the situation, it would seem to him that it would behoove
the City to decide in favour of the Union. Councillor Hodges concurred in the Chief's remarks, stating that if
436
tJ J"/ e J/.;J~e
(J,? J"dl:m
C' ~d J"/-IDn
$,;!: F/J'le H'
Il$SfPC, ;YP. 77/
H'Y'e. L'h/e-/!
J
"!
the City were to move on one issue, its case is poor and very weak, and he recognizes the fact that the
Chief was speaking from experience. Chief Clark noted that the City Solicitor is saying that we have ~ade
an error in this particular case, that it will have no bearing or effect on any future cases. He stated
that, if, for some reason or other, an employee of the Fire Department with, in his opinion, no regard for
the property of the City, exercises no responsibility and loses equipment belonging to the City, then he
should be charged under pe,haps one or the other, but not both. He stated that the charge in question
was, in his opinion, a neglect ,of duty under the Disciplinary Code - and other the other section of the
Rules and Regulations which ~ndicates that if you lose personal equipment - and it is personal equipment,
in his opinion - then it is ~tated that the penalty is that the person involved shall pay for the cost.
During further discussion, Mr\. Rodg,ers noted that the disciplinary matter can be corrected regarding
procedure, but the personal c~!uipmeFt issue is a separate section and if Council upholds the grievance on
that question it is saying t""ht the] mask is not personal equipment. ,
~ fi
Mr. Barfoot asked if' it is possible for the Council to uphold the grievance on the grounds that
the charging of Lieutenant Charlton with the cost of the mask was not a proper penalty for the disciplinary
charge. Mr. Rodgers stated that if the grievance is upheld in its total form the Council is saying that
the disciplinary matter was followed improperly - he assumes that is why the Council is upholding that -
and the Council is saying that the mask is not personal equipment -- that is why he is recommending that
the Council divide the two.
~
.
I
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the Fire Chief as Director of the Fire Department is satisfied I
that he wants that grievance to stand on the personal equipment issue. Mr. Rodgers noted that the main
witness the City would call before the Board to establish that it is personal equipment is the Fire Chief.
Councillor A. Vincent felt that the Council would be better off trying to have a meeting with
them to get a letter without prejudice that in upholding the whole thing the Council would not be es-
tablishing a precedent. He stated that it is his recommendation that the Council uphold the whole grievance
and get a letter from the President of the Union stating that the upholding of the whole grievance will
not be used as a precedent in any way. In discussing this recommendation of Councillor A. Vincent, it was
noted that the Council would get the said letter first from the Union, and if the Union's reply is negative,
then the Council go back to the motion to deny one part of the grievance and uphold the other part of ,the
grievance. Mr. Rodgers noted that Councillor A. Vincent's proposed motion has merit if the Union will
agree to it. With regard to the suggestion made by Councillor A. Vincent, Chief Clark asked if it de~
,velops in that way, is he then placed in the position that he now, with his Department policy in writing,
has to declare exactly what is, and what is not, personal equipment. He noted that the argument is that
personal equipment is items that are issued to an employee for that employee's use only. He stated that
in no way is the Fire Department going to buy 200 pieces of breathing equipment to supply 50 men - when
they are off duty it would be hanging up on the wall. He stated that the men use that personal equipment
from the time they report on duty to the time they report off duty and the men who relieve them pick up
the equipment. He stated that his argument is that it is the particular employees' personal equipment
while they are on duty. Councillor Davis commented that we are going to have to have a better definition
of the term "personal property" because we are involved in this and we have no definition. He stated that
what system is used depends on the Fire Chief, but there has to be some definition of "personal property".
Councillor Higgins suggested that the motion be that both parts of this grievance be upheld, without
prejudice. Mr. Rodgers noted that the motion that is being proposed is that both grievances be upheld
without admitting that the face mask is not personal equipment. Council members noted that if the Union
does not agree to the motion to uphold the grievance with the proviso that is being stiuplated, the
Council can then comeback to the motion to uphold the part of the grievance and deny the other part of
the grievance.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded ,by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that both issues of the grievance of Lieutenant Gordon
Charlton be upheld on condition that the Union agrees in writing that upholding of the grievance does not
constitute a precedent on personal equipment.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that we are admitting that for their past services, we are dropping
the matter, and admitting nothing. Councillor M. Vincent asked him if he is intending that the Fire Chief
attempt to determine with the Union what is personal equipment part 'of it. Councillor A. Vincent replied
that it would be discussed in a friendly manner between the Union and the Chief.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that
regarding the aforegoing matter,
the above named letter, dated April 30th, 1976,
be received and filed.
c/~ ~h~dt>r from the City Solicitor
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
ommon Clerk.
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
r"
'''l ...
'4d'1l
.
I
LEGAL
I
Crt!!
SI? /,' e; br
.
I
.
I
i('/wDlJ1I.s a
/I?T
c?C1~. ~e
life$C'/nZ/~
QJ o-tf i tm
al/nP7~et?
VI/~t11e
.
~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the tenth day of May,
A. D. 1976, at 6.10 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, and
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor
Mr. Rodgers, speaking further to the op1n10n he submitted to Council in legal session on May 3rd last
on the transaction that went through the meeting of Common Council on April 26th, 1976 to sell Lot 1, Kiwanis
Court, to Mr. Leo P. Pye (Councillor Leo P. Pye), recalled that at that time he expressed some concern about this
land transaction on the basis of the way the minutes reveal the land transaction where the Council agreed to sell
a parcel of land to Leo Pye - Councillor Pye - and the records show that Councillor Pye did not declare his
interest and has voted on the question. He stated that any responsibility for not advising Councillor Pye before
he will accept - however, that does not correct the mistake that has been made, and that is what he is interested
in, now - and with the minutes the way they are, all of the Council are implicated in the matter if it is wrong,
and all the legal research he has done, plus discussions with Mr. George Clark, Q. C. (Senior Legal Counsel) and
the Justice Department in Fredericton, outlining the facts - he noted that these discussions took place before
his opinion was given to Council on the matter - have confirmed that the way it stands now it is wrong, and not
just wrong from the point of view of Councillor Pye having bad title but from the point of view of all the
Council being involved in this breach of the fudiciary relationship that the Court has referred to, in that real
property and money' that you (the Common Council) hold, you hold it in trust - you do not know what the law is on
personal chattels and equipment and that sort of thing - but, with respect to cash that you deal with and land -
real estate - you hold that in trust, and, therefore, by holding it in trust you have a different responsibility
and a different relationship to the public - and that is basically on the way the transaction presently exists.
He stated that, however, he also said that if the said Council resolution was rescinded and then Councillor
Davis, or any other Councillor moved that parcel so and so be sold to Councillor Pye for whatever price the
Council agrees on, and Councillor Pye declares his interest and does not vote, the risk is lessened - reduced -
as to that situation; there is still a risk; however, in that case the Council is not implicated as he thinks the
Council is now, and that Councillor Pye is taking the greater risk. He stated that the other point he does not
understand is: the City is selling a parcel of land and whether it is to Councillor Pye or to any other citizen
in the city, it is just good practice to search the title before you buy land - in other words, because the City
is selling it - forgetting the relationship between the Council and a Councillor - does not mean the City has
good title - somewhere back in the 1950's or the 1940'S or the 1930's the City might have purchased a piece of
property without searching the title, itself, and just got bad title - so, now, in reconveying it, the City is
conveying it to someone, and if that person does not search it, that person is getting bad title - so, it is just
good practice when a person is buying a piece of land, to search the title; so, if Council rescinded its re-
solution - the Council agreed to sell property to Councillor Pye, he did not vote, he declared his interest, and
then, in the normal course of events, his lawyer in searching title would advise on whether to purchase the
property, or not. Councillor Cave asked the following question: in the event that the said motion was rescinded
and in the event somebody moved that Councillor Pye be given an opportunity to purchase the land, is there a
chance that the Council can be sued at a later date? every member of this Council? Mr. Rodgers replied that the
risk is greatly reduced, but there is still a risk. He added that the Council might think the Courts are unreason-
able, are interfering in something they have no business in doing so or looking into something it should not -
the reasOn they are is to just prevent - the Act is there for the situation from developing where fraud is ramp
or ripe for it because of the fact that the Council members are on the inside - the Council members have in-
formation that the general public do not have. He stated that the transaction in question is as honest as
anything, and that he is talking about why the principle has developed that way.
Councillor MacGowan asked the following question: if Councillor Pye, at this meeting of Council, for
instance, declared his intent to purchase and Council had a couple of weeks, or something, and the public were
aware of that for a couple of weeks, would that not solve the problem? if nobody else is interested? Mr. Rodgers
replied that it would greatly reduce it.
During further discussion, Mr. Rodgers advised that, on the basis of the records showing Councillor Pye
voting and not declaring his interest, he is satisfied without any doubt at all that that is wrong - however, if
the Council went through the transaction that Councillor Pye did not vote and declared his interest, then the
risk is greatly reduced.
Councillor Pye made the following suggestion: that the Council rescind the resolution in question but
not bother voting on it again, but then introduce his motion which he prepared for the Common Clerk in the event
he had to be rejected, the motion being that the land be put up for public tender again, and then he will bid on
it. He stated that he does not see anything wrong with that because it gives everybody in the whole city an
opportunity to bid on that land. Mr. Rodgers advised that that is an extra precautionary step that Councillor Pye
can take if he wishes to take it. Councillor Davis made the suggestion that the Council just rescind the said
resolution, because of a technical irregularity in that Councillor Pye voted - he occupied his chair at the
Council table whether he voted or not, Councillor Davis pointed out, and should not have been there - and that
Councillor Pye step outside the Council Chamber and the Council will vote again conveying him the land. He added
that he thinks that the Mayor can make a statement that this land was advertised for sale by the City previously.
Councillor Hodges made the point that, in reference to advertising, somebody could ask why the land was not
advertised for sale in 1976 - dirferent people in different places- and stated that he goes along with the legal
opinion.
During further discussion, the concensus of op1n10n among the Council members was to advertise the said
lot for sale by public tender, after rescinding the said previous resolution for sale to Councillor Pye.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, the Committee arose and proceeded to the Council Chamber
for open session of Common Council at 7.00 o'clock p.m., when there were present Mayor Flewwelling, Councillors
Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent, and Messrs. N.
Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Com-
missioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, P. Clark, Fire Chief, and S. MacDonald, Manager of Tourism and Convention Promotion of the
Economic Development Department.
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Kenneth Legassick, Rector of Trinity
Church.
1438
I
~
K'w.anis ('1~.t
c:'k.;m- u.p
Cdh1j7a/.9n
23. ~ Il1C.7:siWiiI
.l'f7Yd/J:d- ~.:t'
~~::JiW//st- .4U7
(h7~//)
..("~.;j/J 5-1-:Z;~
..The,
/1'I'h ~ S,. ;r,
c Itnu,( f'f7"
.(pp/; sr- /a~
(Ma//)
:lJo~5 .
"WmijlOr>t-Dd-It>.
cP~,
C/t!1 /i-ansit-
'/-t~.
:Df7!f. ~,~-cs (;>
c: a J? ;;;uiiiil
Church.
The Mayor welcomed to the meeting Leaders and members of the Cub Pack from Lancaster Baptist
The Mayor expressed gratification that the various organizations within the city are taking
interest and taking part in the cleaning of the City of Saint John, and all the things that are of concern
to the citizens of the city. He noted that, today, the Kiwanis Club of Saint John took a leading part, in
a luncheon meeting, in showing its interest and requirements that are necessary in the city, and have
available to anybody who wish to obtain them, garbage bags that are small ones that can be used for
picking up garbage rather than dropping it on the streets.
Mr. B. c. ~cIsaac, Chairman of the Loyalist Lane Committee of Loyalist Days Inc., presented the
request from Loyalist Days Inc. for permission to create an open air pedestrian mall in Saint John for
Loyalist Days 1976 on the section of street called North King Square by closing it to vehicular traffic
from July 27th to August 1st inclusive, and for permission to erect or build kiosks on the street and'
sidewalk of North King Square to be used for displaying and selling of crafts, merchandise, food and
services. The request also is that the Transportation Committee and City Transit Limited be requestd to
trictly enforce "No Parking" on the south side of Union Street from Sydney to Charlotte Streets, that
parking be eliminated on the east side of Charlotte Street from Union Street to North King Square, and
that space be made available for a bus stop on the west side of Charlotte Street from Union to North
Market Streets. Further, the Council is requested that Sydney Street be made "one way" in an easterly
direction from North King Square to Union Street as requested by the Works Department, and that on a best
effort basis, the City of Saint John support this civic event.
Mr. McIsaac displayed drawings of the proposed Loyalist Lane and proposed kiosks and pointed out
that the line going through North King Square is the fire lane to protect the Dominion Stores, the hotel,
the Paramount Theatre, Calp's Ltd. and the Bank of Nova Scotia properties and that this fire lane has been
approved by the Fire Marshal; he explained the positioning of the proposed kiosks and of the proposed
seating, eating and entertaining areas in Loyalist Lane. He stated that no entrance of the existing
tenants or of the existing merchants on that street is blocked, but only complemented, by the lay-out of
Loyalist Lane kiosks. He noted that these kiosks, for the most part, are of wood frame construction and
there are "fun" areas in the middle, and are in modules of 8 feet by 8 feet, pre-manufactured, and set on-
side; these kiosks are in multiples of two and three, and would be grouped around a "fun" area of eating
or entertaining in the middle, with the kiosk built around it, and having one, two, three or four-sided
opened; the design criteria has been designed in keeping with Loyalist Days. He asked that the Common
Council approve the requests of Loyalist Days Inc. so that its members can go to work on the further
implementation and completion of Loyalist Lane.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the request made by Loyalist Days
Inc. Loyalist'Lane Committee, approval be granted for the following, in order to create an open air
pedestrian mall on King Square North street for Loyalist Days 1976:- (a) that North King Square be closed
to vehicular traffic from July 27th to August 1st, inclusive; (b) that permission be granted to erect/build
kiosks on the street and sidewalk of North King Square to be used for displaying and selling of crafts,
merchandise, food and services; (c)'that the following requests of the Transportation Committee and City
Transit Limited, in their co-operation with "Loyalist Lane", be granted: (1) "No Parking" be strictly
nforced on the south side of Union Street from Sydney to Charlotte Streets; (2) Parking be eliminated on
he east side of Charlotte Street from Union to North King Square; (3) Space be made available for a bus
stop on the west side of Charlotte Street from Union to North Market Streets; (d) that Sydney Street be
made "one way" in an easterly direction from North King Square to Union Street as requested by the Works
Department; (e) that on a best effort basis, the City of Saint John support this civic event:
AND FURTHER that approval be granted for commencement of the construction of three, or more if
necessary, masonry booths in Loyalist Lane on July 26th, which booths are to be built by Boy Scouts as
part of their training in qualifying for their masonry badge.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the Committee has the approval of the Police Department and the
Chief of Police to the Loyalist Lane proposal as it relates to traffic and parking. !~. McIsaac made
affirmative reply. Councillor A. Vincent asked if some of the kiosks were built of masonry, at no cost to
Loyalist Days Inc. would the Boy Scouts of Canada be permitted to use that project for their masonry
badge - he added that if the answer is affirmative, Loyalist Days Inc. is guaranteed at least three or
four booths, at no cost to Loyalist Days. Mr. McIsaac replied that Loyalist Days Inc. is delighted with
the said donation - as far as the Boy Scouts are concerned and having them do it - provided that it fits
in with the schedule for construction so that the project may be completed for the noon of July 28th,
Loyalist Days Inc. would be so happy to have their participation - he added that they would like these
booths to be as authentic in design ~s they can arrange it (he made this observation in reply to Coun-
cillor A. Vincent's point that the masonry work of the Boy Scouts no doubt will be rough work, and that
masonry is only beautiful when it is in the rough). Noting that one of the complaints in past years was
the amount of damage to the lawns and flower beds in King Square from Loyalist Days kiosks and activities
in the Square, Councillor Higgins asked if this Loyalist Lane will eliminate the building of kiosks, and
what' have you, in the actual King Square area. Mr. McIsaac confirmed that he has no knowledge of any
plans other than what he was presently presenting for Loyalist Lane on North King Square, and stated that
if the Council decides to permit building on the grass area of King Square he cannot control that.
Councillor Davis asked if Mr. McIsaac has a count of the number of parking spaces that are being elimin-
ated on Union and Charlotte Streets. Mr. McIsaac advised that none are being eliminated on Union Street _
he believes there are ten or eleven being eliminated on Charlotte Street, and he believes twenty-five are
being eliminated on North King Square - in connection with Loyalist Lane, for the four-day period in-
volved. Councillor MacGowan recalled that the Common Council has already disapproved any construction in
King Square, and did so last year after the grass was damaged during Loyalist Days. Mr. McIsaac confirmed
that the proposed kiosks are to be built on the street of North King Square, as shown on one of the
conceptual drawings he displayed to Council, and noted that the backs of all of these kiosks are facing
the Square rather than having traffic come from the Square over the grass into the kiosks. At this point,
Councillor A. Vincent made the request that the above motion of Council include that the time limit start
on July 26th because the extra day is needed in the building of the three masonry booths to meet the July
28th deadline - he added that they will negotiate if there are to be any more than three masonry booths.
Mr. McIsaac noted that Loyalist Days Inc. are looking for more than three. The Mayor felt that Councillor
A. Vincent can make the necessary arrangements with the said Committee, in this regard. At this time,
Councillor A. Vincent discussed with Mr. McIsaac the necessary arrangements for demolishing these masonry
booths when Loyalist Days are over.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Ife.::'p..~ ~,.,.i~ Seconded
:l:>e;nf. rerd the period January
by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report of the Recreation and Parks Department for
1st to March 31st, 1976, be received and filed.
.
1
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
r"
Cedar n:
.~(7b"'e #~
'Pal' k
'J?inK
S-!-<ilI7,tp!;e
I'e'pdJr
l71iJ?/rs
, (r.7"I-~6''')
---
..7o~.:fI' J?5
I
..(: J: ;:e~u
3'on
(}al'J~e
. ~o/leC'#/(P7
(!(}nlrad
I,
.
1-(/179 $C, F
I'-/I"e s-l'ati
cpn-c-r,;/cr
7Jelr.n,/'I/I'Ja
, :LJpnL
171d1/!?,. /.. /
ment- 2J1?
1( flet:'a ~
~-t-,;i.
1 (1I/~/t:7).(
/f/':;~ )
.
....
439
Councillor Gould noted that the above report noted that it is felt that steps should be taken this
summer to repair the standpipe in the Cedar Point Trailer Park so residents may have a rink next winter, and he
asked if that is saying that such work is going to be done, adding that he would like to see the Department say
that it is going to be done, and not saying that it is felt that it should be done. Mr. Barfoot replied that if
that is the recommendation of the Department, and if funds are available for it, it will be done; he would have
to check with the Director on the question of whether funds will be available to have it done within his budget
to handle that. Councillor Hodges asked if the Recreation and Parks Department received any complaints regarding
the outdoor rink programme this winter. Mr. Barfoot replied that he cannot answer that question in detail.
Councillor Hodges noted that the idea was that the citizens were supposed to look after the outside rinks them-
selves in certain areas of the city, and he asked if there will be a review of the areas that were not operable
this year. Mr. Barfoot advised that the Director is recommending another year's trial because it was somewhat
late last year, and he believes the communication was not that good when the policy was adopted, so, it is
hopeful that, another winter, we have proper trial of this system, with more success. Councillor Parfitt com-
mented that it seems that the outdoor rinks in the winter of 1976 were not very successful and that she was
especially disappointed on the one at Broad and Charlotte Streets in the South End, as referred to in the above
named report, which notes that two consecutive volunteers could not successfully operate the rink - the first
volunteer was not willing to work and the second was plagued with vandalism and relinquished his duties. Coun-
cillor MacGowan commented that she thought the jogging programme was worthy of note - 52 joggers registered for
the University of New Brunswick field house - and stated she is just wondering how many people know about it, and
that she thinks this is something that could stand a little more publicity, because she is sure a lot of people
would be interested in something like that, especially in the winter months.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager advising that City staff have
been discussing with Mr. E. J. Ferguson, who has a contract with the City for collection of garbage in the former
Wards 1 and 2 of the City of Lancaster, the conditions for a changeover to the City operations, and that in so
doing, they reviewed again the advantages and disadvantages of continuing the present contractual arrangement,
and that an agreement has now been reached with Mr. Ferguson to continue collection with a reduction in the per
unit cost because of the changeover to curb-side collection, and also to include the Co-operative Housing in this
area, and that the terms of the agreement are: January 1st, 1976 to April 30th, 1976 - 1,752 units at $21.00 per
unit = $12,264.00; May 1st, 1976 to December 31st, 1976 (including Co-Operative Housing) - 1,812 units at $21.00
per unit = $25,368.00 -- making a total of $37,362.00; and further advising that this arrangement will continue
until December 31st, 1978, with the unit cost to be adjusted in 1977 and 1978 by dividing the net collection
costs as per Budget by the total population and multiplying by the number of persons per family unit, and the
number of units will also be decided each year by the actual count; and recommending that a contract be entered
into with Mr. E. J. Ferguson for garbage collection in the above-named area, incorporating these terms and
conditions -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor M. Vincent asked what is the difference between the rate of $21.00 per unit for 1976 as
compared to 1975. Mr. H. Ellis, going from memory, stated he believes the figure for 1975 was $26.00 and some
cents which is about $5.00 less in this year's contract, and this is due to curb-side collection. Councillor A.
Vincent asked if Mr. Ellis would like to relate his conversation with solicitor Turnbull. Mr. Ellis replied that
he had no conversation with the solicitor for ~tr. Ferguson. Councillor Higgins noted that, once again, there is
an innuendo left here that has to be cleared up. Councillor A. Vincent commented that he is prepared to clear it
up. Councillor Higgins noted that there has been a long-range negotiation going on between the City of Saint John
and Mr.' Ferguson whether or not his contract would be renewed and in the bargaining back and forth he (Councillor
Higgins) knows very well that Mr. Ferguson had lawyers representing him, breaking down figures, and what have
you - Mr. Ferguson was trying to present the best case he possibly could - the Council, on the other hand, was
trying to present the best case it possibly could and, thanks to Mr. Ellis and what have you who continued these
negotiations, the figure has been reduced from $26.00 in 1976 to $21.00, and Mr. Ferguson is agreeable to this -
this is how negotiations are carried out - so, he congratulates Mr. Ellis. Councillor A. Vincent replied that he
was not trying to hold the matter up, but was trying to reduce the $21.00 per unit rate more. Councillors Davis
and Higgins recalled that the Council, in this matter, received a brief from Mr. Ferguson, written by Mr. Tur-
nbull, along with a brief from Mr. Ferguson and a brief from the City staff. Councillor Parfitt asked if there
should be a strike on the part of civic employees, would the above noted 1,812 units still be serviced by Mr.
Ferguson, as a private collector. Mr. Barfoot, in reply, stated that the balance of the residential collection
is picked up by the City of Saint John. Councillor Hodges, also in reply, pointed out that the crux of the whole
situation should there be a strike by civic employees would be - where would the private collector dump the
garbage collected by him?
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that at the
Council meeting of February 16th, 1976, the Council awarded the contract for the construction of the King Street
East fire station to Rocca Construction Ltd. in the amount of $578,579.00, and that in the process of approving
the contract for execution, the City has been informed that the contract price did not allow for a Performance
Bond or a Labour and Material Payment Bond, and advising that the cost of these bonds is $3,182.18 for a fifty
per cent Performance Bond and a fifty per cent Labour and Material Payment Bond -- and recommending approval by
Common Council of an extra in the amount of $3,182.18 to cover the required bonds for this contract -- be re-
ceived and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent, noting that this was an open-end negotiation, asked why the City Manager did not
point the above out to him, first. He added that he does not care about anyone else, but he cares about himself,
from now on in, and stated that this should have been one of the first items - the City Manager should have
initialled this in the negotiations. He stated that he will support it in principle, but the City Manager is
getting well paid to take care of the City's interests. He asked that the City Manager explain what the dis-
cussions were regarding this very important matter. Mr. Barfoot advised that this contract was awarded as the
result of receiving a proposal bid and not a regular tender; in the course of receiving the proposal bid a number
of items were checked over and inadvertently the City staff - and he will take full responsibility - omitted to
check the matter of the inclusion of a Performance Bond; we are now recommending that this omission be rectified.
Councillor A. Vincent asked: under this kind of money, cannot we go on without it, now that a portion of the
building is constructed. He stated that he understands now that they are so far ahead he has no love for in-
surance companies or bonding companies - he thinks the City can save this kind of money by having the company
produce certified certificates that everything is paid for, and the City does not need this bond - he felt that
we have gone this far that we can save this kind of money at no expense to the City. Mr. Barfoot stated that his
recommendation is that we follow the normal procedure here and obtain a regular Performance Bond. Councillor A.
Vincent stated that he is opposed to that recommendation because he does not think we need it.
Question being taken, the motion was lost, a tie vote having been created with the Mayor and Councillors
Cave, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, and M. Vincent voting "yea" and Councillors MacGowan, Parfitt, Davis, Green, A.
Vincent and Pye voting "nay".
! 440
,
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
rll1l'#i"/7 I7tl
4~~9'~"
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above named Performance Bond in the amount of
$3,182.18 not be taken out on the King Street East fire station project.
1(i't7~ St. F:. ~';r,
dc4'-ti~n
~Q&"~ C'Ma-r...(,;
J2'I!';o,t"e.?~1 ~
41.ii-/f?,.ial ?>~
:7If?hZ
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Barfoot stated that he would suggest that since the above motion
of Council was defeated, the Council is now back to where it was in this matter, and the contract could now
be executed without any further action required. The question was raised that by the Council leaving,
things at the status quo - the Council members having just verbally expressed the feeling that they trust
Rocca Construction Ltd. - the Council does not have to take a motion in this matter of no Performance Bond
being obtained. Mr. Rodgers stated that it is his opinion that the item put before the Council now is the
same item that was before the Council before, and, therefore, the Council is reconsidering the item and the
motion can only be put by someone on the prevailing side, that is, on the negative side of the motion that
was defeated through tie vote. He noted that Councillor M. Vincent voted in favour of that defeated
motion, and therefore he is not eligible to put this present motion. Councillor M. Vincent, noting that
this item regarding the King Street East fire station from the City Manager did not have a motion related
to it, asked if the City Solicitor feels that the item has been dealt with legally. Councillor Davis
pointed out that the Council dealt with this item in private session, prior to this meeting, pretty thor-
oughly. Councillor A. Vincent noted that he was not present at the said private session. In reply to
Councillor M. Vincent's question, Mr. Rodgers advised that the motion to adopt the recommendation from the
City Manager was defeated - apart from the Council's normal routine that Council usually follows of re-
ceiving and filing correspondence, he does not believe anything else is required, unless the Council
requires it. The Mayor thereupon stated that he is not accepting the above motion put by Councillor M.
Vincent and seconded by Councillor Green.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the City Manager with
~eference to a Performance Bond or a Labour and Material Payment Bond regarding the contract for the
construction of the King Street East fire station, be received and filed.
Councillor MacGowan noted that Councillor A. Vincent, during the foregoing discussion when he
proposed to second Councillor M. Vincent's motion if it could include provision that no progress payments
be made to Rocca Construction Ltd. until that company produces certified statements that all bills are paid
(Which Councillor M. Vincent refused to include in said motion) had a good suggestion, and stated she would
like to see this pursued because she feels that the City needs some protection, and that it was an omission
not having a Performance Bond because, normally, the City calls for Performance Bonds - and this is why she
cannot go along with it because she thinks it is starting a precedent - buying a Performance Bond after a
contract has started - but, she would like to see some protection - she therefore suggested that Councillor
A. Vincent might like to propose this as a motion.
Question being taken, the motion to receive and file was carried.
Councillor Higgins asked the following question, for information purposes: if the City awards a
tender of, say, $503,000.00, and the building costs $500,000.00 and there is a $3,000.00 Performance Bond
in there, we award the contract at $503,000.00 (Mr. Barfoot replied that is correct); in other words, the
City buys $3,000.00 worth of protection that that building is going to be completed, et cetera, et cetera,
and the contractor charges it back to the City. He stated that he recalls the meeting the Council had when
the first price came in on the proposal regarding construction of the said fire station, and the Council
thought that price was quite high and that with the time of cut-backs and what have you the Council wOuld
try to get the price down as low as it possibly could, and he pointed out that that is where the oversight
took place regarding a Performance Bond, where cuts were being made, and, finally, somewhere along the line
the Performance Bond was cut. He noted that what the Council is doing now is trying to correct something
that has always been the policy of the City in taking out insurance for the sake of $3,000.00 that this
project will go to completion. He added that there is no reflection on Mr. Rocca, and that this require-
ment regarding Peroformance Bond has been done with every single possible contract the Council has ever
signed in the City of Saint John. He stated it is his opinion to say that we will go right through with
this one contract with no Performance Bond whatsoever, the Council is breaking precedent by doing it. He
noted that the City Manager has acknowledged the fact that it was an oversight, and a mistake, on his part,
and the Council is just trying to correct a very logical mistake, that is all - there is nothing dishonest
about it. During ensuing discussion, Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Commissioner of Finance could'
advise how much the City saved in insurance now that the hole is dug for the foundation and the steel is
erected - he asked if it is true that the Performance Bond is the same amount of money as it would have
cost for the same thing before the contract was let, and stated that that is what he is interested in and
is why he voted against the motion. He stated that his question is: that the contract for the same amount
of money, based on the same contractor, would cost the same. He maintained that the Performance Bond is
not fifty per cent now, because the steel for the project is up, and therefore he is voting against paying
the insurance company. Mr. Park replied that, as far as he can see, with the contract partly completed a
matter of a Performance Bond would only relate to work to be done in the future - from now on _ it would be
a matter for negotiation with the insuring company, and he would expect the final cost to be less than it
would have been had it had to cover the whole contract. Councillor A. Vincent stated he is not satisfied
with that information. He asked: what was the latest figure that the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Finance negotiated as of May 7th, or before they put this amount in - he stated that he wants this known -
what was the latest figure. Mr. Barfoot replied that the only figure before him that he is aware of is
$3,182.18. Councillor A. Vincent asked for the date that Mr. Barfoot received that figure, and the name of
the bonding company that gave it to him. Mr. Barfoot replied that we have not received such a quotation
from the bonding company - we were advised in writing by the contractor's representative; he does not have
that letter before him, but it was prior to May 5th. Commenting that this matter is more serious than the
Council thinks, Councillor A. Vincent asked: was it not before the last two or three Council meetings that
they were notified. The Mayor noted that this question can be asked of Mr. Barfoot later - the motion,to
receive and file the above noted correspondence has been passed, and the Council is going to go on with the
agenda items, and the Council can ask Councillor A. Vincent's question to Mr. Barfoot, later - the other
motion was defeated, and the Council is going to bring up the said question, later. Councillor Davis
stated he feels that the Council should deal with, stay with, this item at this time because there has'been
an accusation of dishonesty. He asked if that is correct. Councillor A. Vincent replied that he never
said that - there was lack of good business - lack of communication between Council and the City Manager,
but not dishonesty. '
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, stating that; in
addition to the contract for construction of the King Street East fire station, furnishings and equipment
~
.
I
I
.
'\
I
.
1
I
.
~
,...
Iv~.5t-. F:
-/','"e s#~o.
.ef'u1'h1e~
.//;.e .dJ/.;Jrm
ef'ul,Pme~r
Cal'm 1
:&/// ?T
17).;,"1// F:
Wa1fSfl'J?
(;.p/~e~
(;!roYt' If>tt'.
I
.
I/}f. //un~r
CI7Ia'R~
Grove K'd:
If~~/ rzn-ah
-t-a~
/!,/.,ff7J>? ~fF/-
!/e'OJ t9Hh5J
fr~krcJtt'l
.~n?t?,.?.tion
37 ./eiJ7~r
C4/fft:drJ
ll'r6:z.) ~-Ia.
7kfr~ff- -to
e~5e<'l'e s/-t-e
ck.-rtimee "
I Pldr/s
req,(~.f d
'P/.i1!/..9rentM
ef'K7,pP/8
~"..c.s
I /i:!QLeJ'l
s~/;ti~~ -
-Cion$'
:3Ie,;a::-hG? r s
.
ll....
441
are required for the construction of the new Fire Department headquarters, and that the expenditures related to
the fire alarm system include the cost of the transfer of the existing equipment to the new headquarters and the
installation of a new communications logging and retrieval system, at a total cost estimated to be $28,000.00,
and further stating that the other major expenditures relate to station equipment, of which the main items are
hose dryers, personnel and other lockers, kitchen equipment, furniture, cabinets, and built-in beds, at a cost
totalling $22,000.00 - and noting that this type of bed will allow the utilization of the dormitory space for
general purposes during the day-time -- and recommending that the above named expenditure for fire alarm equip-
ment and station equipment be approved, the cost to be charged to the Capital Budget for the new fire station, be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Mr. Daryl E. Watson of 584 Rothesay Avenue, at this time presented a brief, commenting on the condition
of the Golden Grove Road and advising that he believes the time has come to demand that this Road be brought up
to a standard suitable and safe for driving, walking and living. Mr. Watson advised that he was accompanied by
some of the petitioners who affixed their names to the petition which he submitted at this time, which petition
is signed by 601 persons and which states that these petitioners feel it is time the Golden Grove Road is given
top priority for money allocated for road building and repairs and that they feel it is their right as working
taxpayers to have a safe road.
During following discussion, Councillor Hodges expressed the viewpoint that the Works Department should
bring in a schedule of how to improve these roads and bring them up to standard (not the Trans-Canada Highway
standards, however, which the City could not afford), and that the City has to prepare a programme of bringing
these roads, allover the city, to minimum standards - as far as he is concerned, this kind of a programme should
be started now - and in this way, the citizens will know what roads are going to be done each year. Councillor
Higgins noted that, hopefully, the Capital Budget will be coming to Council next week, and he felt that this
petition should be referred for a report next week in conjunction with the Capital Budget. He stated he would
like to know how much has been spent over the years on Golden Grove Road - next week, the Council will know how
much will be spent for 1976 on Capital Budget - he wants to know what it will take to bring this Road up to
standard and if a portion of this Road is to be done next year, just which portion it will be. For the infor-
mation of the delegation present regarding this matter, the Mayor noted that the Council has a sum of money in
the Capital Budget it is working on, but Council cannot reveal the sum allocated for Golden Grove Road until the
Capital Budget is adopted by Council - he added that the sum is a fairly large sum of money. Mr. Barfoot advised
that since 1971, the City has spent $181,800.00 on capital construction on Golden Grove Road, and $66,000.00 on
maintenance on this Road; the said figure for capital construction has been expended between Rothesay Avenue and
the Baxter Road with some work out on the far end of the Road where it was previously gravelled and is now chip-
sealed; this total of $247,994.00 was expended over a four-year period which is an average of $60,000.00 per year
on this Road, not including snow ploughing costs. Councillor Cave stated that he is hopeful that monies will
come in, over and above what the City has allocated in the 1976 Capital Budget, for the Golden Grove this year in
regard to capital expenditure and improvement of roads from the Provincial Government, and if so, the City could
spend a pretty good number of dollars on the Golden Grove Road, which still is not enough because it will take
half a million dollars to improve it. He added'that the Council will not know this until next week.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. M. Hunter, representing taxpayers
along the Golden Grove Road, requesting that this Road be built 'properly, and making reference to the present
condition of this Road, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager
and the Commissioner of Finance, authority be granted for payment of real property tax bill for 1976 (G3351 014 8
000) in the net payable amount of $10,855.00 on the Hilton Belyea Community Arena on Lowell Street.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation contained in the
report from the City Manager and the Building Inspector, the low tender received for the demolition of the City-
owned property located at 37 Leinster Street, namely, that of Chittick's (1962) Ltd., in the amount of $1,450.00,
be accepted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if the City has a Performance Bond or some kind of a deposit regarding the
above named tender. The Common Clerk replied that a tender deposit cheque was received with the said bid.
Councillor A. Vincent explained that his reason in asking the question is that there was a fire on Waterloo
Street a month ago and the bricks are still lying on that street, and a permit was issued for private demolition
of the said building that was fire-damaged - and he would ask that the Council inspect the demolition site which
he feels is a disgrace, and he does not think - whether it is a demolition by either the City or private enterprise
that the City should continue to issue demolition permits without making the contractor clean up at least the
sidewalk and the street. The Mayor replied that this point will be made note of.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended in the City Manager's report, tenders be
awarded for the supplying of playground equipment and parts as shown on the submitted bid summary.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he noticed that some of the items in regard to the above named
tenders do not come up to specification, and he asked if that is really "cricket"; he added that with regard to
those that do not come up to tender specifications he thinks the City should accept the ones that do meet tender
specifications. Councillor Higgins replied that this is what the City has done on this tender. Mr. Barfoot
added that that is exactly right - the ones that did not meet the specifications a steel seat was called for on
the bleachers and the bidder who put in the lowest price bid on wood seats and it was rejected on that ground.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he received two or three unpleasant calls in this matter, and that when he
raised this question the last time playground equipment bids were received --- he asked: how much money did we
save by doing it this way? He asked if he saved the City some money by complaining last time, or not. In reply
to a comment from a Council member that he did not know what Councillor A. Vincent was talking about, Councillor
A. Vincent stated that he himself knows to what he was referring, and that the City Manager knows, also.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that a portion
442
EI!I!"~N:ahlm
e/t!:f '.5:?;;~i7f(7r
~d!/$h(e 7Jr/pe
f,f//~~J7/~
oS: :T.7<<gbo.;#-
~$IJre 2Jr. ~
.kh~ ~W?~
h..t:
/-3 :l3C1,!/s/d'e7A
~./lMh ,,(o,mo/'l
ifIL
/lJal'>,f# $~/4.7.
a;v/e eehc/"e
?~J~~-t-. hi'~-
cI CI / 1/i.i1~/fi1f'y
S'-hut,ff:
hd', ~ 7J;ow.
(7"ds.
C/C/p-PJ? /fe
/lsso<!/~.s- ..6
n,,.J/175 .m..ut::&
s.J:~~/Qnd/
.<iJl"dl/"!:f .".. :Pal.
/YI. 7? 's 4 /1/.,1. /l. :s
.,(;-Kprp,Prt'.;rC/ 'on
4~1".;u.7'
~nf/l1~ ~~
of property owned by Saint John Tugboat on Bayside Drive, as well as a portion of property owned by John
Paul Realty Limited located at 1-3 Bayside Drive and 2 Loch Lomond Road, is required for the widening of
Bayside Drive, and that the resolutions to Council several months ago did not properly refer to the land
to be acquired, and further advising that the land shown sketched red on the submitted plan, which is a
plan prepared by Murdoch-Lingley Ltd., dated November 26th, 1973, is required for the widening of Bayside
Drive, and that it is recommended that the Common Council authorize the City Solicitor to take the neces-
sary steps to comply with the Expropriation Act and to file the necessary Notice of Intention to Exprop-
riate the land as shown on the said submitted plan -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Hodges enquired as to whether the City will need to acquire land between numbers 121
and 131 on the above noted plan, to make the street alignment correspond to the alignment on the other
side of Bayside Drive at this location. Mr. Barfoot replied that it is not being so recommended at this
time - he believes that the City can get by at this time with the corner as shown on the said plan.
Councillor A. Vincent, a member of the Land Committee, explained that the reason the City is moving on the
other side of the street is to avoid buying that brick building and tearing the front out of it.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager with regard to the
Financial Viability Study regarding the Market Square Project that was carried out for the Federal and
Provincial Governments by Clayton Research Associates Ltd., advising that the said Study has been reviewed
by the Saint John Tri-Level Committee (which is a group composed of staff members from three levels of
government) and is now presented to Council herewith; and further advising of the results of the Study and
that, in general, the Report is well done and lays clearly before the City what its choices are, but more
than that, the Study is positive - Market Square is viable - some improvements can be made in the design
and in the financial arrangements, and a start should be made as soon as possible; and further advising
that, among other things, the Report suggests that the theatre proposal be looked at very carefully, as it
seems excessively ambitious - and that the Report also questions the justification for 75,000 square feet
of space for the new Library; and that as the City will have to build and maintain this space, he believes
that this area should be reviewed - and adding that recommendations concerning the financial arrangements
with the Developer and the method of issuing debentures will be looked into by City staff; and discussing
the financing of the said Project through assistance in the form of grants and loans from Provincial and
Federal sources and the obtaining of a sub-agreement under the General Development Agreement to obtain
financing for the project infrastructure, basically, the parking and the sea-wall; and reporting that the
preliminary study of the sea-wall by Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation Ltd. (FENCO) (which
study was approved by Common Council in connection with the Market Square project). has revealed the
presence of soft materials underlying the entire area of the wall, and that in order to better define the
extent of this unstable layer, further test-holes have been drilled and, hopefully, these further tests
will allow a closer estimation of the cost of a structural sea-wall or a sloped embankment, but may also
show the need for some changes in the design of the Market Square project itself - and advising that the
cost of this investigation is being borne by the Urban Renewal Partnership; and recommending, as follows:-
(1) that Council receive and file the "Study of the Financial Viability of the Proposed Saint John Market
Square Development", and follow up on the various recommendations of the Study;
(2) that a case be immediately prepared for Provincial and Federal financial assistance;
(3) that subject to funding being made available, the City reaffirm its commitment for a 1977 start on the
Library and Parking Structure;
(4) that the City meet with the Library Board to review space requirements;
(5) that an information meeting on Market Square be arranged with the Provincial and Federal elected
representatives as soon as possible ----- be received and filed and the said recommendations adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent asked: if we adopt this, what legal liability have we got? and has the
Legal Department and everyone else taken this into consideration? Mr. Barfoot replied that this is a
further stage in the Council's endorsement of this project, and he pointed out that the City has before it
a Study which, basically, says that this is a good project and it is viable - the Report was produced for
the purpose of assisting the City in coming to this decision, and assisting other levels of Government to
come to a decision - and that is the purpose of the Report. Councillor A. Vincent pointed out that when
the City first chose the Developer it knew it was a good project, and he asked when is the project going
to get going; he noted that there is no time limit. Mr. Barfoot replied that the suggestion in the Report
is that we start .construction in 1977. Councillor A. Vincent felt that we have to get going with the City
Library now. Mr. Barfoot replied that he is sure this will be done as quickly as possible but, from a
funding point of view, 1977 is the year. Councillor A. Vincent, recalling that.he has supported the
Project from the first, stated that he is not happy with this Report because this is a stalling report.
The Mayor stated that, in his view, it is a case of getting the action we require to take those remaining
buildings over before we can do anything. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he does not see anything in
the Report about the sea-wall, and noted that we have to have the sea-wall first. Mr. Barfoot confirmed
this observation, and added that the sea-wall is briefly referred to in the above named report from
hilnself, basically because the report on the sea-wall is not yet completed - he added that it should be
completed within the next two years. Councillor A. Vincent explained that he is trying to get the Library
and the civic centre started, and the whole project started within the next year; he added that he is not
happy with the said Report and that he feels that it is not fast enough a progress report, and he wants
the civic centre, and particularly the Library, started nOw. The Mayor pointed out that the City does not
yet have the property to build it on, and the City is working at the present time on the matter of exprop-
riation of such properties.
Referring to the City Manager's recommendation that the City, subject to funding being made
available, reaffirm its commitment for a 1977 start on the Library and Parking Structure, Councillor M.
Vincent .asked: in relation to that, any change in size - is it flexible enough that it could be increased,
or decreased in size, and not commit the Council to the exact sizing on the Library, perhaps, as we had
before? In reply, Mr. Barfoot advised that the detail design including the sizing of the Library is still
a matter to be completely firmed up before we get to, you might say, construction drawings. Councillor
Parfitt asked: how long is "immediately" contained in the City Manager's recommendation "that a case be
immediately prepared for Provincial and Federal financial assistance"; how long would it take to prepare a
case? Mr. Barfoot replied that he considers this a matter of the very highest priority, and we will try
and get this done within the next few weeks, if not, the next several weeks. Referring to the same
recommendation that Councillor M. Vincent had referred to, Councillor Gould asked: when did the City
commit itself to a 1977 start on the Library and, mainly, the Parking Structure? He added that he does not
remember the City committing itself to that. I~. Barfoot replied that there was a Council resolution not
long ago - within the last month, he believes - concerning start on the Library; with regard to the
Parking Structure, he believes that the Council had a commitment to start a parking structure as soon as
possible. He added that the Council's resolution, last time, was for the library rather than the parking
structure, but the design of the project really has the parking structure down below, and the rest comes
up on top of the parking structure, so it means that the parking structure is a very early component of
the project. Councillor Gould asked: could the Council maybe have an up-to-date look at where they plan
to put the Library right now in the new location. He added that he has seen the first two suggested
locations for the Library, but not the third spot, and he would like to see it. Mr. Barfoot replied that
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
.44~3
.
JJ. ~tI;eht.
C%iltlt::J$
I U?'h.) ,t?!-~
St~17 Gh
("e>, ~-I-L
#/oMAI"/
I' ~jJ~;.ff
.
I
.
Cl!y /J/~r.
$.:J. ~!!.
C'P,mP1'
t>ed'a,.. J>pid
.#t?I/k 8'p~e
I 7!rlrA:
(?/~. /P 4'/'.'
:Pe. p'nA'tT/.'lf;
7~ 'h/1If ~t:l
I~'V/e Vh/oh.
[i?--t)~; n;7lilt
6hJfl7/'7ftde
~~<>ff
S~f/~~sr,.'OhS
.
It.....
he will be glad to arrange that.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
authority be granted for payment of the following invoices, namely:-
'D. Hatfield Ltd. dated March 19, 1976 $ 1,530.10
D. Hatfield Ltd. dated April 21, 1976 $ 1,227.30
D. Hatfield Ltd. dated April 21, 1976 $ 1,399.32
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. dated April 20, 1976 $ 3,710.78
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. dated April 20, 1976 $ 3,791.90
Stephen Construction Company Limited dated May 4, 1976 $21,635.28
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green .
RESOLVED that the report for February of the Works Branch of the Engineering
and Works Department, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that at the March
8th, 1976 meeting of Common Council, the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission requesting that the City
lease to the Commission Cedar Point Mobile Home Park for a trial period of one year was laid on the table until
the Council receives more information as to what the deficit is regarding the Park, what is the City's intention,
and what is the City going to spend there; and stating that the matter of rentals at the said Park, along with
rentals of other City-owned buildings and properties, has been under review by the Real Estate Department for the
last several months as a result of the Council's decision at budget time to review all rentals so as to bring
them up to market levels, and further stating that the submitted statements prepared for this review show that
the said Park suffered a loss of $10,124.29 in 1974 and $10,260.36 in 1975, and advising that the Real Estate
Department subsequently made application to the Provincial Rent Review Officer on April 6th, 1976 to raise the
rents to $50.00 per month for each of the 77 lots, and that this rental increase, if allowed, will cover the
current expenses on real estate taxes, water rates, repairs and maintenance, garbage collection, and repayment of
bond issues, but does not include any return on land involved or on services not bonded for - and noting that the
said $50.00 proposed rental will still be below the average market level of trailer park rentals in the Saint
John area -- be received and filed.
Councillor Gould asked: if the above noted rental rate is increased to $50.00 does it mean that the City
will not incur a deficit, from now on. Mr. Barfoot replied that that is the intention. Councillor Gould asked
if a debt will, or will not be, incurred with the rental rate at $50.00. Mr. Barfoot calculated that at the
$50.00 rental figure the City would just break even. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would wonder ~hy the
City Manager would discuss with the Provincial Rent Review Officer this matter of rent control when the City is
exempt from the Rent Control Act. He stated that he personally knows that under the Rent Control Act, Cedar
Point Mobile Home Park is not applicable, and he thinks that the City Manager should tell us the truth. Mr.
Barfoot, in reply, stated he would have to look at that matter referred to by Councillor A. Vincent. Councillor
A. Vincent proposed a motion, that the matter be laid on the table for one week, for the City Manager to tell the
Council that it is not applicable. Councillor Davis pointed out that the application has already gone to the said
Rent Review Officer, who is considering it and that if he had no authority over the City's rentals he would not
consider it. He added that the said Rent Review Officer, Mr. E. Mawhinney, felt unofficially that $50.00 was
quite fair and would probably go through, but at no time did Mr. Mawhinney suggest that City rentals were any
different or that the City as a landlord was any different than any other landlord. Councillor A. Vincent stated
that he only learned over the week-end "by the grapevine" that the City was being "hoodwinked" and therefore he
was reporting to Council that the said Act is not applicable (to the City) and he felt that came out very strongly
with the information he got. He stated that, furthermore, he was shocked to know that the City is supplying free
water to these Park lots. He felt that these lot lessees should be treated as private home owners, especially
when the City is going to double the water tax within the next few days. On the subject of the City being exempt
from the said Act provisions, he stated that the only reason the City is exempt is because it is losing money and
is subsidizing it (the said Park). He noted that under the Act you are allowed to increase your rent providing
you are not making any money to a certain point - and, under the Act, any property that is losing money is
allo~ed to make a certain percentage. Councillor Parfitt raised the question that the proposed $50.00 rental
rate will cover the current expenses, but not cover the anticipated increase in water and sewerage rates.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week and the
information that has been asked for be supplied to Council.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors MacGowan, Davis, M. Vincent and
Hodges voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting a copy of the
suggestions submitted on January 18th, 1976 for budget cut-backs that were requested by the City Manager and the
Personnel and Training Officer, being a joint submission from the Civic Unions, and advising that these sug-
gestions of the said Co-Ordinating Committee were taken into consideration in the final review processing of the
1976 Operating Budget and that his budget report of January 30th, 1976 makes reference to this matter; and
setting forth the status of the various suggestions -- be received and filed and a copy of same be sent to the
appropriate Unions.
Councillors M. Vincent and MacGowan expressed the view that longer answers could have been provided by
the City Manager to the above named suggestions from the Unions. She noted that the reply to the Union's sug-
gestion Number 4 "Have a directive issued to stop people from leaving trucks and equipment running while not in
use" is "A matter of common sense", and that it does not say very much. With reference to suggestion Number 6
"Sand and gravel", she recalled that the Unions told us what that was and the reply is "Good idea" - she stated
that, but at this time, she is sure she does not remember what i;Sand and gravel" was and probably they do not
either, she felt. She noted that suggestion Number 7 is "Better maintenance" and the reply is "Good idea", and
that there are two or three similar brief replies to the suggestions, and that with reference to suggestion
Number 17 "Suspend all police training at the Police Academy at Holland College in Charlottetown, P.E.I. and re-
institute training facilities at the space in City Hall that we are presently paying for", the reply is "This
would be more costly and less effective than the present training policy". She stated that in these replies she
~ 4'4'4
~
.<ahA! aMP].
tJu/-/" {//1 C/;;. .tt
'<dI15,cPJ"oI1t? ;tf've.
tv/Len 111~
$eI'n~ 5'E~P/?
p"11/1'. lS".4h~
,.eali~l1",e~-r
?N,P1!'!'t:~ cPl"l'ler
a/~1k5k'y~
,(.;;/7s,{owJ1e I'7V6':
~e$(:"/J7~hf ~.
71~A'~s(/~~
~:;Aec~~ .
SeH'e~~
thinks there should be an explanation so that the Unions would know exactly what we have in mind. She
asked if this report of the City Manager could not be sent back and filled in a little bit more in detail.
Councillor Gould felt that there was plenty of discussion when those points were presented to Council and
they were quite lengthy, and he felt that the Unions went away at that time knowing that we had tried a
lot of those - some of their averaging principles would not work and we were told they would not work and
they were not allowed to apply them - we did try it and the budget was still sent back by the Province and
we were asked to cut one million dollars off it - so, he is quite satisfied that those points that were
able to be applied generally were applied, and those that were not, were not.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors M. Vincent, A. Vincent and Mac-
Gowan voting "nay".
Consideration was given to the letter from the Land Committee, dated May 3rd, 1976, which
advises that the City has redesigned the corner of Wellesley Avenue and Lansdowne Avenue to accommodate
the widening of Lansdowne Avenue and part of the design included 560 square feet of land belonging to Gulf
Oil Canada Ltd. and a settlement of $1,100.00 was agreed on at a previous date, and which further advises
that the loss of 560 square feet from the said company contributed to the difficulty of motorists entering
to and from Wellesley Avenue, and that the company then realigned its pump island to make a smoother
approach and departure to and from the island at a cost of $4,000.00 and the $1,100.00 for the sale of the
land was contingent upon the City paying the cost for realigning the island ($4,000.00), and which further
advises that at a Land Committee meeting held May 3rd, 1976 with Gulf Oil's solicitor, it was agreed that
the City did have some responsibility to share the cost of $4,000.00 and a settlement of $2,000.00 was
agreed upon -- and which recommends that the City of Saint John reimburse Gulf Oil Canada Ltd. the sum of
$2,000.00 as the City's share of the cost for the realignment of the pump island at Gulf's service station
located at the corner of Wellesley Avenue and Lansdowne Avenue.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above recommendation be adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that, while he supports the above recommendation being adopted, he
wants to know why the City staff would do this - why would we do that - he added that he knows why we did
it but he wants the public to know and. that is why he is asking the question - and he is going to support
the said payment because he knows that the City is behind the "eight-ball" and did negotiate the figure
down to $2,000.00 through the Land Committee - did the City really need this corner? The Mayor replied
that he would take it that it must have been recommended and it came to the Land Committee and that
Committee approved it. Councillor A. Vincent commented that the Committee did not approve it until after-
wards. The Mayor noted that it was recommended to that Committee. Councillor A. Vincent stated that the
question is: how can we prevent this from happening again? The Mayor stated that he thought it had
happened with consent of the Land Committee, but Councillor A. Vincent claims that it was done, before.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if it happened to come in with the Land Committee, or did it happen with
consent of this Council - but it happened with consent of a certain firm that wanted to move. off of King
Street to go over to the Avenue over there, and he is very upset about it. On being asked by Councillor
Hodges what he was talking about, Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would advise Councillor Hodges, in
private, some day, and that he was asking the Mayor to tell us. The Mayor replied that if he knew, he
would be able to tell Councillor A. Vincent, but he is sure he does not know. Councillor A. Vincent ~sked
if he could have a traffic count on that corner, and explained that in making this request he would point
out from the map attached to the Land Committee's letter there are cars parked there every day, and he
wants to know how do baby carriages get along there; he wants to know, if the City buys this land at this
meeting, does he have some guarantee that the sidewalk is going to continue around there, and he stated
that he noticed that it stops right there (referring to said map) and it starts there (again referring to
said map) and they park all their cars there, on the inside of the piece of land that is shown shaded on
the said map. He stated that if the City is buying that piece of land he wants a sidewalk along there and
he wants it that when the baby carriages come along Wellesley Avenue and turn left or whatever they have
to do, that they have the right to travel on a sidewalk - and they have not got it now, he noted. He
stated that what he is trying to say is that, in here, they park the cars all the time and baby carriages
come down here and have to go out on the street and go out around here, and in. He stated that he wants
some assurance that if the City buys this land, the purchase of which he supports, that we are going to
have a sidewalk in there. Mr. !~acKinnon advised that, as he recalls the construction, there is no side-
walk there and the dark.line shown on the said plan is to where the parking - any vehicles are going to be
obstructed from coming out - there is no sidewalk going around that area - the sidewalk is on the opposite
side and the cross-walks would allow passage from island to island. Councillor Davis asked if there is
room for a sidewalk there; have we got adequate space for a sidewalk. Mr. MacKinnon made negative rep~y _
the company's property line goes right to the street curb - when we put the alignment around there there
was some difficulty moving some of the poles back - he believes the company's sign was involved and
some other utility poles - there is no room for a sidewalk. Councillor A. Vincent explained that he
was raising these questions now, after the land Committee (of which he is a member) had dealt with this
matter and submitted this report to Council, because he went over and looked at the site after the Com~
mittee met with the attorney from Gulf Oil, and stated he was assured by George O'Connell that the
sidewalk was going to be there, and he went over and found out it was not there, therefore he is not happy
about this matter.
Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting during the aforegoing discussion.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until it is
reconsidered by the Land Committee.
Question being taken, the motion was carried to table the matter, with the Mayor and Councillors
Davis, Cave, M. Vincent and Parfitt voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the
Committee's recommendation to the April 12th, 1976 meeting of Common Council for an easement over the
property owned by Randy's (1975) Ltd. for the Marsh Creek Sewerage Scheme requested a clause be inserted
in the agreement protecting the City against any liability in the event the sewer pipe had to be dug up,
and that it is the feeling of the Commissioner of Engineering and Works that the words "protecting the
City against any liability in the event the sewer pipe had to be dug up" are not necessary, and the
document regularly used for easements is sufficient -- be received and filed, and as recommended therein
Council's resolution of April 12th, 1976 in this matter be rescinded and, as recommended by the Land
Committee, Randy's (1975) Ltd. be paid 10 cents per square foot for an easement consisting of 3,994 square
feet over the property presently owned by the said company, regarding the Marsh Creek sewer line.
.
I
'I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
'4'45
~~I1,( Cpmm.
. /~761<<.f?rm
/111'S. /1ldri~)?
/1'&11011 <>J-/J1,.
,1ft,!fR $~
S E/?,,( /lie'.?
Jt?Il"~#M
.l)eve.lo,e.
~/.;J)?
I
.7J<JV/,,( C~
I
.
I
~// ~r
/'KPJ<e S$/ PI's
dF ZJev,/o~
me~-t-.
. .L~1fere$,
Ct'-( ~ f/.;jl/
bld5S - J>r,
U/m,St-.
.s. :r. ..7J /sb/
-ICl~{?K.r
7eJo/,?,k ~o.
I
I
.
....
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee advising that the Com-
mittee at its meeting held on May 3rd last reviewed a recommendation from the Housing and Renewal Services
Department to acquire title to the freehold interests at 147 Queen Street owned by Mrs. Marion E. Henry and Mrs.
Lloyd Samson, and recommends that the City purchase the said freehold interests from Mrs. Henry and Mrs. Samson
for the sum of $3,000.00 plus legal fees for future land use in connection with the Neighbourhood Improvement
Development Plan, $1,125.00 of such figure being the City's share -- be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, Mr. David Goguen be sold
the parcel of land measuring 4 feet by 100 ,feet that he now leases from the City and that is located adjacent to
his property at 292 Main Street, for the sum of $150.00 with Mr. Goguen being responsible for all costs involved.
Consideration was given to the report from the Land Committee which advises that at its meeting held on
May 3rd, 1976, the Committee received two responses (copies of which are submitted) from the Call for Expressions
of Development Interest regarding the old City Hall buildings on Prince William Street, and that the Committee
reviewed these proposals which were submitted from the Saint John District Labour Temple Company, and from Kelly
Management Development Consultants Ltd., and that the Committee recommends that negotiations on the proposal
received from the Saint John District Labour Temple Company begin as soon as possible.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like for the City Solicitor to instruct him, where he is
known as an international representative for the International Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen who are part of
the group that is interested in the above named buildings, as to whether he should leave the Council table, or
whatever, during consideration of this matter, because he does not want any embarrassment, afterwards. He stated
that he is declaring his interest in this matter, and that he wants it on record, and he wants a legal opinion
before he does it. Councillor Hodges added that he is a Past President of the Saint John District Labour Council,
and he asked whether he should withdraw from the Council table during consideration of this same matter. Mr.
Rodgers replied that he did not quite gather all the facts to establish what involvement Councillor A. Vincent
has in this. He stated that if Councillor A. Vincent is involved with SOmeone doing business with the City, then
all he is required to do on that point is to declare his interest in writing to the Council. Councillor A.
Vincent stated that all he did was go to a group of building trades people and pointing out to them the City has
those vacant buildings and that the City would like to rent that block and make it pay for the City. He added
that we have a group of Unions together who want to rent that corner of City-owned buildings and make it a
payable proposition, and he would want to make it crystal clear that he does not want to be involved, if it is
going to be a conflict of interest - he could take a seat in the audience. He stated that the Bricklayers Union
will definitely be one of the Unions that will be part of the Saint John Labour Temple Company. Mr. Rodgers
asked: will that require another motion and vote, later? Making affirmative reply, Councillor A. Vincent felt
that probably it will require a letter in, on its behalf, the attorney being known as Teed & Teed. He stated
that he is co-chairing the committee to make City Hall pay - that is, the old City Hall buildings in question.
Mr. Rodgers advised that the most safe way of handling the matter, if a conflict exists, is for Councillor A.
Vincent to declare his interest in writing to the Council. Councillor A. Vincent, in reply, asked: why can
Councillor A. Vincent not just be excused now, and sit out in the audience? At this time, Councillor A. Vincent
asked permission to declare his interest, and to seat himself in the audience. He was. granted same, and there-
upon assumed a seat in the audience.
Mr. Rodgers advised that Councillor A. Vincent is free to leave the Council table if he so wishes;
however, that does not satisfy the requirement that if he has an interest he has to declare it in writing to the
Council. He added that that is a New Brunswick regulation. The Mayor noted that Councillor A. Vincent can
declare his interest verbally at this time, and then follow it up by written declaration.
Councillor Davis noted that in addition to the proposal received from Teed & Teed on behalf of a number
of Labour Unions in the city in order to form a Saint John Labour Temple Ltd., a very fine brief was received
from Kelly Management Development Consultants Ltd. but that brief says the time has been too short to prepare a
proper brief and that they would like to do something about it but have not had time and hope that the right
thing will be done. He stated that the Land Committee considered both briefs, and also considered a brief from
the Federal Government on the block - which is unofficial and not quite complete yet - and it was the feeling of
the Land Committee that it should submit the recommendation contained in the above mentioned letter.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, negotiations on the
proposal received from the Saint John District Labour Temple Company regarding the old City Hall buildings on
Prince William Street begin as soon as possible.
Councillor M. Vincent asked: if, by Councillor A. Vincent being present at this meeting and not dec-
laring his interest, can same put the above motion in jeopardy as being an invalid motion at a later date. Mr.
Rodgers replied that he prefaced his remarks by saying that if Councillor A. Vincent had a conflict of interest,
there is a way he has to follow it. He stated that for him to decide that Councillor A. Vincent has a conflict
of interest, he needs to consult with that Councillor and go over the details - he cannot give an opinion based
on what was said at this meeting on whether Councillor A. Vincent has a conflict of interest or not. Councillor
M. Vincent asked: presuming that he might have a conflict of interest, would his presence here and by not having
declared his conflict of interest, lead to the above motion being ruled invalid or out of order at a later date?
Mr. Rodgers replied that the records on this motion now will show that Councillor A. Vincent was absent from the
meeting. Councillor Davis pointed out that even though Councillor A. Vincent signed the receipt of these letters
at the Land Committee he withdrew from the meeting when the recommendation was made by the Committee - and that
is so recorded in the Committee's minutes. Councillor MacGowan stated she is questioning that we have two
submissions - and she suggested: if we are negotiating with one group should we not also negotiate with the other
to see which is the better deal for the City - otherwise, it looks as though we have a closed mind and that there
was no need to call for expressions of development interest. The Mayor felt that this has been taken up by the
Land Committee and worked out. Councillor MacGowan pointed out that the Land Committee does not know very much
about the Kelly Management proposal, nor does the Committee know too much about the proposal of the Labour Temple
Company. She felt that, in all fairness, it would seem that we should find out exactly what both groups plan.
She stated that she has no quarrel to find with the Labour group and if it had been the only proposal she would
have been very happy, but she thinks that because we have this other proposal that we should at least hear what
they have to say about it. In reply, Councillor Davis stated that is precisely why the Land Committee brought
both into this meeting. He stated that if the Council would like the Committee to follow that path, the Committee
will certainly do that; if Council wants to make the choice at this time, perhaps he was a little hasty in making
the above motion, but it is a legitimate way of getting the matter on the floor, and if Council were against it,
it would vote against it.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
446
7/';;IJJf. 17~V/s.
l1!Js~l?'c -Co
'1?1?>>I/L -rJe,.1o/
Sm/i-It SU/?-tU'v.
/l$$~d -Co
/l///sPJ? /I-ts.
$It~-d/'v.
tfHrJf ~171;
~~"f- ~ tt/pnl-s
7Jo/~
])nver nd~. '7'-
/iJs'pec~/ OJ?
~/J7 iJ7.ff ,PI'~
~ec!f
C/-t-!t ?I?t'e.!/
/l5./bQJ/~
S.J. (j'V/~~/e-
(/hitM, /}/(;1./5'
C/-6o/ ~r.
~~: z;,6~-tO
S. ./, 1Is!J. Gn?h?
Fl/'>e Ch/e.,e
Sein,c av~ ~
Prt>//. .I/e>.$f1. /11)>>
,~S.
"c-K"p,.,e$$''"NS <>
..7)e~e/e,?n7e %-
In7f-eresr
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED. that the letter from Mr. M. Zides, Municipal Planning
Director, with regard to the Ronald and Jerry Smith Sub-division plan of land on Golden Grove Road,
advising that in answer to the question as to how access would be provided to Lot 3 of the proposed sub-
division shown on the submitted print, the land.between that Lbt and the said Road, identified on the
plan by L.R.I.S. number 295469, is owned by the Smiths and it will have to be shown on the sub-division
plan as being consolidated with proposed Lot 3 to form one lot whose frontage is on the said Golden Grove
Road -- be received and filed, and, as recommended in the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee
dated April 28th, 1976, the Common Council assent to the said Ronald and Jerry Smith Sub-division plan,
which sub-division comprises approximately 30 acres of land on the northerly side of Golden Grove Road
and which extends to within 150 feet of Irwin Lake. .
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee
recommending that the Common Council assent to the sub-division plan for the proposed Allison Heights
Sub-division, and advising as follows:- that the proposed sub-division located on the north side of Loch
Lomond Road east of St. Anne Street (originally initiated by Mr. Norman Smith last year) will now be
developed by Lloma Construction Ltd. and a new plan will be submitted; that Lloma Construction's scheme
is based on the former street pattern but the housing proposal has changed considerably - Mr. Smith had
been considering 28 lots for 12-unit apartment buildings - the new scheme consists of 10 lots for 12-unit
apartment development and three larger parcels to contain a total of 74 townhouse units; that the total
number of units in the proposed Allison Heights sub-division area will be 194 compared with the earli~r
proposal of 336 units - the new plan will, therefore, provide for additional parking, landscaping and
usable open space; that the project will be developed in two phases - Phase I will consist of the 10
apartment buildings and will include approximately 1,800 feet of street; that, ultimately, there will be
a 2.08-acre parcel in the upper left hand corner of the submitted plan which will be set aside for land
for public purposes - this land adjoins land for public purposes which has been set aside in the Ellerdale
Development by the Rocca Group - since this area is several hundred feet distant from the Phase I area an
interim parcel to cover Phase I will be set aside - the intention is that this land would revert to Lloma
Construction at such time as the larger parcel of land for public purposes was to be vested in the City;
that: the name of the proposed street in this sub-division -- "Linda Crescent" -- has been approved by the
Planning Advisory Committee; that the assent of the Council for the sub-division plan should note the
interim or "in trust" aspect of the land now proposed to be set aside as land for public purposes and the
laying out of Linda Crescent which is to be a publicly owned street --- be received and filed and the
Council assent to the said sub-division plan as recommended and as noted therein.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor Cave, Chairman of the
Engineering and Works Department Committee, outlining the steps that have been taken in the Engineering
and Works Department to date in endeavouring to achieve a staff training programme in regard to the
City's equipment fleet driver maintenance and inspection, and advising that the Department, in order to
meet this need, developed an in-shop training programme for driver-operators, being a one-week course to
be held at the offices at Rothesay Avenue, and that the cost to the City in this regard, thus far, only
involves staff time, as all course content was either prepared by staff or supplied by manufacturers at
no cost, and that this course has met with approval of Saint John Civic Employees' Union, Local 18 and
that the first class will commence this month starting with supervisory staff and then followed by
driver-operators - and noting that although this particular training programme is specifically for
driver-operators, it is only a start towards training for other Department functions, and it is planned
that future training will be provided for new employees as well as existing employees on such topics as
safety, City policy, asphalt and other Work procedures, and that the possibilities for on the job training
are unlimited and all will be explored by a staff advisory committee which has been set up for just such
a purpose; and advising that it should be understood that the best equipment maintained by skilled
mechanics will become defective when improperly or unsafely operated, and that the best way for the City
to reduce vehicle misuse and abuse is by properly selecting and training the operators, and this is
precisely what the Department intends to do -- be received and filed and that the Common Council agree in
principle to the said training plan.
Councillor Cave, bet'ore making the above motion, advised that the Works Department, composed of
Councillors MacGowan, Davis, Hodges and himselt', spent several hours going through the City-owned buildings
n Rothesay Avenue, and that he was quite impressed with the set-up for study and teaching of this Works
facility, and that he believes this training course is a good thing, to prevent accidents and to provide
preventative maintenance, et cetera. He stated he believes that Local 18 has agreed in principle to this
training plan and is willing to put its men in to it for a training period.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for permission to place on the agenda of this meeting an item from I
the City Manager, containing a recommendation from the Building Inspector.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named item be placed on the agenda at this
time.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting (1) the
recommendation from the Building Inspector that tenders be called immediately for the demolition of all
buildings at the former Provincial Hospital Annex buildings on Sand Cove Road, (2) a copy of a letter
from the Saint John Housing Commission to the Building Inspector, recommending that demolition tenders be
called in two parts, (3) a history of the fire that occurred in the buildings and the recommendation for
action by the Fire Chief; and advising that the City owns 3.3 acres of land in the area around the annex
buildings and that the barn which was destroyed by fire is not on City property and the provincial agency
owning this land should be asked to immediately clean up the site; and advising that with respect to the
City-owned land which was obtained from the Province in 1975, the Council resolved on December 15th,
1975, on the request of the said Housing Commission, that the Commission be authorized to publicly
advertise for proposals for the development of this property, such proposal to include the rehabilitation
or demolition of the existing buildings, and that the Commission call proposals in early March, closing
on March 31st, 1976, and that .two Expressions of Interest were received at that time and a third came in
later, and these Expressions of Interest are being examined by a sub-committee of the Commission - and,
f
I
.
~
Crdll7/v/ep'
/lve.llumt! '11-
5ehof)/ /lssp
- Pei/-i /017 I"
I tV.-tel" emn-
/? ~/PI?/1 Councillor M. Vincent asked: is there any intention of having the above water extension dealt with in
tr~~~P/e~/7~ Capital Budget this year. Mr. Barfoot replied that this is part of the Council's Capital Budget report.
Sum. SCht?1J
C/t-I/ /J'l ~/'.
CkI'/-Ia7/
~~~e~ Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
.7 RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Marguerite Peacock, 144 Elliott
I Row, outlining dangerous conditions at Elliott:Row "dead end" hill approaching east and west coming traffic where
~~~A(e)W/lfe cars are parked on right side of Crown Street completely blocking the view of vehicles coming up Crown Street
'?e:;;1codk from westerly direction, and on the hill, between Crown Street and the "dead end" of Elliott Row where cars park
)f7~p~~ ~ the entire length of the street on the right side; advocating that parking on the right side of Crown Street, as
.5t referred to in her letter, should be stopped,_and suggesting that a new "no parking" law be put into effect, or
~~~h . that possibly some better system be put into effect; and suggesting that possibly pedestrian crossing lights
~~,.Ar/'J?~. should be installed in this same area, if only perhaps a caution light -- be referred to the Engineering and
re~~J'~~/P~ Works Department and to the Police Department for a report:
1/:V'tesb/lillJ, . '. .
al1 55. /1 /I~ 'J AND FURTHER that the sald correspondence be referred to the Pollee Department for actlon wlth the
~,~~~~7~ ecommendation that the Principal of Prince Charles School be contacted concerning the placing of a school safety
. n;/"J}eP1f; patrol boy at the crossing in question.
JJ(lIt~i,.;])~-t: .
~rinae~~C?r. Counclllor Pye, who suggested that the motion include the contacting of the Principal of Prince Charles
~c~PPI' School concerning placing of a safety patrol boy at the above named crossing, stated there is no question that he
Schopf ~- is needed.
-t~ p:C-rrd.. D1
r~' CIYJSE/h
,....
.
7e~t"r.J r.
(!a //
2>~;;."&/
$';]~R aJ/e
'R~ 11-0 J/.,
/4~.#I7J?e
I ~/a".!/s.
2<<.//;:/ //?!l
.1n.s;pt?crp,
I
L
.
I
S.XC/-t-!f
1/<<// k;/!-
/oyt"t's" Vh/Ph
/Yp, ~ff~
6 '-!!I //~//
..;1;1" ,,~//1.
-tes-h 17,7
~
441
in the meantime, the buildings have been further vandalised, culminating in the fires over the week-end; and
further advising that the Fire Department, under the authority of the Provincial Fire Marshal, had ordered the
demolition of these buildings on April 29th, 1976; and advising that with today's situation, the City Manager
believes that the City can delay no longer on this matter and he concurs in the Building Inspector's recommendation
to call tenders for demolition, with the tenders to be called in the manner as reQuested by the Housing Com-
mission -- be received and filed and, as recommended by the City Manager, tenders for demolition of the said
buildings be called in two parts, (a) for demolition of the fire-damaged east wing, and (b) for demolition of the
entire building down to the foundation -- and for a complete clean-up of all debris.
Mr. A. Ellis, Building Inspector, referring to his report dated May 10th, 1976 addressed to the Common
Council which outlines the situation regarding the above named buildings, as to vandalism and fire damages,
stated that it is now felt that the Annex buildings situation is dangerous and could cause bodily harm and
possibly death, and therefore his recommendation is forthcoming to Council for consideration and immediate
demolition or part demolition, whichever is the wish of Council. He added that his recommendation in this regard
incorporates the recommendation made to him by the Saint John Housing Commission letter (whiCh is referred to in
the above noted letter from the City Manager), which .is what he agreed to the Housing Commission. The Mayor made
note that there was a first-class barn there that was owned by Lonewater Farm and the Farm was planning to take
the barn down or to donate it to whichever organization in that area could use it - possibly the young people
from the co-operative housing project - as a recreation room, but, unfortunately, over the week-end the barn
burned through an act of vandalism. Brief discussion centred on the incident involving theft of a boiler from
this City-owned Annex building basement by the knocking of a hole in the wall of the main building.. Councillor
MacGowan advised that there are two groups who might possibly be interested in rehabilitating the remaining brick
building of the said Annex, which she understands has a good foundation, and this is why the Housing Commission
made its recommendation regarding demolition tenders as above noted. She added that if the possible rehabilitation
of the building does not materialize before next Monday, then the City can go ahead and demolish. Councillor M.
Vincent noted that the Building Inspector's recommendation in his letter to Council is for the demolition of all
buildings and a complete clean-up of all debris, and stated he.feels that such recommendation certainly has to be
dealt with at a higher priority than the recommendation from the Housing Commission. Mr. Barfoot pointed out
that the recommendation he put on the covering letter was that the tenders be called for the demolition in the
manner as reQuested by the Housing Commission - in other words, you would get two tenders: one for the demolition
of the one wing that is down, and the other tender for the demolition of the whole thing - and then, by that
time, maybe the Housing Commission would be in a position to report further on whether the proposals the Com-
mission received were worth considering for the retention of the wing that is still standing. In reply to
Councillor A. Vincent's Query, Mr. A. Ellis advised that the building wing that is still standing is the west
wing and the wing that is down is the east wing. Councillor A. Vincent expressed the opinion that the west wing
is still good for emergency housing. Speaking on the question of the demolition work, the Building Inspector
expressed the view that the wisest COurse of action would be to get proposals to tear the building off the
foundation, and construct some type of senior housing, or something, on top of that foundation. Councillor A.
Vincent asked if there is no way between now and the time the Council awards the demolition tenders that we can
get our Police Department to be fearless of who they catch, and have them arrested, regarding persons who are
committing acts of.vandalism regarding the buildings in Question. He stated that he understands the only reason
why the Police Department is not doing is because the cars are all of very wealthy people from Lancaster who are
taking the b~icks; he added that he understands they are antique bricks - and that he does not know anything
about it. He urged that the Council members go over to the said buildings, and stated that the vandals are over
there like pack rats. The Mayor stated that he has asked the Police to stop in there, many times. Councillor A.
Vincent asked: that is private, City-owned property - why cannot the Police lay charges against anyone they catch
there at night. The Mayor replied that they can, if they catch them. Councillor A. Vincent commented that his
band radio works very well - they have caught a few.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from Saint John City Hall Employees' Union, Local
486, C.U.P.E. advising that the Union members feel that the Quality of air being circulated throughout City Hall
is causing unhealthy working conditions for the civic employees and that the Union Executive has received numerous
complaints from the Union members on the poor quality of the said air and, therefore, the Union urges the Common
Council to take steps to have the air content and quality analyzed, and further advising that the Department of
Labour in Saint John has testing equipment available on reQuest; and suggesting that two tests be done - one at
approximately 10.00 a.m. and the other at approximately 4.00 p.m.; and stating that it is felt that because of
the serious nature of this request regarding the health and welfare of the City Hall employees, immediate attention
should be given to this matter in order that all City Hall employees may work in a healthy environment -_ be
received and filed and the City utilize the said testing equipment on the air in City Hall.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Grandview Avenue Home and School
Association, repeating the request contained in a petition presented to Common Council on May 12th, 1975 that the
City water service be extended to the Grandview Avenue Elementary School, be referred to the City Manager for a
report and be referred to the committee on Capital Budget.
On motion of Councillor Cave
1448
I
l~
Sel7/pr h,i?~S'
"'~ ~Ae /4174'-
C?1"~fi ~,Id
A e.;;1se
#/3ph-er
C'/ty, R1ff.,r.
/Ik':A-d ~.m.m.
b!u/~ (/;1 C1
.I/-d.
$erl//i!e 51.;;1/
Sel-/"- st?/'ve
/il'e .:lJe;;f
~Kp/e:>s/"nor---
HJ.re //1 $t?rv/;
:;-ICI-I-/~n l7eOir
!J101"sJ C,.eeA-
Se,,///ce ~;t7
p/L~, ~~I<{./d-f/
Jle- .ze:>~n')?ff.
:8ul/,(/H.f ~
.z;,,,,s-&" /J7tU?7! s
.A-t~
P/~bl1,#""/:S .
CoP"'''''''''.
1///ya;.L ,//p~-
/n!/s .<~~
;z?e- ~on/)?~.s
PICll7n, 19~P'/s.
l?p.mm.
J?eS'c/I7A'1'p~
n70 r/e:>n
t'(;i1/,q/?/s 6.ze:
/e>~
Af!t7 7! PJfe
(1"<<-11. ~ye
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Gould voting "nay", he having
expressed the view that in referring the said crossing matter to the Police Department, the Council should
ask for a report without giving a recommendation beforehand, to the D~partment. .
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Senior Friends of the Handcraft
Guild, explaining that they will be unable to rent the 764 square feet of space on the third floor of the
City Market building at this time (the Council having approved on April 5th, 1976 such lease)- due to
uncertainty in their financial position, but that they hope to receive a grant from the New Horizons
Programme and to be able to then proceed with renting of this space, and that they would appreciate having
first chance at renting same if another firm offer is made before July 1st, 1976, be referred to
the City Manager for a report, and to the Market Committee for a report.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Gulf Oil Canada Limited, advising that
further to Common Council resolution of November 4th, 1974 which granted the company a permit to construct
a new service station at City Road and Blair Street, the company's application at that time was made for a
self-serve station, however the Common Council approved the application and the company subsequently
received a permit to build its new facility as an attendant operated service station and when the company
constructed the said new station facility, it was constructed as a self-serve, with all the necessary
provisions built in to switch operation to self-serve on short notice; and further advising that in the
said Council resolution of November 4th, 1974 and in the October 7th, 1974 Council resolution, mention is
made that the company would make application for self-serve operation as soon as the appropriate civic laws
or regulations covering self-service have been adopted; and advising that formal application is now being
made to the Council for its consideration to grant the company permission to switch the said facility from
manned gasoline bar operation to self-serve - and adding that it is the company's understanding that the
new National Fire Code with standards covering self-serves is now in the Common Council's possession _ and
submitting standards covering self-serves issued from the Provincial Fire Marshal's Office, which became
effective April lst, 1976, and submitting two company manuals which cover the operation of self-serve
facilities with attention being drawn to the sections dealing with safety aspects, and also submitting a
set of City Road self-serve detailed drawings -- and requesting the consideration of Council to grant the
company permission to operate this City Road and Blair Street facility as a self-serve gasoline outlet __
be laid on the table for two weeks so that the Council can have a teach-in with City staff in open session
of Council to find out what the complications would be.
Mr. Barfoot asked what exactly is required, in regard to the teach-in referred to in the above
motion. Councillor A. Vincent explained that he wants to know what the complications would be regarding
manned service stations versus self-serve gasoline outlets. Councillor Hodges recalled that at the present
time, no stand has been taken by the Council on the question of self-serve gasoline outlets. Councillor A.
Vincent stated he also would like a report from the Fire Uepartment that if the construction of that
service station - and he would not name the name - because he is just not sure of the name of the oil
company - located on the left-hand side going down from Marsh Creek - had a fire there - someone lit a
match - if that roof had been built according to the City plans and specifications, would we have had the
explosion on the ceiling. He noted that most of our service stations are built with an open air and are
not housed in and the fumes could not build up as they did in the service station in question. He stated
that the service station to which he refers is a metal one and it has a closed-in ceiling, and when an
explosion occurred the whole ceiling blew off. He stated that, in comparison, the overhead of another oil
company service station is open with a flat concrete roof and the beams and there is no way fumes can build
up in them. He stated that he is wondering if it is not in the Building Code, should it not be in it,
because he.learned within the last couple of days that service stations in the United States of America
which have open roofs throughout that country have less chances of a build-up of fumes. He stated that he
would like to have that on the report, as well. The Mayor stated that we will have a report on it.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Gould and Cave voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED.that the application from Building Space Investments Ltd.
requesting that 1.52 acres of land known as Lot 74-1 on Linton Road be re-zoned to permit the construction
thereon of a commercial building, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and
that authority be given to advertise the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application of Hilyard Holdings Ltd. making a
request for re-zoning of 77 Co burg Street and vacant land on Garden Street to permit the use of the ex-
isting building (formerly used for church purposes) for business offices of a general insurance agency, be
referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that authority be granted to ad-
vertise the said proposed re-zoning.
The Mayor asked for a motion to place an item on the agenda at this time.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
~
I
I
.
I
.
I
Seconded by Councillor Green I
RESOLVED that the item that the Mayor wishes to introduce be placed
on the agenda at this time.
The Mayor advised that the matter in question is the rescinding of Common Council resolution of
April 26th, 1976 to sell Lot 1, Kiwanis Court, to Mr. Leo P. Pye.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the following resolution that was adopted on April
26th, 1976 be rescinded, namely, "That in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee, Lot 1,
Kiwanis Court, be sold to Mr. Leo P. Pye for the sum of $8,500.00, which is the appraised value, subject to
the condition that the title to this lot reverts to the City unless it is developed with a single family
dwelling thereon within one year of this Council resolution".
.
~
,....
44:~
.
I
r@K.e1" ~6
I G.,il//
/{;ivNn/$
C'd. ./d /
SCl /e
.
CPh.cpknees
J)e.;l-t'A
/J'Il's.K c:
..Lrvin!/
I(: e.;r rvi-t'f7
~ -f'e1l7?/o/
I
.
I
I
.
.....
The Common Clerk advised that Councillor Pye wished to put a motion forward to the effect that Lot 1,
situated on the eastern side of Kiwanis Court, be again put up for public tender.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above noted item be placed on the agenda at this time.
Councillor Pye advised that on March 17th, 1976 he submit~ed an application to the Real Estate De-
partment of the City of Saint John to purchase Lot 1, Kiwanis Court, for the appraised price of $8,500.00, and
that at the time of his submission he was the only applicant for the said lot which, incidentally, was put up for
public tender in 1973 and has been available for public purchase since that time. He stated that, throughout his
entire life, with exception of the past four years, he resided in the general area of Kiwanis Court, and his wife
and he wish to build a home and take up residence in this area, in which their raised their children and which
afforded them countless happy memories. He stated that about two weeks ago the sale of this land to him was
passed by Common Council, but because of a later division of opinion as to whether or not a Councillor was
entitled to purchase land from the City, the motion which approved same was rescinded a few moments ago. He
stated that, to dispel any doubts which may be entertained by the public in this regard, he wished to put the
following motion.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that Lot Number 1, Kiwanis Court, be again put up for public
tender.
Councillor A. Vincent drew attention to the death recently of Mrs. K. C. Irving, who was a very good
friend of many citizens of Saint John and of the working people of this city, and stated that her death was a
great loss.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that Councillor A. Vincent be permitted to introduce at this time
on the agenda a motion with regard to the above noted matter.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that a letter be sent to Mr. K. C. Irving and family expressing the
deep sympathy of the Common Council in the recent death of Mrs. K. C. Irving.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the seventeenth day
of May, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal
Services, C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, E. Ferguson,
Chief of Police, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, and
P. Clark, Fire Chief
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes. of the meeting of Common Council, held on May
3rd last, be confirmed.
450
7e";(t!'r a~
/l!tdh~~/ ~t!'Y/~i,
~Mk.se ff
b/lflt'ffJ #,h,;,k~
~~
$~J-~'JI', d1!1!2
men~
,t/'/7?dl [1Ph~
A -Cd.
/! ///.s~" #&-s.
t: u.J -,al/,
"PAdsI!' ..L-
SlIb-L/I/. ed-
sJal'/hff p"fic
C'a~/&-.;ll //~je
/J1/~'4eY///t!'
St!'wd~e Vr~-
menr '?/iiilhT
/l. JJ.r. L-t-L.
J),'R.E.E
~<<hcas-le,. .I~
~ I'-/"T sC.iiI-t-ip
/At//' CNnJlt'a//-.
11 $SP(!, (/I1;;IhClfS"
m~ld) .I-t~.
~hbra~
F/J'le S-t-J? 7
reflall"$
t11. w: r;dl'Y7~
/l$~~c/;,;,t-e
~
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent .
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
May 10th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report dated May 10th, 1976 from
the City Manager, the.City-owned building located on the former Morehouse property, Whalen Road, be sold
to the only bidder in response to the public tender c~ll, namely, Mr. Michael Devlin of Garnett Settle-
ment, for a price of $200.00, the conditions of the said tender including removal of the building within
sixty days, filling in the basement, cleaning the site and also that the building is not to be relocated
within the City watershed area.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that
Lloma Construction Limited is developing a parcel of land, known as Allison Heights Sub-division, Phase I,
off the north side of Loch Lomond Road behind the Woodside Townhouse area, and that this development will
involve approximately 1,000 feet of street and services and make land available for the construction of
ten 12-unit apartment buildings, and further advising that the developer's servicing plans met with the
approval of the Engineering and Works Department, and that, according to the City's sub-division policy,
the City will be responsible for the following costs:- (1) water piping materials (watermains, gate
valves, et cetera) $15,800.00; (2) sanitary sewer materials (pipe, man holes, et cetera) $7,000.00; (3)
storm sewer materials (pipe, man holes, catch basins, et cetera) $9,500.00 -- making a total of $32,300.00
and recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water and sewerage materials to be charged to
the 1976 Capital Budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division
agreement in due course -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
Councillor Gould recalled that the Council at one time was discussing the possibility of dis-
continuing the sub-division cost-sharing service regarding water and sewerage materials, and he asked if
there is any more information on that subject, at this time. The Mayor replied that he had discussed 'this
matter this morning with the staff and no approval has been given as yet; the matter has gone to a committee,
and a report back has not been received as yet. Mr. Barfoot advised that he will bring out the said
report next week.
.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved
invoice for engineering services, with regard to the following named capital project:-
1.
Millidgeville Sewage Treatment Plant
A. D. I. Limited
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated March 31, 1976
I
Nil
$ 4,588.32
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engin-
eering services in connection with a project that has been undertaken under the Department of Regional
Economic Expansion programme:-
1.
Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates (Management) Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 7,
dated April 30th, 1976
.
$ 56,523.32
$ 4,648.45
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that one
reply has been received to the public tender call for providing repairs to the brickwork at Number 7 Fire
Station, Church Avenue, and that the Fire Chief has reviewed this bid and has recommended its acceptance,
and that the City Manager concurs in the recommendation that the said tender be awarded to the said
bidder, namely, M. W. Garnett Associates, at a cost of $8,950.00 -- be received and filed and the recom-
mendation adopted.
I
In reply to Councillor Gould's question as to whether there is any advantage to calling tenders
again when there has been only one tender received, Mr. Barfoot advised that in the above particular case,
specifications for this project were taken out by five companies but only one tender was received, as
above noted, and it would seem that it was not worth calling again for these tenders.
I
(Councillor Green entered the meeting).
Question being taken, the above motion was carried with Councillor Gould voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, further to con-
sideration on April 12th, 1976 by Common Council of the matter of tenants of the Fort Howe Apartments .
parking their vehicles on City-owned land on the south side of Magazine Street, advising that this matter
has been under consideration by the Historic Sites and Events Committee, the Saint John Parking Commission,
the Planning Advisory Committee, and, on April 12th, as mentioned, by the Common Council, and that in the
process of weighing whether or not the City should tidy up the area and deny parking through the erection
of curbing, the City Manager was asked for an estimate of the cost and Council was informed that to make
~
,....
451
.
I
I
('/":1 /l/5~
h~ 19'owe
.p.i7J?klnff
SJ!.;JC!.t!"s,.
/'l.tilp::Vhe
.5Y; CU ,..1//1
+.~I7Lse.a/,-
07.7'
I AfpMh&
refJP" t-
.
I
P"Pi-ec'h'oJ?
C?UI7?,m.
~/"'e 2Jept".
k/I.dl/.srm
.6 !I$~eh1
1.('~..P/2f....1
:J:ho(!let-
/<176
/.,77
:eluK$.d
'CU/1Ih1.
.7Psse/y11 ~
.
.....
the restrictions effective, curbing would be required along the entire face of Fort Howe from the road which
leads up the hill right along to the rock-cut opposite Barker Street, that the cost would be considerable, and
that it was not anticipated in the 1976 Capital Budget; and further advising that the estimated cost of the
proposed curbing and landscaping work, is $11,300.00, and submitting the plan that Council had requested on April
12th last, showing the actual parking; and further advising that the annual Capital Budget for improvements to
the whole of the Fort Howe site is only $5,000.00 and that he believes that the emphasis on capital spending for
Fort Howe should continue to be on improvements to the areas of historical and tourist interest rather than on
measures to control parking -- and recommending that no further action be taken on the curbing under consider-
ation -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Expressing her concern regarding the City Manager's recommendation, Councillor MacGowan asked the
following questions: is the City going to leave this site the way it is and let the said Fort Howe Apartments
residents use it for free parking, or has the City any plans at all, in the future, to make it attractive, or is
the City going to charge rent as it does for any other parking area? She stated that she would like to see this
particular landscaped, and she felt that even if we did it only for one year, we would then have enough revenue
from such parking fees to pay for the improvements there. In reply, Mr. Barfoot referred to the recommendation
in his letter, which is, that we let things continue as it is. He stated that the improveme~ts to Fort Howe
should be placed in an order of priority, and that the revenues that would be derived from this parking lot would
be very small and would not be worth the cost of making the necessary improvements. The Mayor enquired: how many
vehicles would be there? Mr. Barfoot stated that he dld not recall the exact number of vehicles, but it seemed
to him that it would be a very small amount of revenue that would be generated from this particular improvement.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he agrees with the City Manager's recommendation, but he wanted to know if the
City staff has figured out how such revenue could be generated from such parking fees - and, if those figures are
not available at this meeting, perhaps the Council could look at the matter as it relates to further expenditures -
in other words, is it going ~o be somewhat viable if the City does some work there to improve the said area
perhaps next year and then charge a fee for parking; does it generate any money that could be turned back into
improvement? Mr. Barfoot replied that the staff could look further at this matter - if it was worthwile, but his
opinion was that this particular parking arrangement is really something that has been there for some time, and
it is not worth spending a great deal of money to change something which is really not in that much need of
changing. Councillor MacGowan stated that she would like to find out how many cars are parking there. She noted
that it is not the citizens who are using this City land for parking, but it is the residents of the Fort Howe
Apartments, some of who have to pay to park inside that building and, therefore, why should those who park on the
City land be exempt from parking fees.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the Council receives a
fuller report.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors M. Vincent and Gould voting
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report of the Fire Department for the month of March, be
received and filed.
With reference to assistance and rescues performed by the Fire Department Rescue Squad, and the notation
that thirty persons were transported to hospital, Councillor Gould asked: have all the bills been sent out, and
how much have we collected? Mr. Barfoot replied that the Commissioner of Finance promises that information for
the next meeting. Councillor M. Vincent, noting that the above named report of the Fire Department states that
the Fire Chief and Deputy Police Chief Jackson escorted members of the Protection Committee on a tour of all fire
and police stations on March 11th and 18th, stated that the Protection Committee has completed the tour of the
police and fire facilities and the Committee's report has been drafted and forwarded to the City Manager for his
study and hopeful consultation with the appropriate staff, and perhaps in the not-too-distant future, we might
have something from the City Manager on the said tour. Councillor Davis pointed out that the above report shows
how many false alarms there were on the bell alarm system - that of the 48 bell alarms in March, only 10 were
actual alarms and the remaining 38 were false alarms. He stated that, disregarding the cost of maintaining the
system, which is considerable, he thinks there are two Or three men maintaining the system -- the cost of sending
out 38 sets of vehicles to false alarms can be very high if there is an accident. He stated he thinks it is time
to review the said system again, and that he thinks it is time, perhaps, that the City should drop the bell alarm
system completely. He stated he believes that the bell alarm system is being abused, and abusing the system
means abusing the firemen - so, perhaps the Council could have the Council Committee on Protection look into this
matter.
On motion of CouncIlor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the suggestion raised by Councillor Davis
City should abolish the use of the bell alarm system of the Fire Department, be referred to the
Committee for that Committee's study.
that perhaps the
Protection
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting the proposed
Capital Budget for 1976 and 1977, and advising that the total expenditure contemplated is $12,221,000.00 for 1976
in the said Capital Budget, and that of this amount, $3,344,000.00 is budgeted to be received from other levels
of government as contributions, and $2,424,000.00 is budgeted for re-payable loans from the Federal Government,
leaving a balance of $6,453,000.00 to be raised from the sale of City debentures, and discussing details of the
proposed said budgets, and recommending that the 1976 Capital Budget be adopted, and that the capital expenditures
proposed for 1977 be referred to the Budget Committee for their future guidance -- be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
Councillor Gould noted that the above named budget contains items of water works and sewerage parts to
be done regarding Josselyn Road, but he does not see anything included for improving the road, and he asked if
that was supposed to be included, or was it omitted through an oversight. Mr. Barfoot replied that that normally
would be done in 1977; the underground work is being done in 1976. Councillor Gould stated he wonders what
condition the road will be in, after the water and sewerage works are done; he added that it would appear to him
that the road work should be done, as well, this year. Mr. Barfoot replied that it varies with the road, but no
doubt with a lot of service cuts across the road and excavations along the road. that is going to require work,
but by the time we finish the capital work this year, it will be a job for 1977 - so that could be referred to
the 1977 budget.
452
~
C~'p/I- .-/
.2Ju~;J'd-
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
Councillor M. Vincent and !1r. Barfoot discussed the fact that it is very difficult to forecast
exactly the effect of the capital spending upon future tax rates and upon future events in general. Mr.
Barfoot noted that his report states that the City has to be very careful with the amount of expenditures
that it undertakes because of the various large cost-shared projects that the City has been engaged in and
which, hopefully, the City will be engaged in. He recalled that last year, the Commissioner of Finance
prepared a very detailed analysis of the effect of the capital budget upon future tax rates, upon funding
which had to be done in the future, and stated that this analysis is certainly being used in preparing this
year's budget. He added that such an analysis could be done for this year's capital budget, and possibly
should be done - this, of course would mean that if Council wished to delay the approval of the Capital
Budget until after this analysis was completed this would delay the start of a lot of work which we should
take advantage of the summer season in starting. Councillor M. Vincent noted that the point he was trying
to raise was that people will probably raise questions as to why our capital budget is not higher, and that
he would suggest to them that you cannot increase the capital budget with the desire to want to spend 'more
capitalized money if our operating budget is restricted and we cannot carry out the work physically that we
might like to. Mr. Barfoot stated that that point is correct, and added that the two budgets have to be
looked at pretty well together: the capital budget has to be repaid through the operating budget, and too
high an increase in the capital budget will affect what kind of operating budget we can adopted in 1977.
Councillor Gould asked: what is the plan of the City Manager in implementing all these projects
and getting them done? is the plan to have City staff do it, or are we going to contract out a lot of these
jobs? Mr. Barfoot replied that most of the transportation and most of the recreation projects, will be
done by City forces - some of the large projects will be contracted out - the buildings, in particular.
Councillor Gould explained that what he is really asking is, does the City Manager have all plans and
intentions of expending the above noted $12,221,000.00 this year. Mr. Barfoot replied that he would be
very bold to say that we are going to spend that total, because, in point of fact, as we start off on a
number of projects there are delays where one thing has to follow another and, with the best will in the
world and all the contractors at our door, we are not going to get some of these projects completed - but,
this represents, he trusts, with its adoption, Council's policy in these various projects - it will cer-
tainly be staff's intention to get on with them, as quickly as possible, by whatever means we need to
prosecute them, to get them done. Councillor Gould asked: what percentage of the 1976 capital budget
figure does Mr. Barfoot expect to spend? Mr. Barfoot felt that around $9,000,000.00 of that figure is
probably a fair estimate.
Councillor MacGowan voiced her disapproval that the Simms Corner bus lay-by, estimated to cost
$9,000.00, is in the 1977 capital budget items, and noted that she has been trying for three years to get
that bus stop so that we could use it and get all those buses out of the lane of traffic at that very
miserable corner. She recalled that the Council approved that this work be done, and the building on this
particular site was finally demolished, and the Province of New Brunswick contributed towards the fill.
She felt that actually we owe it to the Province to get that job completed. She stated that, last year,
the City received more fill, at no cost to the City; the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee had
this project in its budget that we hoped to have it so we could use it - for some reason, it was never
~' 'k ~ completed because by the time they had the fill in it was too late to lay the pavement - and now, instead
/~e "ll'!"::":o>l&r.'. of being in the 1976 budget, this work is in the 1977 budget. She stated that this situation is very
.... .0 it a<<.1f/T' frustrating. .
C' O.l7?HI.
S/M~S ~,,~,..
bPS 4!f-bf
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting a r~port
from the Fire Chief in response to the enquiry made at the May lOth last meeting of Council concerning
c?/'~~ ~jrJ?, fires and roofs of service stations; and advising that with respect to the enquiry made at the said Council
jCf'"e ~~/~ meeting concerning Cedar Point Trailer Park rentals, the City staff has been advised by the Regional
Director of Assessment and Rental Control Officer, Mr. Ervine A. Mawhinney, that the mobile home sites
Se"v/eedazf/~ leased by the City at the said Park are "residential premises" and, as such, are under control by the
61,;{,11, r~AeW/ Residential Rent Review Act, and that Section l(b) of the Act defines "residential premises" as "any land
~ leased as a site for a mobile home used for residential purposes whether or not the landlord also leases
&.It"a.;. '7if. ;?/t?b//e that mobile home to the tenant", and that, furthermore, there would seem to be nothing in the regulations
~~e ~~~ that would exempt the City from the provisions of this Act -- be received and filed.
N'~1fN/s
~5/:.{e dl6l1
11 e ~T h'ev/ew
t9or-
S'e/f'-serve
serv/ee ~/t217
Councillor Kipping recalled that he believes that the above report was brought forward as a
partial answer to a matter that was in the Council minutes of May lOth last, which meeting he missed. He
noted that the matter was laid on the table for two weeks so that Council could have a teach-in with City
staff in open session of Council to find out what the complications would be - that is, the matter of the
self-serve gasoline stations. Noting that the above report does not refer to self-serve gasoline stations,
he asked the City Manager: when will the Council get that information? Mr. Barfoot advised that there will
be a report from various members of City staff on self-serve gasoline stations for the next meeting of
Counc il. .
Councillor MacGowan asked if the City Solicitor is prepared to give an oplnlon, with reference to
the above noted report from the City Manager, about the rent review on the Cedar Point Trailer Park lot
fees, and whether the Residential Rent Review Act applies to property owned by the municipality. Mr.
Rodgers stated that on that question: generally, the Rent Control Act applies to the entire province
, L ,/ including the municipalities and, therefore, would include the Cedar Point Trailer Park; however, there
CedaY' ;;ztt-.A/Ile'//t!? several exceptions under the regulations and if the residential premises are known as limited dividend
lIO~e ;P~J?Ar housing under Section 15 of the National Housing Act, or non-profit housing under Section 14 of the Na:-
/ ,ional Housing Act, they are exempted. He added that the City Manager probably can confirm that the sald
rel1i-ii/S reI/Ie Trailer Park does not fall. Mr. Barfoot advised that the said Park does not fall under either of those
ffd3"t1. /lso,/?O categories. The City Solicitor continued, stating that the answer then is that Rent Control Act applies
.n.3 1 Cedar Point Trailer Park.
/f'el1rl..Pffe-Z+
/11gb/Ie Ao/?1e
p.i11",fs W'~~ r
s elVer C>h.i1;yres
In reply to Councillor Gould's query, Mr. Barfoot confirmed that mobile homes are included in the
residential homes that pay water and sewer charges; with regard to the query as to whether the City has a
consistent policy across the City with regard to that, Mr. Barfoot made negative reply, stating the City
has no one policy for mobile home parks, some of which pay by means of meters and others pay by housing
units (that is, each trailer is regarded as a housing unit). In reply to Councillor MacGowan's question as
to whether the City's application to have the lot rental fees increased at the said Cedar Point Trailer
Park has been forwarded now, Mr. Barfoot made affirmative answer. Councillor MacGowan made the point that
if the rental amount includes the City's charge for water and sewer rates, the City possibly will have
problems. Mr. Barfoot felt that that is a further consideration. He stated that the said application for
rent review was only on the basis of current costs at the time of submission. Councillor MacGowan asked:
if it (the water and sewer rates) changes within six weeks will the City be able to apply for another
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
are
to
I
.
~
,..
.
Ce/;i:1J"> ~
M7~le h'e>m
;z?;,rlr 1"BJ1
I
/an~ GA?P'
.l:Kpre> ,,of'fa-
I '-t/(;)?
~~$~/Weh
/l~n 1'1///
S'pI"K~e .4*e
wafe-J"> /''/7
(sl'e
dhle nLh/t?h
below
+)
.
-tf-
~'-t-
I S/!c/-{;pr
.4'.;1~L ~h1m
7011/(een
/IJ';;1If~e/~n
Zd
.S.k"h;!
/Yt'I~Je>g~
z;"proyt."",
ZJeve/op'~
"P/an
lfeso/ut,/ol1 L
~me/1l(ea P!:f
c: Co. :r~J1€' Ii/;
1J76
(1) s-o~ #J15
I ;BooK)
?,,"f't!'d-~
I Fei/rt;/l7e
5te;;uNt'aN~
1Y/~/h:.7.-
~M;'l'~:Z
Set'K-J-o/1f!/
;P/teA?P/h~ ..
de<rh"'~
7?~Q,(s ~
se"I//~e's
. 1(t?So/tLflo17
.;/mehcfQt! ~
Co C a ;J1.:ir. 7-
1'7'17
(7? :l. 'fe,
:i3dlS~ 1~)
....
'l5 .~3
increase in rent? Mr. Barfoot replied that we will have to look into that. The Mayor noted that this will be
looked into. Councillor Gould asked: is Cedar Point Trailer Park hooked up individually, and are they, in fact,
charged water and sewerage rates? Mr. Barfoot replied that the rent is inclusive of water and sewer charges -
there is no master meter at the said Trailer Park, so there is a charge, basically, against each trailer but the
rental - the ground rent - which they pay includes allowance for the water and sewer charges against such housing
unit. With reference to the rents, Councillor Gould asked Mr. Barfoot: are you suggesting that if we are under
the control of the Residential Rent Review Act we are only allowed to increase it by eight per cent - is that
true? or is there room for a bigger increase providing you can prove need? Councillor Davis replied: if there
is a loss, there is a higher increase. Councillor Gould stated that all he is saying is, that, maybe, what we
should be doing is making the water and sewerage separate from the rental basis - and you can do exactly what you
want,.then, and there may not be a deficit, under that plan. Mr. Barfoot replied that it is the City policy, he
thinks, to review these rentals periodically, and if, in fact, we need to make an application, that is what will
be done.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by CouncIlor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that in 1971 the
City began negotiations with persons acting for Mr. Allan Hill to obtain an easement covering an area of 21,411
square feet across land owned by Mr. Hill, for the Spruce Lake water line; that negotiations over the years
became very protracted and the most recent correspondence from solicitors acting for Mr. Hill is that he be paid
the sum of $14,000.00 for the said square footage plus an amount sufficient to cover all his legal expenses in
the matter; that the City had made an offer of $4,400.00 for the land involved even though the highest maximum
figure paid for land for this easement was ten cents per square foot; that the watermain was installed some years
ago -- and recommending that title to the said land in the form of an easement for the main water line over the
land of Mr. Allan Hill, having a width of 35 feet and an approximately length of 612 feet for an approximately
total area of 21,411 square feet be acquired by expropriation as the City is unable to reach a satisfactory
settlement for compensation with the owner or his legal representative, the land in question being shown on the
submitted plan -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Moved in amendment by Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that in 1971 the
City began negotiations with persons acting for Mr. Allan Hill to obtain an easement covering an area of 21,411
square feet across land owned by Mr. Hill, for the Spruce Lake water line; that negotiations over the years
became very protracted and the most recent correspondence from solicitors acting for Mr. Hill is that he be paid
the sum of $14,000.00 for the said square footage plus an amount sufficient to cover all his legal expenses in
the matter; that the City had made an offer of $4,400.00 for the land involved even though the highest maximum
figure paid for land for this easement was ten cents per square foot; that the watermain was installed some years
ago -- and recommending that title to the said land in the form of an easement for the main water line over the
land of Mr. Allan Hill, having a width of 35 feet and an approximate length of 612 feet for an approximately
total area of 21,411 square feet be acquired by expropriation as the City is unable to reach a satisfactory
settlement for compensation with the owner or his legal representative, and the City Solicitor be authorized to
file the necessary documents and Notice of Intention to Expropriate with the Expropriations Advisory Board, the
land in question being shown on the submitted plan -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Question being taken, the amendment was carried.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that the Land
Committee, at its meeting held on May lOth last reviewed a recommendation from the Housing and Renewal Services
Department to acquire title to the freehold interests at 70 Queen Street owned by Mrs. Madelyn Zed for the sum of
$4,000.00 with the City preparing the legal transfer documents at its own expense, for future land use in con-
nection with the Neighbourhood Improvement Development Plan -- and that the Committee recommends that the City
purchase the freehold interests in the said property from Mrs. Zed for the said sum of $4,000.00 with the City
preparing the legal transfer documents at its own expense, for future land use in connection with the Neighbour-
hood Improvement Development Plan -- the acquisition to be cost-shared and the City's share amounting to $1,400.00
and advising that sales of vacant land in the South End of late have averaged around $2.00 per square foot and
this transaction involving 2,264 square feet of land calculates out to $1.76 per square foot -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
In reply to Councillor Parfitt's query as to whether the acquisition of the above property is possibly
to combine this lot, which has a frontage of only 23 feet, with other properties there, to provide land with more
than 23 feet as frontage, Councillor Davis explained that the City is presently in the process of acquiring Lots
23, 24 and 25, and the above matter deals with Lot 10 - the City is acquiring Lot 11, and it owns Lot 13; this is
part of a scheme to provide a tot-lot for the area and to provide space for new in-fill housing; there is no move
on our part to acquire the entire lot - there are some good homes - quite a few-good homes - in this area, but
the homes that are not very good - we have obtained this one for less than $2.00 per square foot that is our
limit, and we should find good use for it under the programme.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councilior Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Com-
mittee, some 6.5 acres of usable land plus an undetermined amount of embankment off Fairville Boulevard be sold
to Standard Machinery & Equipment Company Limited and to Security Plumbing & Heating Limited, subject to the
following conditions:- (1) that 2.7 acres of land, more or less, be sold to Standard Machinery & Equipment
Company Limited, and that 4 acres of usable land, more or less, be sold to Security Plumbing & Heating Limited,
as shown on the submitted plan, for the sum of $1,500.00 per acre; and that the excess lands in the form of
embankment be transferred to Security Plumbing & Heating Limited, to be planted and maintained as a greenbelt;
(2) that Standard Machinery & Equipment Company Limited and Security Plumbing & Heating Limited jointly submit to
the City of Saint John a plan to provide for the installation and design of roads and services to the lands, such
plans to be acceptable to the Commissioner of Engineering and Works of the City of Saint John; (3) that a start
on construction be made within six months of the date of the Council Order authorizing the sale of this land.
In regard to the above named sale of land, Councillor Davis advised that this is a very gratifying
solution to quite a complex problem; both the said firms are well-known firms in this city, and are progressive,
and they both want to develop this area, and it was very gratifying to have them get together with the Land
Committee and come up with a solution that he thinks will prove to be beneficial to everyone. He added that
there is in the above item., some acreage that is very steep in the back of the ground leading up to Manawagonish
Road and these two firms have obligated themselves to maintain this steep bank in a presentable condition - it is
'45'4
7>!dhh.!lclf//5. C:,m
7?a.IJPI ent- il1 he&t
0-1" p<<PItt:: ;;___
4nlli
7(,yc: ;1fe&//o
hU(/-E-J, -<.;jwTt?1'1
/lssed -&-0 5".6-
pC/I/, ?,/.;:jl?
srCl~/e!:f {7"t'n
'7?olthd/ n5 ~
~7I/H#e ~
II/Po;:?w.iid I9ve.
;1ft?b/le h(Jh'/e
/J1.;lI'/-c-"I7? e/"l
Il/qfe /
~5-t S/ae
h -64Y'flr/ses At
71e-~PJ?in~
/'eso/<<t-iem
V.;i/'/t!';( re
'p1'f?fPS;;J /
J/~/"/t?;I ):1. d,{? tJ.
J:;rft.J/, 1777
('/? /3.3, $t7/l.f 7'1')
5.7: IIs~, {bh?I7?
:lJ!f-,t~w re .
lloepPl>>;oP(~'h On
St".;Jl7tK.;lM 5
C/t!f SoltcitoY'
~
part of the agreement.
On motion of Councillor Green
.
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
Advisory Committee, the Common Council accept the following sums of money in lieu of land for public
purposes with respect to the two following sub-divisions - the figure in each case being based on the value
of the proposed lot estimated by the Property Management Branch of the Department of Community Planning and
Development and upon the percentage of the value payable to the City under the Subdivision By-Law according.
to the zone in which the land is situated:-
(1) from Roy G. McCullough, S-29 - the sum of $224.00 (another one-acre lot is being severed from the R. G.
McCullough property on the westerly side of Red Head Road, just south of Debly Sub-division; the 50-foot
wide Canaport to Irving Refinery pipeline easement crosses the lot but should not interfere with its
development for a single family dwelling; an approval from the Property Management Branch places a value of
$2,800.00 on this lot - this means that $224.00 is the amount payable in lieu of land for public purposes);
(2) from Judith Lawton,. L-83 - the sum of $480.00 (the Lawton property is situated at the junction of
Forest Hills Drive, Ridge Rowand Island View Heights Sub-division; a formerly approved Lot 15A-l is being
divided into three lots; Lot 76-3 contains a dwelling occupied by Mr. Carl P. Tilley; confusion about an
existing separate title to this lot resulted in an extensive title search which in turn resulted in Judith
Lawton's agreement to give a quit claim deed for it to Mr. Tilley when the plan is filed - actually, one
new lot. is being created out of this sub-division; the appraised value of Lot 76-1 is given as $6,000.00
and at eight per cent of the market value the sum of $480.00 is payable to the City as money in lieu of
land for public purposes).
I
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee,
whose letter of May 13th, 1976 advises that Murdoch-Lingley Limited has submitted a plan showing a City-
initiated 450-square foot rounding on the southwesterly corner of Millidge and Woodward Avenues and that
the resultant change to Lot 1 makes it necessary to amend a former plan of Stanley Gardens, the Common
Council assent to the sub-division plan, shown on the submitted plan, with respect to the street corner
widening.
.
On motion of Councillor Green
(
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter, dated May 13th, 1976, from the Planning
Advisory Committee to whom had been referred by the Common Council for a report the question of the mobile
home located at the rear of the Maritimer Motel on Ocean West-way, advising that the Committee has never
been in favour of a mobile home at the said location and advised Common Council by a letter, dated June
13th, 1975, that it should be removed; and further advising that the property was sold in the latter part
of 1975 and the new owner engaged a manager, who wished to live in a mobile home behind the motel, and
that Council's November 24th, 1975 meeting granted permission for the temporary placement of this mobile
home for a period of six months, which period expires on May 24th; and further advising that the Committee
advises that the family living in the mobile home has been attempting to relocate but allegedly without
succeSs so far - this family also has one or more children who are attending school in the general area;
and recommending that no further extension of time be granted for a mobile home at the rear of the Mar-
itimer Motel but that the present occupants be given thirty days after the expiration of the present
period (May 24th, 1976) to remove the mobile home from the site -- be received and filed and the rec-
ommendation adopted.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that the May 26th, 1975 meeting of Common Council re-zoned property of East Side Enterprises Ltd.
in Millidgeville Estates, Phase 4, on the southerly side of University Avenue east of the Huntington
Development townhouses (about Candlewood Lane) to permit the construction of seventeen 12-unit apartment
buildings, and that the re-zoning was pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act and was tied to
the development proposal as shown on a plan filed with the Common Clerk; and further advising that the
said company has run into difficult soil conditions on the site and was forced to raise the original level
of the buildings so far under construction, and was forced to excavate the building foundation areas, and
land fill the areas for solid foundation footings - the water table was so high that it was not feasible
to make these buildings semi-basement type as originally proposed; and further advising that Central
Mortgage and .Housing Corporation is requiring both front and back foyers be added to the buildings to
accommodate the necessary changes in stairwell construction to change the buildings to three-storey
walkups; and recommending that the Common Council vary its resolution related to the May 26th, 1975 re-
zoning to permit the proposed front and back foyers for the seventeen buildings and to substitute for .the
plan now on file with the Common Clerk an appropriately revised plan which is being filed with the Common
Clerk -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission,
stating that the Commission understands that the City Solicitor wished further information as to the basis
of a by-law respecting Accommodations Standards in order to prepare a draft of legislation to enable such
a by-law to be adopted by the City if it desires, and submitting a draft proposal of such by-law as the
basis for legislation for the information of the Council, and the City Solicitor, be received and filed
and the said draft of legislation be turned over to the City Solicitor for study and a report.
I
Councillor Parfitt pointed out that since the above noted Accommodations Standards By-Law was
proposed, we now have the Rent Review Board and so on, and she asked: are we just thinking of starting
another bureaucracy - is this a commission that has to be paid, or what office staff does the City have to
enforce these things? She commented that we cannot enforce the by-laws we have passed, now - so, who is
going to tell us that our accommodation is only worth fifty per cent, or seventy-five per cent, of the
going rate - who is to judge that? The Mayor replied that it would be the Standards Officer. Councillor
Parfitt replied that in the whole city, she just cannot see where the City will have the staff. She asked
if the City would have to employ other people in order to implement such a by-law. She added that some
landlords wanted to have a look at this matter, but did not know this item was going to be on the agenda
of this meeting of Council. She noted that the landlords are now forming an association because they
think that the eight per cent is unfair in some cases, and they want to have a look into it, as well. She
.
~
"'"
455
..B~-kw reo
I1"PPlI'I7IJd26'
St-dJ? ,{OlPtLs
S.:r.//6ff'
C'Oh;?M.
I L'N'f Splt~ .
I
.
IY/. /1<<17 Ur
rJolden
CJrt?pe h>d.
I ef?h7m.~~
~rJ5
{'aJjJ/~a /
2Jud5et"
.
I
I
$.~nd ~~
. Cb,..,P-..LnC!.
.s:KhFt/Ye~
poeerhlF,d
:Uevebp?t!"h
"/'/01)7
St.:x;.~~.5 .5f.
SF~i'MIJ1,
/fw" tiR1f7'., 17 I
,q"ea
~
suggested that such a by-law might end up in some deterioration of property, if people are only allowed to charge
fifty per cent or seventy-five per cent. The Mayor noted that if the above motion is carried, the matter will go
to the City Solicitor, who will look into it and report back to Council, so the Council will have another op-
portunity to discuss the subject. Councillor M. Vincent asked that the City Solicitor, when he is doing his
legal studies on the said document, check to see if it is enforceable as it is presently written. He stated his
other question is: is this document, if it becomes a by-law, intended by staff that this by-law would be enforced
by the Standards Officer? Mr. Barfoot, referring to the said draft legislation submitted by the Housing Com-
mission, stated that he does not see the provisions for inspection or enforcement in the draft. Councillor M.
Vincent replied that that was his point, and that when he said the question of enforcement was to go to the City
Solicitor, - he is in favour of said proposed by-law, unquestionably, and he is sure that the City Solicitor
will, in his study, but he is just wondering if City staff had intended to have something covering this by-law
that, when the City Solicitor is studying it that he might look at it within the purview of the enforceability -
who is going to be the enforcement agency - he cannot find it in his copy of the said draft. The Mayor commented
that after the draft legislation has been reviewed by the City Solicitor, they will come back with some recom-
mendation as to whether it is practicable, or not, he feels.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Read a letter from Mr. M. Hunter, representing Golden Grove Road taxpayers, and dated May 11th, 1976,
commenting on the Council's discussion at the Common Council meeting held on May lOth last with regard to the
condition of Golden Grove Road and the amount of money spent on this Road in past years, and stating that these
taxpayers agree that amount of money was spent, but challenge the Council to show them where and for what this
money was used, and stating that the inefficiency of City work crews have been witnessed by many residents along
this road, on many occasions, and also reported to the Works Commissioner or his office, and citing one illustratiol
in this regard; and pointing out that these taxpayers are not asking that the Golden Grove Road be improved for a
highway, but that it merely be an upgraded, resurfaced road fit for cars. Councillor Cave, stating that he
wished to discuss the motion he was proposing, proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the said letter be
received and filed and a copy be sent to Saint John Civic Employees' Union, Local 18, C.U.P.E. for the Union's
remarks. Councillor Higgins, during ensuing discussion, stated he would like to second the proposed motion if he
knew Councillor Cave's intent as far as sending it to Local 18. He added that he knows what Councillor Cave is
driving after, but he suggested that it may not be the proper procedure, and that the proper procedure maybe is
that the letter be received and filed and that the Commissioner of Engineering and Works be asked for his com-
ments, rather than Local 18. Councillor Cave replied that the only thing he is concerned with is - when a truck
leaves to do patching there are six men, approximately, and they only cover so much ground and while the truck
returns for more asphalt, four men stay on the job. He asked if this is what Mr. Hunter's letter refers to.
Councillor Cave stated that he has heard many complaints about this work procedure of the asphalt crews, and he
thinks the complaints are ridiculous. He made the point that if the men on these crews go back and forth on the
truck they could get hurt, and therefore it is far better for them to stay right there, on the job. Councillor
Kipping asked: why could there not be two trucks? He commented that there is no need for people to be standing
around, waiting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter from Mr. M. Hunter be received
nd filed and that a copy of this letter be sent to the Commissioner of Engineering and Works for his comment.
Councillor Cave stated that he would like ,to see a copy of Mr. Hunter's letter sent to Local 18, too,
and that he would then support the motion. Councillor M. Vincent stated that, now that the Council has passed
the 1976 Capital Budget, he would like to see the mover of the above motion agree that the author of the said
letter be supplied with a letter as to what the City is going to do to the Golden Grove Road this year, that is,
telling what work is going to be done. In reply, Councillor Higgins stated that he believes that is the Council's
intent, anyway, when Mr. MacKinnon's report comes in, on the Golden Grove Road, to do as Councillor M. Vincent
suggests. Councillor M. Vincent expressed his concurrence in such procedure. Councillor Gould noted that the
1976 Capital Budget includes an expenditure of $63,900.00 for the Golden Grove Road. Councillor A. Vincent
asked: how much has the City already spent out of that $63,900.00 item? Mr. Barfoot replied that this is new
money for 1976; he believes that $188,000.00 was spent in capital money on the Golden Grove Road over the past
several years, but this amount is another $63,900.00. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he thought the City did
some emergency ditching out there, or something, and that it was charged to this year. Mr. Barfoot pointed out
that that would normally be done under maintenance - the ditching work. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that the
City did not have any money for the work to which he refers, and that we agreed to do it out of the capital
budget. Councillor Kipping stated that he thinks that one of the questions that should be answered when the
Commissioner of Works brings his report in, is how much it would cost to put the Golden Grove Road into an
acceptable condition this year, planning more permanent improvements for next year and maybe succeeding years _
because he thinks that is all that the people representing the taxpayers out there want, as noted in their
correspondence. In reply to the question regarding costs, Mr. MacKinnon referred to the two letters that came in,
from both Mr. Hunter and from Mr. Daryl Watson, and noted that Mr. Watson was referring to a rebuilding programme
for the entire road, and in dealing with that, the City staff had to look at those sections that had to be
rebuilt - the approximate cost that was developed about two years ago was about $420,000.00 for those sections _
he would estimate that it is at least $500,000.00 to rebuild it. He pointed out that he can only deal with the
comments that Mr. Watson made, and that Mr. Watson was speaking of rebuilding and then repaving, and that in
order to do the job that Mr. Watson wants, that is the sort of cost. He stated that Mr. Hunter's correspondence
refers to the fact that there is going to be a huge amount of money spent and says that these taxpayers really
only want some asphalt and the holes patched. He stated that that is what the City has been doing, and trying to
do every season - to pad this road up and trying to keep it into condition so that it can be driven on - and the
$50,000.00 that is in the budget for that particular project - although there is another $13,000.00 - is for the
maintenance portion of the road which will pad it up and put the asphalt in the areas where it is broken up most
badly. He pointed out that the $50,000.00 certainly is not going to rebuild the road, unless the City spends
$450,000.00 - the road was never built originally to withstand the traffic that is on it now, and he does not
think, again, that the capital programme, the way we are developing it, that we are going to spend that kind of
money to develop the road. Councillor Kipping asked: is the $50,000.00 enough money to put the road in accep-
table, passable condition, for now, for this year, say? or is it just too little, with today's prices? Mr.
MacKinnon stated that he would say it is enough to put it in acceptable and. passable condition, but that is his
opinion. He added, in reply to Councillor A. Vincent's question, that his opinion is whether or not $50,000.00
would repair the road, and his opinion is "yes" - however, he is not answering for the petitioners. He added that
if he were a resident of that road, it may have an effect on his opinion. Councillor A. Vincent commented that
that is what he is worried about.
Read a letter from the South End Development Corporation Inc., expressing pleasure that the Common
Council adopted the South End Neighbourhood Development Plan at its meeting on April 12th, 1976, and advising
that since the budgets for the various City Departments are to be approved in the near future, the said Cor-
poration requests that the Council direct the City Manager to instruct the Departments to immediately commence
the implementation of the Neighbourhood Plan, and advising that the initial actions should be directed at putting
into effect the following items, which are all described in the Neighbourhood Development Plan:
(1) the closing of the portion of Saint James Street between Wentworth and Pitt Streets, and the relocation of
the Block 10 recreation facilities to that space;
456'
~
7D~-~~~"~~1oP~ (2) the acquisition of land and the development of five tot-lots and small recreation spaces in various
.7I;,,._1r 67_y",~ locations of the South End;
r:.../...t (3) the improvement of the Barrack Green field to make it suitable for use as a baseball field;
~I.%_ -t~' (4) the installation of traffic signals on Broad Street;
. ~~~ (5) the reconstruction and landscaping of Mecklenburg Street as a model residential street, and simil~r
~~~~~~.~~/~ work on Britain, and Canterbury Streets;
t::-11-4-e. ~ /I1t!P:,f. (6) the general upgrading of a number of other residential streets;
/~~~ 3'1fs. . (7) the re-zoning of the following areas: Queen Square North re-zoned to "RM-l"; Germain Street south of
S~~~ "~~~ Princess Street re-zoned to "RM-l"; the lower Cove area and the Barrack Green area re-zoned to Park. The
ili'e-':Z.Dh/hff: t1~-", letter states that action on these matters will indicate that the implementation of the Neighbourhood
~~.,~~~~....~, Development Plan has begun, and will be fully supported by the residents of the South End.
.((lI#~1" ~oye.t:"J106I;;j
2,;,""'CK C"eeh
$.E;u:t:Z;ev~A,~
Cb'/h Th(!.
$'. k;,d /V~/"'-~
ht?~ 2Jeve~
'?/.;m
, 4'
/r,hR /Y(?/~
h~ 1'955&1(1.
.JJ//al'iaafe,t fI.;.'
ot;m,~d') p/ d~,
60 /lief ~.;;/..;:e .J'-t.
J},/7ii111t C%isJu/m
(JhS~UIy l'h'P?i
.1r~. .7h5/,ecCt7r
.
Councillor Gould asked if any of the above listed items have been included this year in either
the operational budget or the capital budget, of the City. Making affirmative reply, Mr. Barfoot advised
that there was a programme adopted under the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme which the Council ad~
opted, and the projects scheduled for 1976 have been included in the 1976 programme - so, of these works
listed in the above named letter, those scheduled for 1976 and approved as part of the Plan will be begun
this year.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter be received and filed and
I
sent to the appropriate staff.
Councillor MacGowan, for a point of clarification, noted that on going through the budget -
demolition of Block 10 - and she asked: will that City block be closed before we start demolition - will
the playground be relocated this year? She added that she does not see it in the budget, as such. Mr.
Barfoot replied that he understands the answer is "yes". Councillor MacGowan noted that the acquisition
of land and the development of five tot-lots has been started. Mr. Barfoot confirmed that this is cor-
rect. Councillor MacGowan asked if the improvement of the Barrack Green field to make it suitable for use
as a baseball field is for 1976, and she received an affirmative reply. She added that the installation
of traffic lights (on Broad Street) is in there, and the reconstruction and landscaping of Mecklenburg as
a model residential street. She asked: what about Britain and Canterbury Streets - are they also in-
cluded - and she noted that they are not spelled out (in the budget) if they are. Mr. Barfoot advised
that this is part of a three-year programme - not everything will be done this year. Councillor MacGowan
noted that regarding these other things she mentioned, Mr. Buck nodded confirmation that they are going to
be done, including Mecklenburg Street, so there is only Britain and Canterbury Streets that are not being
done. She added that we have other residential streets that are being done. She asked if we need re-
zoned yet the streets listed in the above noted letter from the South End Development Corporation Inc;
Mr. Barfoot replied that the Council has adopted the Plan and all the necessary works included in the
schedule are being undertaken as policy this year. Councillor MacGowan noted that the Council in its 1976
capital budget approved some of these items, and stated that she thinks the said Corporation would like to
know that, and therefore she does not think the Corporation's letter has to be referred to staff because
the Council has been getting an assent to most of these questions - therefore, she thinks that the action
Council should take is to direct the City Manager to instruct the Departments to immediately commence the.
implementation of the Neighbourhood Plan. Councillor M. Vincent stated that, in seconding the motion, he
thought that was the intent. Councillor A. Vincent, referring to the item in the above letter regarding
improvement of the Barrack Green field to make it suitable for use as a baseball field, asked: are we
spending money on Her Majesty's land that we do not own or have a lease on? Mr. Barfoot replied that the
City has spent money in the past there. Councillor A. Vincent made the point that the City still has no
lease, and stated that all he is saying is that the City should not spend any money on private property -
filling in, or grading, or anything - until the owner, of the property, whether it is Her Majesty, or not,
has given the City a lease, or unless the City has some protection that they do not let the City use it,
because he understands that the Federal Government may sell that whole area. He stated that his infor-
mation comes from a private source, but he understands that it is an educational facility that is looking
at the whole Barrack Green - and it is not going to help the City any. Councillor Cave noted that it 'is
very easy to find out how much the City has spent over the years in using the Barrack Green as a recre~tional
facility, and stated he does not believe that the City has spent very much money in that regard.
.
I
Read a letter from The North End Neighbourhood Association, requesting that immediate action be
taken concerning the building at 60 Metcalfe Street that was destroyed by fire on December 13th, 1975,. is
still standing, and has not been adequately boarded up, and that the following action be taken by Council:-
(1) that the buiding be boarded up immediately by the owner, Mr. Donald Chisholm, 16 Rosedale Crescent"
Saint John; (2) that the building be demolished and removed as soon as possible, and all rubbish and
material, as well as abandoned cars on property owned by Mr. Chisholm, be removed so as to leave the area
in a neat and safe manner. The letter advised that this building is an unsightly part of the neighbour-
hood and is a hazard to safety, particularly to children.
.
The Building Inspector advised that the above named building has changed ownership from one to
approximately three, in stages, and this is one of the reasons the building has reached the condition it
is in. He stated that the last owner approached him several times suggesting it was his intention to
rehabilitate this building, but to date, there has been nothing concrete in this regard. He added that
his Department asked for an up-dating of the title, and a title search was done May 14th, 1975, and the
Department is now asking for an up-dating title search, so there is a possibility that there will be
either be action in respect of dilapidated buildings, or the Fire Marshal. He added that there is a Fire
Marhsla's order on this building, and he assumes that as soon as the title search is done the Fire Chief
will be carrying out the Fire Marshal's order. Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Ellis if the report that
Council anticipates receiving, with regard to vacant and dilapidated and dangerous buildings in this city,
is anywhere near ready for presentation to Council. Mr. Ellis noted that ~IT. Zides, who is preparing the
said report, held a meeting this afternoon on this subject. Mr. Zides stated that he is hoping to get the
said report to the City Manager for next week. Councillor MacGowan asked if Mr. Donald Chisholm is the
present owner of 60 Metcalfe Street. Mr. Ellis replied that, as far as we know, he is the present owner
of the said property but the title search would have to prove that fact. He stated that he sent a report
on March 11th, 1976, telling Mr. Chisholm that if he did not do something to rehabilitate this building,
it would be coming in to Council for demolition; but, Mr. Chisholm has come to the Building Inspector's
Office several times indicating his intention to rebuild this place up. Councillor MacGowan asked if it
is possible to rehabilitate this building. Mr. Ellis replied that it is possible to rehabilitate any
building if the person wants to put up the amount of money, time, value and labour into it. Councillor
MacGowan noted that if it is not done now it is going to cost a great deal more, and it will not be
there - this is what the citizens are concerned about. She added that that whole area would make a
bea~tiful home site, because there is a vacant lot next to 60 Metcalfe Street. Mr. Ellis replied that the
problem regarding the vacant lot next door is that there is a house already on it, and Mr. Chisholm's lot
is very small - he is not able to obtain the lot on the other side of 60 Metcalfe Street; he added that he
I
I
.
~
,....
.
I
I
.
~~,
L5f11?C -1-b
I !K,f"J,d' lfeh
PaQ';/,M~
.b'~',(N/r;d
(./?,.~6)?f.
b/~~.
6olPd-ea/le
fA?5&~-c/y
pl1!'m/ses
.7)o~...r
c~/$Jok
.
I c;;f)' Io/'r
I /j/;hq #e/p
.ItJM'.Jt?t7~
.LH/'p,/'ove/?78.
~rPfI'bJh7b?t?
b?1"~.ss 'p/,ds
?!1"tIZt's,tle
!/iduriOl S-t-.
./l6~~/o/7~
4/71'>s-
.c.- /1.1 'Y- '1'-
tt/iirks .7Je~
/Y-EH<< .?e/j'h-
bOVI"J"n;;?
I,.,'proVtlt~
,?'S.s~,
.....
4_....
t)-4.
suggested to Mr. Chisholm three or four months ago that he obtain that other lot and Mr. Chisholm has looked into
it and has tried to secure it, but has not been successful. Councillor MacGowan noted that, in the meantime, ~tr.
Chisholm should either demolish the present building or start doing something, and stated that she would think
that the Council should be asking Mr. Ellis to bring this building in before Council for demolition within a
week, if there is no action on it; she thinks it is terrible for this situation to go on and on. Councillor
Gould asked when Mr. Ellis made a request for the title search. Mr. Ellis replied that it was made March 30th,
1976. Councillor Gould asked Mr. Rodgers how long it would take to up-date the title search. Mr. Rodgers
replied that he does not know - he does not know how many more were requested, and he would have to check to
determine where this particular property is on the list. He added that this property is not the only one that
has been referred for an up-dated title search. Mr. Ellis confirmed that there are three or four properties in
this particular request. Councillor A. Vincent stated that it is a well-known fact that they run from 150 to 200
on the list, and he asked: why do we do it in drib-drabs - why do you not come in with the whole thing and say
that you request it, because according to the Fire Department, and other people to whom he has spoken - the Fire
Marshal's ~ they will not, unless we supply the list, let us use the Fire Prevention Act - so, why do you (the
Building Inspector) not ask for the whole list of properties and tell Council and Council will hire a couple of
outside lawyers and get it done? He felt it was unfair to expect the City lawyers, who are tied up in other
legal work, to produce title searches in a short time; he also felt that the Council should know the outside
picture regarding the 200 homes that it knows are not fit to live in, and that if the Council has to tender out,
or farm out, some of this work, or whatever it has to do, it should do it. He asked: when can the Council expect
the list. He added that the Council can then decide on a major issue. Mr. Barfoot replied that this is cer-
tainly part of the report which is being prepared by several Departments concerning the said dilapidated and
dangerous buildings procedure. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to have in-put, and that he can
supply addresses for such properties.
Discussion ensued on the possibility of speeding up the process of demolition or rehabilitation of the
property, without up-dating title searches on ownership if the person involved admits ownership, and Mr. Rodgers
explained that title searches are required as part of the procedure. He informed the Council that, based on 100
properties, as an example, - a preliminary run-through has been made on it and it was part of the report coming
in - that would take one lawyer, full-time, for one year to search those titles, and if that work is farmed out
that is approximately $60,000.00. Councillor A. Vincent commented that if it has to be done, that is $60,000.00
well spent. Councillor M. Vincent expressed the view that the Council might be at a gain to wait until the
anticipated report comes in from Mr. Zides, and then perhaps look at some of the areas that the Council is
discussing at this time, and maybe that report will answer some of the questions that the Council has in mind at
this meeting.
During further discussion, Councillor MacGowan asked if the Building Inspector can not tell Mr. Chis-
holm, if he professes to be the owner, that this building has to be boarded up, and put in a safe condition. Mr.
Ellis replied that he has already told him this, and Mr. Chisholm has done, it, partially. Councillor Davis
discussed the necessity of the Council adopting a policy regarding these vacant dilapidated buildings, which
change hands very frequen~y and which necessitate thorough title searches, so that the policy adopted
can speed up the procedure. He noted that the situation is best, as has been pointed out by the City Manager,
when the owner himself rehabilitates and makes the building to be in a safe condition; he added that when there
is delay, such as in this particular case, the City has to streamline its procedures. Councillor MacGowan asked
if there is any way the City can put a "freeze" on these properties so that they cannot change hands where they
are considered that they are dangerous and dilapidated and we are waiting services. Mr. Rodgers replied that if
that occurs after the Council makes the order it does not matter: if the report comes from the Building Inspector
to Council and the Council accepts the Building Inspector's report that it is dangerous and dilapidated, and the
person has so many days, then, to repair it or demolish it - it does not matter about selling it, then - and it
is not necessary to search the title again, if it is then sold.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above noted letter from The North End Neighbourhood
Association be turned over to staff for appropriate action.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understood that we abandoned the 1925 Saint John Building Act _
that is what he was told - and that all we have to do now is search the title, under the New Brunswick Fire
Prevention Act, and the Fire Marshal will do the work for us. He asked which route the City is going to take,
now. He asked what the above motion means: is it to have the property title searched and have the Building
Inspector follow through the Fire Marshal's Office, or come back here and have the Council declare the property
dilapidated under the said 1925 Act? He stated that he does not want to have anything to do with that, if we can
help it. He felt that the above motion will supercede what is trying to be done, regarding taking action through
the Fire Marshal's order. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the Building Inspector, or Mr. Zides, could confirm,
for the Council's information, that unless the City supplies the search the Fire Marshal will not do anything
(with respect to the Fire Marshal's order). He added that that is what he has been told. Councillor Kipping
observed that all that is needed, then, is for the Council to receive and file the said letter and let "nature
take its course", as it is under way, now. Mr. Rodgers was asked for his advice on the motion that is required
with regard to the said letter, and he stated that the letter is from a group of North End citizens and, in his
opinion, there is nothing incorrect about referring this matter to staff. He noted that the Council is not
saying what staff has to do - or directing anything - the Council is just referring the matter. In reply to
Councillor MacGowan's question as to which staff it is being referred to, he stated that it is being referred to
the City Manager.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from The North End Neighbourhood Association,
advising that it is important for the success of the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme in the North End that a
significant visible improvement be made in the area immediately and that the Association has devised a small
project which can be accomplished at low cost, but with obvious positive results, namely, that the grass plots
along the north side of Victoria Street (on which cars are constantly parking and are killing both the grass and
the trees which have been planted there) and the remaining trees on this street should be protected by placing
steel, wood, or concrete posts along the curb line, which posts would be joined by a chain, which would dis-
courage cars and bicycles from driving on the grass surface, and that, where necessary, the grass would be
replaced and additional trees and shrubs would be planted in the plots - and that in front of the two stores on
this streets it is suggested that the grass plots there be attractively paved, with benches for people to sit be
placed there - and that these things could be done immediately, in time for the grass and shrubs to be green this
summer - and further, the Association feels that action should be taken immediately to remove all the abandoned
vehicles along this street -- and requesting that the Common Council authorize the Engineering and Works Depart-
ment to meet with representatives of the North End Neighbourhood Association and the planners, to prepare a
schedule of work, and to carry out the work at the earliest possible date -- be received and filed and the
request contained therein for a meeting be approved.
458
~
-'lkq/Phe~
/I/~t?I"/;';' st'.
2aF/s'C- (}~K
~,-/ ~ site
J:;'. K5!.L~~rt7.
'I7$/fI~d/'y .
?""m/s~.s
A/,.G,/ ~/!hIN)kr
hf?p;l 4$5'C.
:J};Ici1?1 p{.;r&-(!?,c
~"'//t:t'/q~ ,
~ .3 -.:? tF V; 'crlor/J;/
S-e-.
1(,F/I/s
1? e/t?C'd-l-ih.,d
hl?hJg/ess -r.;v,,///
])(QqI?//~iDh ff
Pk// iii; h!l
I?/11l/sttJ'J'I J <<s6 ~
~ep. 7Hp.e-/~e
;])91: /I~a/~h
CP~ht-~ Gdol
ePhLhf/on
71e-AI?J7ln5
$rl/?/er Orhal;eh-
~.;;;/ ..L ,..,n /T/.
7'l3l?h, t?d'ns.
C?t7~,#7.
With regard to the reference made in the above letter to abandoned cars, and so on, Councillor!
Gould stated that in addition, the staff should be looking at the matter of dilapidated cars which are
placed on the old Victoria Baptist Church site on Victoria Street, and which are dangerous there. He
asked that the Building Inspector pursue that matter, as well. Mr. Ellis replied that he is aware of thdt
situation and has already sent the Unsightly Premises Inspector to that site.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from The North End Neighbourhood Associatiqn,
requesting that immediate action be taken concerning the building at 23-25 Victoria Street, owned by Mr.
R. Ellis, Fairvale, Kings County, N. B., which building fell off its foundation on May 12th last, and !
appears to be a total loss leaving two North End families homeless, and requesting that the Common Council
take the following action: (1) provide all available aid immediately in relocating these two families in
permanent locations; (2) have the building boarded up immediately to prevent any accidents, fire, or
vandalism; (3) have the building demolished and removed as soon as possible, and the area cleaned up and
left in a neat and safe manner -- and advising that the Association is anxious to have this building
removed so that an unsightly and dangerous condition can be avoided on Victoria Square, which is one of
the nicest areas of the North End neighbourhood -- be referred to appropriate staff for the necessary
action.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Minister of Justice for New
Brunswick, in reply to Common Council resolution of March 29th, 1976 which referred to the Department of
Justice and the Department of Health for a thorough investigation in the matter, the matter of the County
Gaol building being antiquated, obsolete, inadequate and overcrowded and accommodating twice the maximum I
number of 70 inmates for which it was built to accommodate, advising that some months ago he personally
visited this Gaol and observed the inadequacies of the present situation, both in terms of the physical
facility itself and the lack of sufficient correctional personnel to ensure adequate levels of super-
vision, and further advising that there can be no question that the conditions which currently prevail in
this Gaol are unacceptable, and that, unfortunately, in recent months, this situation has been aggravate~
by dramatic increases in the inmate population which has resulted in widespread overcrowding in all
provincial institutions - and further advising that, notwithstanding, he would like to assure the Common
Council that the situation, in Saint John in particular, is a matter of considerable priority and one that
will continue to receive his urgent attention -- be received and filed.
.
I
I
.
Councillor MacGowan made the following comments regarding the above noted letter: the situation
certainly has been aggravated by dramatic increases in the irunate population which has resulted in widespread
overcrowding -- that is the understatement of the year, but unfortunately, there are many people in gaol
who, if they had employment, could pay the fine and stay out of gaol, like the more affluent citizens-
and this is sad, because some of those people are doing exactly what many people in the $10,000.00 to
$20,000.00 brackets are doing - drinking and driving - and they cannot pay the fine and they are put in
gaol for fifteen days where somebody may pay $50.00, $100.00 or $200.00 and perhaps one or two days in
gaol - so she felt that if these people could work out their fine, some way, it would help the conditions .1
in the gaol a little bit, anyway. She noted that this is the situation not only in New Brunswick but all:
over Canada that our penal institutions are tragic. Councillor A. Vincent commented that he is sure that.
there is not one person who has been before the magistrate here, and he said that he is working or has a
chance to get a job that that person would not be given thirty, sixty or ninety days to pay his fine.
Councillor MacGowan replied that there are people who are given fifteen days in gaol, or pay $100.00 _ but
they have a choice - they have so many days in gaol if they do not pay the fine; some of these people are
not employed and if they had employment and could earn their money, it would help a great deal. She
stated that she is hoping that something will occur along this line.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the application from Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd.~
making application for re-zoning of the land on Simms Street, Saint John West, on which its plant is
located, .be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that the necessary
advertising be authorized to be proceeded with.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the above application states that should the Council see fit to
comply with the company's request, work would begin immediately on the yard clean-up, and asked why this
company cannot clean up the said yard, anyway, and why does such clean-up have to .wait until the Council
complies with the re-zoning request. She noted that in the first part of the said application letter, the
company agreed to do it.
.
With regard to the letter from Mr. Peter R. Stanton in which Mr. Stanton is seeking employment
in the Saint John Police Department, the Mayor advised that it has been brought to his attention that the; I
Chief of Police has already taken some action with his (the Chief'S) authority on this, and that the Chief
has seen this letter from Mr. Stanton.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
jVe~11( ~~~ RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Peter R. Stanton, advising of
his desire to be re-hired as a policeman with the Saint John Police Department, and the letter from the
~1?1't~~ ~~ Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., in support of Mr. Peter R. Stanton1s
s..,.7) /. , request that the Common Council sincerely consider his application to join the said Saint John Police
,,/. rl7//~/JIfe.l?S Force, be dealt with in legal session.
~Jo~'pe 4$So~
./ /7d.;l / 6/
t7I7Uh. .J).,;/Yis
Cpgh, 7}e
In regard to the above named matter, Councillor Davis advised that he personally does not want
to become involved in the hiring practices of this city, and that he therefore would request that he be
excused from the discussion in this matter in legal session. He stated that it is personal feeling that
the matter should be discussed in open session, and he pointed out that it has been dealt with by the
Chief of Police and the City Manager, and he added that he does not think that the Council should in-
terfere in these matters. Councillor Higgins stated that he thinks that the idea of the above motion was
to get some iegal advice as to where the Council stands in the matter, and added that is what he would
like to know, and that he wants to find out every facet of this matter.
Councillor Pye asked for permission to place a very important item on the agenda, and then
advised that in view of the fact that a senior citizen narrowly escaped serious injury in the Loch Lomondi
Villa area.a few days ago, he would like to ask the City Manager what steps have been taken in relation t6
I
I
.
~
,....
459
7/e~est-l"Ian
.W.;JII(-//~ht-
I,(pt:'h .te>m,17.
if4,
,,( ~h hl>/7/tJ.
1//1/ ,;J
C/-t-!j 4lj7r.
1-
1
.
(bun, /J.
V;hC'e~
/:Xe~s~~
.,4."/71 a,,, h(! I
metTt-i17.f
I
s: J. I/s!/.
t?Ph7M/.$-S/D
LEGAL
. 8..1 ?'~~
;Pro-krc-lit/e
.19 SSD{'., ,/Yp,b,
I
Peter If,
Sed)? ton
I ;Pt7//'ee ~e~
C'~ie.,e t?r
r''','l ee
.
...
the installation. of the pedestrian walk-light, and whether the wheels have started in motion in this regard-
and, if so, when can it be expected that those lights, that. are so sorely needed, will be erected. Mr. Barfoot
replied that he did not have that information with him, and that he would have to make a report on that subject -
he would have to find out from the Department concerned what the status of that project was.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the City Manager be asked for a report in the above matter, for
the next meeting of Council.
Councillor Gould suggested that if the above project is that serious, and we know it is a serious
situation, that maybe it should be a top priority to be done first in the Works Department. Mr. MacKinnon was
asked for a progress report on the said project, and he advised that the said lights were ordered approximately
two or three weeks ago, but he does not know when they will be installed - it depends on how soon they can be
delivered, and normally there is about a two-month delivery time after an order is placed. Councillor Gould
asked if the location for the lights could not be prepared in advance and any foundations put in so that when the
uprights for the lights are received all that will then have to be done is to bolt them in place; he further
asked if the Works Department plans to take that type of action, or is it going to wait until the lighting
standards come and then prepare the site for their erection, which would mean a further delay. l{r. MacKinnon
replied that the Department has normally waited until the equipment has arrived, and that it takes about two or
three days to erect and instal these standards, and the time element has never been that important - however, if
the Council wishes, the bases for these particular lights can be put in - if the Council wishes action on the
site, the Works Department can put the action there. Councillor Gould stated that what he was really asking
was - is that not a better idea, so that as soon as the standards come they can be put up in probably half a day,
then. Mr. MacKinnon made affirmative reply. Councillor Gould stated that he would hope that that procedure
might be carried out.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
The Council members noted that the next meeting of Council will be held on Tuesday, May 25th, the 24th
being a holiday for Victoria Day. Noting that a Councillor can be absent from only three consecutive Council
meetings, Councillor A. Vincent advised that he will be out of the country commencing May 24th and that he would
like to be excused from attending four Council meetings, commencing with the May 25th Council meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that Councillor A. Vincent, who will be out of the country,
be excused from attending four Common Council meetings, commencing with the meeting that will be held on May 25th
next.
Councillor MacGowan asked that an item be placed on the Council agenda, copies of which will be dis-
tributed to the Council members at this time, and that the Council permit that item to be considered at the 7.00
o'clock open session section of this Council meeting, the said item being a letter from the Saint John Housing
Commission regarding an urgent matter.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above noted item be placed on the agenda of this
Council meeting, and be considered when the Council meets in open session, later in this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillor Higgins stated that he would like to obtain a legal opinion on where the Council stands in
relation to the above mentioned letters from Mr. Peter R. Stanton, and the Saint John Policemen's Protective
Association, Local No. 61; C.U.P.E., regarding Mr. Stanton's application to be re-hired with the Saint John
Police Department; that is, he is talking about the policy of the City of Saint John - the policy of the Council.
Mr. Rodgers replied that on the basis of the said two pieces of correspondence and the one, in particular, from
Mr. Stanton he has prepared a resolution because he believes that the Council should have something to report out
from this legal session on this matter. He thereupon read the said resolution, for Council's consideration.
Messrs. D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police were present
during ensuing discussion in the above matter.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
Solicitor, be adopted, namely:-
RESOLVED that the above mentioned resolution, as read by the City
"WHEREAS Mr. Peter Stanton has stated that his application for membership on the Saint John Police
Force has been rejected by the Chief of Police:
BE IT RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Peter Stanton, dated May 13th, 1976, with respect to becoming a
member of the Saint John Police Force, be received and filed, and that Mr. Stanton be advised that save and
except for the appointment to the Chief of Police position itself, the Common Council is not authorized to make
appointments to the Sa~nt John Police Force:
AND FURTHER that the Chief of Police be asked for a general report on Mr. Stanton's comments that 'it
was not Department policy to re-hire former policemen'.".
Councillor A. Vincent, stating that he was not asking the Chief of Police to re-hire Mr. Stanton,
advised that he was asking if there is any merit in hiring a policeman who took training and who left the City's
employ voluntarily, without any record - he understands this man's card is clean. He stated that his Question to
the Chief of Police is: if you had an opportunity to hire, and you had 121 applications and 120 of them had
absolutely no police experience, and one man had seven months' police experience (that is, Peter Stanton) with
the Saint John Police Department - and he (Councillor A. Vincent) thinks he left on his own accord because
Rothesay offered him more money. In reply, Chief Ferguson stated that the circumstances, really, are a little
bit different. He stated that he knows the background and the information in this matter, and there is more than
really what happened. He stated that Mr. Stanton called, and he met with him, and spent an hour with him; he
460
~
S.7Pth~i!'I7S
'?rtdecr/ve
/lS50t!., /yp, bl
'Peter '1f. :Jt <7-
';Po//ce ..2)~
r;J /" /e f/.;j.l?c-e
S.:!:'Pf?(/i:eP?t? hS
'P"tdear iI's
/lsSOd., /Yo. 61
hht!'5, pt7hee
.z;~
/J Job/'", ~-t-iOh
'7\ " "D "
...vI". .o~ z z
Wppds
7?im.;:;ld ~/$ter
(!/i!/ St?//dtpr
~
:L 11 s u.JT,;ll7ee
c'Pft're;'i!'.I'1s;~e
I/~Jt"/t'-l,,- ek;;/l?Is
77-ifL $ ~Ke'Y
~hl7etQ
/lfac eil/ y/'ey
explained to him, and talked with him, and felt very sorry for this young man, but he made the decision _
and he thinks it is the right one - that he could not be re-hired because of what took place even prior to
the offence where apparently what he had been discharged for by Rothesay, and he thinks it would not be
right to hire the man at this time. He added that there is more than really what appears in the report. :
He stated that he had the report, and read it - regarding the report of the Chief of the Rothesay Police ,_
he does not have that report.
I
,
During further discussion, Chief Ferguson advised that during his talk with Mr. Stanton he does
not believe that he said to him that it was not Department policy to re-hire former policemen; he said tq
Mr. Stanton that each case was looked at on its own merits; he stated that he does not recall saying thai
it was not Department policy to re-hire former policemen. Mr. Rodgers stated that he thinks that the
Chief should explain that in the report he is being asked for. Mr. Barfoot stated that he is not sure
that it is wise for the Chief to have to report to Council on why a certain person was not hired. Mr.
Rodgers pointed out that the resolution does not say that - the resolution asks the Chief for a general
report on Mr. Stanton's comments that "it was not Department policy to re-hire former policemen" _ and
that does not concern Mr. Stanton. Mr. Barfoot stated that the only other point he wished to make was
that he wonders if it would be wise for Council at this time to make a policy statement that they do not;
intend to act as a court of appeal for people that have not been hired through City staff, because the
Council could be besieged by a large number of people. He suggested that the present policy of Council .
in this regard may be worth reiterating, in case other Unions thought the Stanton case was another ex-
ample. Councillor Higgins asked whether the resolution prepared by the City Solicitor in the above matter
covers the matter widely enough, from the aspect of other civic departments. Mr. Barfoot stated that he
raises that question, as well. Mr. Rodgers pointed out that in only referring to the Police Department in
the resolution, the difference is that the City Manager makes appointments to the other departments, and'
the Council did not want to get involved in that. Mr. Barfoot stated that he was wondering if the Counci~
wished to take this opportunity to make a more general statement in addition to that, with respect to the
hiring of people for the other City departments, or just leave the resolution as it is now worded. With
regard to the report that is to come in from the Chief of Police as a result of the above resolution,
Councillor Kipping stated that he understands that the said report should be a very private one and should
be for the Council only. Councillor Gould pointed out that the Council will be dealing with the said
resolution in open session, later in this Council meeting.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Kipping voting "nay".
The Council members agreed that the above noted resolution will be taken up in open session,
later in this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from Saint John Policemen's Protective
Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., advising that the Association supports fully the request from Mr.
Peter R. Stanton, 52 Mountain Road that he be supported in his application to join the Saint John Police
Force, and that the Association would ask the City of Saint John to sincerely consider 11r. Stanton's
application, be received and filed.
Consideration was given to the letter from Saint John Policemen's Protective Assocation, Local
No. 61., C.U:P.E., advising that the Common Council's reply on grieved Article 6(4) of the 1975-1976
Working Agreement between the City of Saint John and the said Union is unsatisfactory to the Union, and,
therefore the Union is willing and prepared to go to arbitration as per Article 12(1) of the said Workingl
Agreement, and has appointed Mr. George Vair, 1815 Manawagonish Road, as its nominee to the Board of
Arbitration, and that the Union will await the Council's reply on this important matter and for the
Council's appointment to the said Board of Arbitration as per Article 12(1) of the said Working Agreement'.
It was noted that this letter was in reply to Common Council resolution adopted in legal session on April:
26th last, when a copy of the City Solicitor's letter of April 23rd, 1976 in this matter was forwarded to'
the Association, having regard to the Association's claim of a violation by management of the said Article
6( 4) of the Working Agreement and there is Ino provision in the said Agreement that gives management the .
right to work any of the Association's members a forty hour week and pay them any less than stipulated in,
the working agreement for forty hours so worked and that there is no provision in that Agreement that
authorizes management to order the forfeiture of pay.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the City's
Arbi tration be Dr. "Buzz" Woods of McGill Uni versi ty, Montreal.
:
appointee to the above named Board of:
Mr. Barfoot stated that he would raise the question as to whether this is an arbitratable
grievance, or not. Mr. Rodgers replied that he researched the matter and discussed it with Mr. George T.:
Clark, Q. C., Senior Legal Counsel, and their opinion is that the City's first argument before the Board:
of Arbitration will be that they do not have jurisdiction to hear this grievance. He pointed out that, to:
,
get to the Board, the City needs a nominee to the Board. Mr. Barfoot noted that if we cannot get the one,
person who has been nominated, some other names will be brought to next week's meeting - however, if the:
one nominee will act, we will proceed. Councillor Davis suggested the name of /1r. Ronald Lister for
consideration, if Dr. Woods does not accept the appointment to the said Board.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried.
Councillor A. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould ,
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, with regard to' the
report received by Council in legal session on April 26th last from the City Manager and Commissioner of ,
Finance respecting comprehensive liability claims connected with Titus Bakery and Kenneth MacGillvrey,
advising that on checking into these matters he learned that the reference to the Titus Bakery claim was
submitted in error by the Insurance Company in the form as present and that the amount of $3,025.80
referred to in this item was not with respect to the claim but disbursements incurred by the Company
for legal and technical advice in which it was determined that no legal liability rested on the City, and:
further advislng that with respect to the Kenneth MacGillvrey matter concerning liability in connection
with changed rotary without proper notice, the matter is still under review by the Legal Department, and;
the Insurance Company has admitted liability in this matter - however, the City Solicitor is looking into
it further to determine whether in his opinion legal liability should exist in these circumstances, and he
will further advise Council in the near future - and further advising that, in the meantime, it is in i
order for the Council to approve the recommendation of the Commissioner of Finance, save and except claim;
.
,I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,..
.z;,5~ht'e
('p"h1J?!"1:npnS~v.
.//.sIb/&-f (!klm
lie"" ei-h
/JJaeGi//l/r~
amm. U/hok
C/6!f .
I St?//e/tpr
$,:7; F;}1e
/?ff~~t!'I'>S'
/h$#e..,( IX!
77.
I Cr/wDlnee
(}.pn/PI?
e~C1,,/-t-t717
.
/t7>?-///
73,.I:&DI/n
I.z;,SUn;Jhee
Se/;elltu/e
Ihe~/-bl'/''Iy
'2J/I~!d
pU~,
/an"'" ahnn.
.T /Jf. 'ff (!,If/.
./lo'pe ~h
A-t-d,
I SJ. ;%~ a,q,
SClhK ave
Ji'L /11lJ?t?x
P"Pj1.
EKJ1'MSsit?17.
uT J)::~~
l/lfemf: -
{!I~d or
-ae A/<;!7drehe
.
Peter> ~,
St,;udpn
~
461
Number 7515-17457, Kenneth MacGillvrey -- be received and filed and authority be granted for payment to the
City's insurers regarding Comprehensive General Liability claims for the fourth quarter of 1975 in the total sum
of $7,368.50, which is exclusive of the claim of $440.69, Number 7515-17457, Kenneth MacGillvrey, regarding
changed rotary without proper notice.
Read a letter from the City Solicitor, dated May 14th, 1976, with regard to the motion adopted by
Common Council on May 3rd last in legal session, namely, that both issues of the grievance of Lieutenant Gordon
Charlton be upheld on condition that the Union agree in writing that upholding of the grievance does not con-
stitute a precedent on personal equipment, and with regard to the letter received by Common Council in Committee
of the Whole on May lOth last from the Saint John Fire Fighters' Association, Local No. 771, I.A.F.F. which
states that the Association could not agree, "that the upholding of the grievance does not constitute a precedent
on personal equipment" -- recalling that the letter from the City Solicitor to Council at its meeting of April
20th, 1976, concerning this matter recommended that Council reverse its decision, and that the Council, however,
chose to adopt a motion to rescind its decision made in Committee of the Whole on April 5th, 1976 to deny the
grievance -- and advising that in view of the fact that Council's decision to deny the grievance has been re-
scinded and having regard to the recent correspondence on this matter, he is recommending that Council uphold the
grievance -- and further advising that if a similar incident occurs in the future, and a member is required to
pay the costs of a similar item, the City Solicitor can argue that the upholding of this particular grievance is
not precedent setting in that this grievance can be upheld on faulty procedural grounds.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the City Solicitor be
received and filed; and that the grievance of Lieutenant Gordon Charlton regarding the personal equipment issue,
be upheld.
Councillor Gould stated that he feels the Council should say (to the Union) why the above grievance was
upheld - follow the procedure. Councillor MacGowan felt that such explanation should be included in the above
,
motion.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried with Councillors Gould and MacGowan voting "nay".
Read a letter from the Land Committee, advising that at its meeting held on May 10th last, the Com-
mittee requested that the submitted letter from the City's insurers be sent to Council in legal session for
consideration by the Council in its policy for awarding insurance contracts. The said letter from the insurers,
J. M. & C. W. Hope Grant Ltd., advises that the building at 109-111 Britain Street has been discussed with the
underwriters and, unfortunately, they are not prepared to add it to the City schedule of insurance, the reasons
being: location, amount of insurance, heating system, and the fact that the building is to be demolished.
Councillor Davis explained that this matter has to do with a dilapidated, old building and that normally the City
has these buildings insured for whatever they are worth and the insurers refused the City, this time, and that
the Land Committee felt that this was a heavy-handed way for the insurers to deal with this matter. He added
that he does not believe these buildings are occupied. Mr. Park advised that if the City buys a building with
the intention. of demolishing it within the very near future after acquiring it, there is no value in it from an
insurance point of view, and for fifteen years the City has lived with this - all properties acquired for urban
renewal clearance are not insured, for this reason. He stated that he does not believe there is anything part-
icularly unusual regarding the insurers not adding this property to the City schedule of insurance, as far as he
reads the insurer's letter. Councillor Gould stated that if the City purchased this building with the intent of
demolishing it, then demolition should have taken place right away, and that he does not understand it still
remaining standing. He felt that by the City not having demolished that building immediately, it seems contrary
to what the Council tries to do every time a dilapidated building comes before it, Councillor Green expressed
the view that until such time as the Council has such City-owned buildings vacated of tenants and demolished that
have been acquired for demolition in connection with programmes such as the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme,
et cetera, these buildings (which he said are good buildings in many cases, even though they do not have furnaces
for heating them, which exempts them from being insured, under the insurance companies' policy of insuring) are
still good buildings until torn down and should be covered by insurance, under the City's "blanket" insurance
policy.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Land Committee be
received and filed.
Councillor MacGowan proposed a motion, which was not seconded, that the City-owned building at 109-111
Britain Street be demolished.
Question being taken, the above motion carried with Councillor Gould voting "nay".
Consideration was given to the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission, dated May 17th, 1976,
informing the Council that three proposals were received in response to the Commission's call for proposals for
the development of the property formerly known as the Annex property on Sand Cove Road and that the Commission
after careful study of these Expressions of Interest, would recommend that the proposal of The Church of The
Nazarene be recommended to the Common Council, and that the matter of the sale or lease of the land be referred
to the Land Committee for recommendation - and advising that, in essence, The Church of The Nazarene would take
immediate possession, instal watchmen, demolish the east wing, secure building for safety purposes and ultimately
develop. Councillor MacGowan, a member of the Commission, advised that the Common Clerk has the information
regarding the other two proposals that the Commission received. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that the tenders that
the City has received this date on the demolition of the Annex buildings are complex and that the Building
Inspector does not have a recommendation ready regarding acceptance o~ any tender in that regard. Councillor
MacGowan pointed out that under the proposal of the said Church, demolition will be done by that Church itself.
The meeting resumed in open session of Common Council at 7.00 o'clock p.m. in the Council Chamber when
there were present the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and M.
Vincent, and Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of
Engineering and Works, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, and C. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS Mr. Peter Stanton has stated that his application for membership on the Saint John Police
Force has been rejected by the Chief of Police:
462
.~
c
?ec~r ;:p
S-t-o:/h ~pn
IYPI/t->e' :2J9~
CA;d p'r
~pl/ee
S::7:'?e>~t:en?eh;
?I"'d~/t-'e
/lss D(! .,/yp,6/
p~&-er ;e
S-t-ah~t7J?
s.:J: //s~, ~m.M'
hl'hPS5/~>1.J" ~
:lJfP',p/o'p n?e hT-
L ~fel"t!'ST
S~~"'t' ~Oyt!' W d',
11"1/ t')f liT'() /',,4' ~If
CA lel"t!:;' t> '.I! -t-/?e
IV.;; ;1.d1V'J?e
,
l'I'Ja!1ors ~t~-
menT
tfl'a',rq ~~!f
ra;re-gs
//,WoJJQ;lhe.",. a.
S-ttut'y ",e 1fI~
... .seU/~r :J)~.
7?a-le
a--m. ~~",q,.L
~e-kr IIU e,;T/pJ?
BE IT RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Peter Stanton, dated May 13th, 1976, with respect to
becoming a member of the Saint John Police Force, be received and filed, and that Mr. Stanton be advised
that, save and except for the appointment to the Chief of Police position itself, the Common Council is not
authorized to make appointments to the Saint John Police Force: .
.
AND FURTHER that the Chief of Police be asked for a general report on Mr. Stanton's comments
"i t was not Department policy to re-hire former policemen".
that
,
I
t
I
,
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Pye voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Saint John Policemen's Protective
Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., advising that the Association supports fully the request from Mr.
Peter R. Stanton, 52 Mountain Road that he be supported in his application to join the Saint John Police
Force, and that the Association would ask the City of Saint John to sincerely consider Mr. Stanton's
application, be received and filed, and the Association be informed of the above resolution that has been.
adopted with respect to the letter from Mr. Peter Stanton.
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
I
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission with
,
reference to three proposals that the Commission received in response to its call for Expressions of
Interest for the development of the property formerly known as the Annex property, Sand Cove Road, advising
that the Commission would recommend that the proposal of The Church of The Nazarene be recommended to the
Common Council, and that the matter of the sale or lease of the land be referred to the Land Committee for
recommendation -- be referred to the Land Committee, and to the City staff for appraisal and a report.
The Mayor at this time read a prepared statement, advising that it was based on the presentation
that was to follow at this meeting on the water and sewerage rates of the City of Saint John.
.
Mr. Barfoot introduced Messrs. William Hayward and Peter Wheaton, of the firm of H. R. Doane and
Company, who were present to present the City of Saint John Water and Sewer Department Rate Study, dated
April, 1976, in graphic form, which report had been prepared by the said firm.
Councillor A. Vincent re-entered the meeting.
,
Wi th the permission of Common Council, Mr. Hayward thereupon proceeded with the said presention:,
and advised that the terms of reference for this study were to set water and sewer rates for the City ,of
Saint John that permit the City to recover future expenditures and, as well, to recover accumulated def- t
icits in the water and sewer utility. He noted that there were some limitations to this study in that
there are some uncertainties in respect to the future - these uncertainties included whether or not a
capital programme is or is not undertaken, what interest rates are for money borrowed, the actual costs of
some of the projects - which tend to be escalating, the restraint programme which the City is under - and,
its impact, the fiscal policy being exercised under the Anti-Inflation Programme, and the usage of water by
various large users. He stated that in spite of these limitations or uncertainties - with the assistance:
of staff, members of the city, budgets available - that information - they have compiled what they might
anticipate to be the expenditure levels for the next couple of years. He made reference to graphs and
charts in discussing various sections of the Study, copies of which Study the Council members had before
them.
I
Discussion ensued between Council members and Mr. Hayward. Councillor A. Vincent expressed hisl
complete opposition to the proposed water rates, stating he is not in favour of the City recovering the
deficit in the amount that is presently involved over three years. Councillor Davis stated that it seems to
him that the City is involved in a system that is no longer correct, and he added that when people got '
interested in public water supply and sewage collection it was mainly for domestic users, and that in Saipt
John we have become deeply involved in industrial promotion and having a water supply available for in-
dustry when and if it arrives - and this put a tremendous burden on the householder - the small taxpayer ~
as is apparent in the consultants' analysis. He stated that he is wondering what Mr. Hayward would think: .
about the suggestion of approaching the Provincial Government with the idea that there should be a divisipn
in service - that perhaps this pipeline should be charged to industrial promotion or something of that
nature, rather than trying to pay the interest charges on, let us say, a facility that does not return the
income that was expected of it and that was promoted by those governments who are now denying the City the
privilege of a longer pay-off term and things of that nature. He stated he feels that this is now incom- ,
patible - the consultants are trying to include little items with a huge bulk supply of water and it seems
to him that the entire philosophy is now wrong. In reply, Mr. Hayward stated that the question of excess:
water supply is certainly significant, and that, to bring it in perspective, he wished to point out that
the increase in water rates averages thirty per cent, and it is really our sewer, and the extra capacity ~n
the water system does not have a great impact on the sewer. He added that there are a couple of philo- I
sophies in respect to excess capacity in a utility:- one is that it is a general charge on the community
(and that community can be Canada, the Province of New Brunswick, the City of Saint John), and the other is __
that all water charges should be recovered by user rates; and at the present time, to the best of his :
knowledge, the only charge which the water utility can make to the City of Saint John, and thereby get
cost-sharing from the Province of New Brunswick, is for fire protection - we are not authorized to make a'
charge for water capital or usage for industrial promotion - so, to that extent, our hands are probably t
tied legally. He stated that there is a philosophy that excess capacity should be donated by the public!
generally, and that he thinks this is where we get into this - it was an industrial promotion expenditure, -
it does not have an impact on our rates today -and he has spread it over all users, both small and large; I
users; that, in respect to the present legislative position of the water utility, he thinks is really the:
only option we have at this point, but there is a philosophy that would argue, as Councillor Davis has ' ~
done, that it should be a general charge on the community - whatever size community you pick.
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he had asked for a report on his suggestion that the City
send out only yearly water and sewerage bills, as an economy measure in sending out these bills, and give;
us a year voluntary payment of two per cent, or something - and he noted that this report has not been
submitted. He stated that he thinks that this suggestion might help, particularly if people would pay
their yearly water and sewerage rates in advance for the year, thus giving the City this revenue much
earlier in the year. Mr. Hayward replied that the City's billing system is set up for a certain system and
as long as the majority of the people do things that way, that is the least expensive way to do it. He .
stated that he tends to agree that if there was a substantial number of people - let us say, one-half the
people - paid once a year, particularly if they paid December's bi-monthly billing and then in january paid
for the whole of next year - we would generate some significant money, and we could earn interest on that;
or better, avoid paying interest which is double - better rates - however, he thinks he would have to say;
~
,....
46B
.
I
I //.~ 7)Q;;lhe'll-
C'P.
St-NiIt'~ I'e
I1/tYkr'<'/' .se~
7Jept-. 7?~t-e
CAf.!l ~p.
.~fer+
Sewe/Q~e
23y-AClI'V
amenA' .m"
re n-d-e,,4-
tJdtGCl'eI'l:i1!/e
/'Ii1Iks
I
eC'O'/UI. /I.
Vincent-
,?"pJ/,Gp~
IJfJt.$f~ s),.
tvAt-er
S <<f"1'& ell
I
I
.
~
that his firm did not undertake a study of that and it does not have the exact savings in costs, but the firm did
discuss the matter with some of the officials in the Water Department. CouncIlor A. Vincent stated that he has
talked with many large property owners and he felt that if the City made it attractive enough they would pay
their water and sewerage bills once a year. Councillor Kipping expressed the view that once this is properly
programmed for proper computerization it should be no great problem to pluck out whatever exceptions are desired.
Councillor Davis noted that Councillors MacGowan and A. Vincent raised the question concerning the
watershed and the water quality, and he stated that the Land Committee met with the five Provincial departments
involved with it, with the representative from Environment Canada, and the microbiologist from the local Pro-
vincial Laboratory, and they discussed changing regulations to prevent sub-division in Loch Lomond (the City owns
the other watershed), and the microbiologist reported that the water at the moment is of excellent quality, but
that in July, when the weather gets warm, it would deteriorate. He noted that, therefore, we have that problem,
of too many residents living in the area, and perhaps some other sources of pollution, but it is being actively
investigated and we hope some day that the Provincial Government will prevent sub-divisions along our watershed.
He added that the Province did not really have too much to say about the matters that Councillors A. Vincent,
Green and Pye, and the Mayor, and himself, on the Land Committee have been discussing for some months; the
Province has a problem not only in Saint John but in all the other watersheds in New Brunswick and the Province's
officials are trying to come up with an over-all philosophy.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the report of H. R. Doane and Company entitled, "City of
Saint John Water and Sewer Department Rate Study, April 1976", be received and filed and the recommendations
contained therein adopted:
AND FURTHER that the report from the City Manager, dated May 17th, 1976 regarding the above named Water
and Sewer Department Rate Study, be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting Water and Sewerage", be
read a first time.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he was rather surprised that the above noted by-law amendment was
going to be given first reading at this time, and that there were some points to come up, such as the ones that
were mentioned: a longer period to erase the deficiency - maybe four or five years - rather than the two years
that has been suggested; some discussion on the industrial block charges might be considered; certainly, it is
hard to consider the increases that Mr. Hayward has passed on to the Council in this presentation - to slap those
on domestic home users, when we have tens of thousands of dollars owing to the City from large industry he does
not think is really "cricket" all the way around. He noted that there were some other suggestions: on difference
in our billing processes and the amount of money that is in arrears, as Mr. Hayward has told the Council _
Councillor M. Vincent thinks there are a lot of opportunities and a lot of options that this Council should look
at rather than just accepting carte blance what Mr. Hayward has said. He stated that he thinks Mr. Hayward's
presentation was excellent, but he does not know if a month or two months is going to make any difference - but
he thinks there are some other avenues that have not been explored to find out information that the Council
should have, before it quickly jumps at this present recommendation.
Councillor Green advised that, after having heard Mr. Hayward's presentation, he feels that the Council
should look into the matter very closely and that the Mayor should set up a committee that when major expend-
itures are projected in the Water and Sewerage Department that up-to-date costing and what effect it will have on
the water and sewerage rates will be provided to Council so that it would know what were the City is going and
would keep that within line; in other words, he feels strongly that it is high time the Council stepped in and
made the Water and Sewerage Department a public utility - when major expenditures exceed the capabilities of the
City and people are going to be affected very severely he believes the Council should take a close look at it.
He pointed out that the City has given to the Provincial Government the relief through the Provincial rate and
those who own homes are receiving benefit there, but those who are landlords have to assume the additional costs
of major expenditures through the regular budget and have to pass this on to their tenants, who also share in the
costs of the regular budget.
Councillor A. Vincent explained that the reason he opposes the proposed amendment is that if the City
can get the $147,744.48 - that it should not have to pay for the Musquash water - waived by the Provincial
Government, which is the exact amount the City owes, the City should have a summit meeting with the Premier and
the Minister and Department of Economic Growth, and point out that the Province forced the City into a corner and
the City built that big pipeline without a user and the amount of water that goes down to Coleson Cove is very
small and the City is stuck with financing it. He stated that the City has to have some special dispensation
from the Provincial Government on some money, but if the Council is going to, at this meeting, put the costs on
the poor taxpayer here and on the water and sewer user here with only one or two in a family, and we will build
the big sewers for the Provincial Government's false promises of industry in Lorneville and out in East Saint
John -- he just cannot go along with that, and he is begging the Council.to come up with some other solution that
the City buy time and if the Council has to carry out in the next couple of days a "march" on the Provincial
House in Fredericton saying that the City needs help here and that we cannot do it from the widows and orphans
and the small taxpayer. The Mayor pointed out that the Council did discuss having meetings. Councillor A.
Vincent replied that that is why he does not want this proposed amendment to go through.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors M. Vincent, A. Vincent, Green and Pye
voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting Water and Sewerage".
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~~
co~ Clerk.
464
~
,
tf!af/PI's
5tdi#l1'I"nr
C/&-!f o/en:;d/()~:
tY'UhC//-.sC~~
CI?-I7j7eAiil-l-;"J? ..
ct?H}/ntlehiccnfion
~/ahn.4d'~$-.{:;
Re-;(Dn/h~
~scpn :Bro-tAe.
Co, ~~L
-P/shh.IJ,{WS.
C'P.I>?n? .
~I?n,,~ecas/s
l?t'p/ly ..(-b(.
/fe- ;7.. ()17 ih.1
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Tuesday, the twenty-.
fifth day of May, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt and Pye
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks,
P. Clark, Fire Chief, E. Ferguson, Chief of Police, and J. Gabriel,
Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Lloyd Carver, minister of
Exmouth Street United Church.
The Mayor read a prepared statement, outlining the problems that the Common Council encounters in
its desire.to set the policy for the operating of the City of Saint John, and stressing that trust and good
will must prevail and that the City's business will be conducted in an orderly manner by Council and staff
working as a team;
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding the proposed Zoning By-Law
amendment for the re-zoning of a lot on the east side of Sea Street between residence Numbers 483 and 509"
for Pascon Brothers Co. Ltd., who propose to construct thereon warehouse and office space, and that no
written objections had been received. It was noted that no person was present to speak to this proposed
re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that with regard to the application of Pascon Brothers Co. Ltd. for rezoning of a lot on the
easterly side of Sea Street south of 483 Sea Street from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to
"I-I" Light Industrial district classification, the applicants propose to erect on this vacant lot a :
warehouse and office building and they presently operate a masonry business from the applicant's residence
which is adjacent to the lot proposed for re-zoning; that the lot is 113 feet wide with an average depth bf
459 feet, and the proposed building would be 99 feet long and 59 feet wide at the widest part, and there:
would be 3,501 square feet of warehouse space and some 1,840 square feet of office space; that the area is
zoned "R-2" Residential and adjacent to the rear of the lot along part of one side is a Heavy Industrial :
zone; that there are two lots with frontages on the same side of Sea Street between the lot and the point:
at which the industrial zone extends to Sea Street; that one lot is vacant - the other contains an older
one-family dwelling; that along this side of Sea Street from Beaconsfield Avenue there are three one-family
dwellings and one two-family dwelling; that across Sea Street the lots contain mostly one-family dwellings
and one three-family dwelling; that behind the lot is a large vacant lot and there are three vacant lots
along the northerly side of the lot; that although it is presumed that the land at the rear and to the
west, which is owned by Canadian Pacific Railways, will be used for some industrial use, attempts to ,
determine the future use have been unsuccessful; that the area in which the Pas con Brothers lot lies is '
designated for low residential use in the Municipal Development Plan, and the Plan would, therefore, have~
to be amended before re-zoning could be considered; that the Advisory Committee felt that even though this
is a slightly marginal location, the instrusion of industrial uses into residential areas should be dis-
couraged -- and recommending that the application for re-zoning at this location be denied -- be received'
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
I
I
.
I
The Common Clerk stated that with regard to the application of Kennebecasis Realty Ltd. for re-,
zoning of 7413 - Lot 74.2 on the Boar's Head Road, which is a parcel of land on the south side of the said .
Road, approximately 800 feet east of its intersection with Woodward Avenue and to the rear of the H. A. ,
Seaman residence, the necessary advertising has been made and that no written objections have been received.
It was noted that no person was present to speak to the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, re-
commending that the above named area be re-zoned from "R-IB" One-Family Residential to "R-2" One- and Two-
Family Residential, this re-zoning to be pursuant to a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning
Act which would tie the development to a plan being filed with the Common Clerk, and advising that the ,.
revised plans which are now being filed with the Common Clerk regarding this development supersede or
replace those originally submitted to Common Council by the said applicant, Kennebecasis Realty Limited,
and further advising that the proposed development would result in 14 dwelling units, four of which would:
be in detached one-family homes and ten in five semi-detached buildings which are attached side by side, :
each unit having its own entrances, and further advising that the site would be served by a cul-de-sac or;
circular turn-about street, and that, in addition, there would be a small play area suitable for a tot-lot
or something similar -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted. :
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave ,
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law:
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning a parcel of land on the
south side of Boar's Head Road, approximately 800 feet east of its intersection with Woodward Avenue and to
the rear of the H. A. Seaman residence, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "R-2" One- and Two"'
Family Residential district, be read a first time.
I
I
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of the City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto". .
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
,
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By- ;
~
,....
~l7h e~et:iV5/.s
.1?~/tfy ..&~
1?e-~&lJ'7/nf
.I~ I9I'R~~.R7f.i &l
U//-&'hKrdillV
-f" 0 yo
)?e-2~I7/n!f
Kasnrn
kVe'~el7
~-&-d'.
I
'?/;;Mn.
/1,(l/ls. C~
.
2J,~ E E:
tl/h. ~S/~OI7- 1-
I tia/ 4l'eeJ
ep/k~
G..a$~'
,,(t-tZ.
.
SeH/ergnt.
.-<.iIhe./f'IQqoJo/'.i1.
h'ti/R
S(1~d/hf QJoJ
h;//, :Pever ~
I. C'il-/e e~
sid,. /eCilVe
re/,p"",&-
C','-Eylll ~r.
I
7enael'l
q1~)'
7?ulrh h5
O/q h:;JhC'.
C'/t~ /7a//
/l.T~~
.,.t SOhS ,,(-(K.
7e-?d'efts n,
k (!al#f~ 4j'~h
'P<6/~h99'
n:>ev.~Taru-.
~"'''~
Flre Stn./V6,
... 7'(1/,(:e~~/"j
... C,-(-y Ha//
465,
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning a parcel of land on the
south side of Boar's Head Road, approximately 800 feet east of its intersection with Woodward Avenue and to the
rear of the H. A. Seaman residence, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "R-2" One- and Two-Family
Residential district, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
The Common Clerk advised that with regard to the proposed re-zoning of property on the Latimer Lake
Road for Eastern Investments Ltd., the necessary advertising took place, and that a letter was received from this
company, withdrawing its application for the said re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the following correspondence be received and filed, re-
garding the application of Eastern Investments Ltd. for re-zoning of land on the Bustin farm in the Latimer Lake
area:- from Eastern Investments Ltd., stating that Mr. R. S. Bustin, President of the company, appeared before
the Planning Advisory Committee regarding the said application and that he understands that the Committee will
not support re-zoning but is prepared to grant him temporary permission to locate on that land for a one-year
period, and stating that this period is adequate for his purposes, and if the truss manufacturing operation
proves successful, he will look for a permanent location, possibly in an industrial park, and that, therefore, he
withdraws the said rezoning application; from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising that the said Bustin
property lies partly in a Rural and partly in a One-and Two-Family Suburban Residential zone and the Municipal
Development Plan future land use is low density residential, and that Mr. Bustin was made aware that the Com-
mittee was not enthusiastic about changing both the Plan and the Zoning By-Law to permit an industrial type of
use on a permanent basis in such a situation and he explained that he would need this location for a one-year
period and that if the proposed truss manufacturing operation proves successful, he would look for a permanent
location, possibly in one of the City's industrial parks; and advising that the Committee has resolved that (1)
temporary permission for one year would be granted by it for the use of the building as a roof truss prefab-
rication plant subject to a written undertaking by Mr. Bustin that he will relocate the plant by May 15th, 1977,
and (2) it be recommended to Common Council that the application for re-zoning be denied; and further advising
that the Committee has received a copy of Mr. Bustin's letter to the Common Council, on behalf of Eastern In-
vestments Ltd., withdrawing the re-zoning application, and that the Committee trusts that the Council will,
therefore take no further action on this matter.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the following con-
struction progress certificate and approved invoice for engineering services regarding the following named
project that was undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic Expansion programme, be approved for
payment, pending approval of the City Solicitor:-
Western Residential Area Collector Sewer
Gaspe' Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 10 (Final)
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 10,
dated May 20, 1976
$ 323,580.00
345,708.35
Nil
312,811.33
$ 32,897.02
~tr. Barfoot explained that, in making the recommendation that payment of the above named progress
certificate and approved invoice be subject to approval of the City Solicitor, he understands that some legal
matter has come up which the City Solicitor wished to clear up before payment. Councillor Kipping asked for an
explanation regarding the overage on the total value of the contract. He stated that he has noticed that overage
on contracts has been occurring much more frequently, lately, and he wonders if there is any reason. Mr. Barfoot
replied these are all unit-price contracts and sometimes when the quantities vary from that put forward in the
contract documents there will be a slight overage, such as the above amount, which is about seven per cent. He
noted that this collector sewer goes down along the Canadian Pacific Railway railway track down back of Man-
awagonish Road to the sewage lagoon from the vicinity of Carpenter Place.
Referring to the sewer contract for which the Lancaster Memorial Field was dug up, Councillor MacGowan
expressed the view that the contractor should fix the side hill on Dever Road because the sod keeps moving away
after rain storms, and was not done properly.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the statistical analysis of sick leave for permanent City
employees, submitted by the City Manager, covering the period from November 1st, 1975 to April 30th, 1976, be
received and filed.
During discussion of the above mentioned analysis figures, Councillor Cave suggested that the City
Manager check into the larger figures for sick leave, such as that of 6.8 for the Inspection and Technical
Services personnel, which he feels is too large. Mr. Barfoot noted that some departments are very small and it
only requires one man to be away on a serious illness for several weeks, which will put off the whole proportion.
Councillor Cave replied that there are two or three areas into which we should check.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report on tenders from the City Manager,
the bid of A. J. Mallette & Sons Ltd. in the amount of $3,500.00 for painting the old Lancaster City Hall, be
accepted; that no award be made for painting the Reversing Falls TOurist Bureau (exterior), Number 4 Fire Station,
Courtenay Avenue, Saint John East, Or the Police Department on the City Hall fifth floor; that the specifications
be reviewed and changed where necessary and new quotations be invited.
Councillor MacGowan, referring to the above noted painting work, stated that she still would like to
see the City have permanent staff who went and painted all the buildings because she thinks it would be cheaper
in the long run, to keep the City's buildings looking attractive and maintained inside and outside. She felt
that a permanent person could perhaps do a lot of these jobs and perhaps do small repairs, as well; the person
could be kept employed in the winter time by doing inside painting work.
466
I
I
~
?ehMrs -Ie) Je
re- ca//e It'
ervs'! In!! !/NI""
C';t-~ /I?~r.
h,;c #oiue kJNt'-
!!JCa'p(I1~q' ~u/'.6
~rk/l7!! srC'~'
t?h!l-~;ne .%.
CSt?e am'.nL~
111' fft- ,1t?/t> ~ -It
...If:
Cafl/t-iii/ .7Iu~
/~77
Hd- ~/Ut',f',d-.
J/~~. - ,.~nl- ~
(I/t-!/.- vI"" h"~
~~':A-;n~ s~.r,
~~7..ine $I-;
C()h1j/lalh~
~~nche C. hheS
;:,.e~ /V4/-Ie
St'dlbl? 5~,
,
00,," re,P,ri/;os oil
s/d'e&Qa/k
C/ty /I'I~r,
t!iJ/~.,eol' J?O/t'de
1?e,/'O~ "e
J?es~ue S~uad
Silrv/~S a~d5.
recei/lPb/e
7i /lKerJ" .pcce
IJ/p~pl'/~ed
e~~ /,fine ~
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that in accordance with the
and the Commissioner of Engineering and Works, whose report advises that
report, were received for crushing gravel and that these were high bids,
the specifications and conditions of the tender be reviewed and modified
be called.
.
recommendation of the City Manager
two replies, as listed in the i
,
the tenders received be rejected,
where necessary, and new tenders
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye ,
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, dated May 19th, 1976,'
regarding the possibility of providing landscaping and curbs on the City-owned land opposite the Fort Ho~e
Apartments on Magazine Street, submitting a review of the correspondence that has been before Council to
date on the subject and recommending that, inasmuch as revenue from parking, as pointed out by the Plannihg
Advisory Committee to Council on April 5th last, will not likely cover expenditures necessary to produce I
and continue parking, and, further, that since the capital cost of $11,300.00 for curbing and landscaping
will be lost on the site, and will not promote either its historic or tourist potential, that no action be
taken on either parking or curbing and the site be left as it now is ~- be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
I
I
Moved in amendment by Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, dated May 19th,
1976, regarding the possibility of providing landscaping and curbs on the City-owned land opposite the Fort
Howe Apartments on Magazine Street, submitting a review of the correspondence that has been before Council
to date on the subject and recommending that, inasmuch as revenue from parking, as pointed out by the '
Planning Advisory Committee to Council on April 5th last, will not likely cover expenditures necessary to
produce and continue parking, and, further, that since the capital cost of $11,300.00 for curbing and ;
landscaping will be lost on the site, and will not promote either its historic or tourist potential, that
no action be taken on either parking or curbing and the site be left as it nOw is -- be received and filed
and the recommendation adopted, and that the matter of such landscaping be referred to the 1977 capital
budget for consideration.
.
The Mayor stated that he would like to see the City staff look into the possibility of charging;
the manager of the Fort Howe Apartment building so much a month for the use of the land that he charges
rent for. He added that the said manager was going to charge $5.00, and he believes that the City Manager
told him (the Mayor) today that the $5.00 is really for the first car, and that it is the second car that,
parks on the City-owned lot, but there may be the odd one that moves in there and the City should charge:
them for the use of it. Councillor Green stated that if nothing is to be done for a period of a year he :
would suggest that the City lease this City-owned land to the said apartment building manager for a perio~
of a year, or whatever it may be, and the City would at least get some revenue from that land.
Question being taken, the amendment to the motion was carried.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges ,
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, with respect to the
complaint lodged by Miss Blanche G. Jones of 126 Station Street concerning the garage operations of Mr. I
Fred White next door to her residence, advising that the Chief of Police reports that with regard to the;
allegation of illegal parking and repair work done by /1r. Fred White, the garage business has now changed;
hands and is being run by Mr. James Currians since May 1st and there have been no complaints so far of this
operation, and the new owner was informed that no repairs were to be made on the street - and further
advising that it is to be hoped that the change of ownership and continued surveillance will remedy the
complaint of Miss Jon~s -- be received and filed and Miss Jones be so informed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the joint report from the City Manager and the
Commissioner of Finance in reply to the request made at the Council meeting of May 17th last for infor-
mation concerning accounts receivable for the period of January to April 30th, 1976 regarding Rescue Squad
services at the rate of $30.00 per call, advising that as of April 30th there are 40 outstanding accounts'
in the total amount of $1,200.00 outstanding, be received and filed. :
,
Councillor Hodges enquired how the above named $1,200.00 will be collected, and if it will cost.
the City money to do so. Mr. Barfoot replied that this will be followed up in the normal Collection
Department practices - that is, the City will send another bill to these outstanding accounts - this will' I
have to be checked out with the Commissioner of Finance. Councillor Gould suggested that these outstanding
bills should be subject, after a period of maybe thirty days, to interest charges of 18% or 21% per year,: -
thereby treating these outstanding bills like any other "company" treats bills that are outstanding. He;
felt that such procedure may encourage the people concerned to pay these bills on time. Councillor Hodges
raised the question of the possibility that some of these people are unable to pay these Rescue Squad '
services bills. Mr. Barfoot replied that this is a possibility. Councillor Hodges thereupon asked if th~
Council, then, could have a list of the write-offs, of the amounts that should be written off, because
there are other means of collecting. Mr. Barfoot noted that this procedure has only been followed since I
January and probably some of these people have not even been billed yet, so he felt that we could expect a
better rate of collection over a longer period than is shown on the above report. Councillor Parfitt asked
if any of the outstanding 40 accounts be covered by the Blue Cross which includes ambulance service. Mr.:
Barfoot made affirmative reply, stating that we are getting some recoveries from Blue Cross.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that tenders for motorized equipment be awarded
ance with the summary of bids submitted and recommended by the City Manager for adoption.
in accord-l
I
,
In response to requests from Council members for an explanation as to why the above summary of .
bids awards the purchase of various items of motorized equipment to bidders who were not the low bidders,'
,
Mr. Barfoot supplied the following information:- the bid of Halifax Seed Company Limited for the triplex
mower did not meet the specifications on four items (turning radius, horsepower, rear steering, brake
~
,....
46rt
.
J?/ t'lPI" j ;ee.
efu~/H6:
I
I
7?p~neyJ.
G////s
GreaffJ"l5.
G;;;SPhPe
:lJea/ers ~
Se/r-sel"vl?
!1Cl50// ,/1t!Jl
. S-t-<i1-&-/PhS
I
.
I
drum); with regard to the tenders on five dump trucks, the low bid did not meet the required horsepower require-
ment - the 220 net horsepower was specified and the low bidder only had an engine with 189 horsepower; with
regard to the tenders on two only 25,00 dump trucks, the Downey Motors bid did not meet the requirement of the
model (we specified a Ford model 800 - Downey's bid model 700, which is smaller) - Bayview International, we
specified automatic transmission and Bayview bid standard transmission; with regard to tenders on one only ride
on type mower, specifications called for a four-cylinder engine and Halifax Seed bid on a two-cylinder engine;
with regard to tenders on one only 4 by 4 pick-up truck, there was only a difference of $2.81 between the two
bids that were received, but the delivery was somewhat short on the higher bid (Downey's Limited) and for that
reason the higher bid was recommended; with regard to the tenders for one tandem.truck, the specifications call
for 210 net horsepower and the low bid (from Downey's Limited) had only a 199 horsepower; with regard to the
tenders on one hydrostatic sweeper, the low bid is not hydrostatic, it does not meet the required GVW, has a
smaller engine than specified, and the travel speeds are not those specified; with regard to tenders on one
catchbasin cleaner, the specifications call for a diesel engine and the low bid did not have a diesel engine;
with regard to tenders on one only backhoe loader, the low bid did not meet specifications on the size of loader
bucket, on the digging depth, on the dumping height, on the operating weight, and on the break-up force; with
regard to tenders on one window van, the low bid only bid a six-cylinder engine and the specifications called for
an eight-cylinder engine; with regard to bids on two only 4 by 4 pick-ups, and with regard to bids on five police
cars - both were the only bids received, in each case.
Mr. Rodney J. Gillis, Barrister, was present on behalf of the Greater Saint John Retail Gasoline
Dealers Association with regard to the subject of self-serve gasoline stations, and made a presentation based on
a written memorandum which lists the advantages and disadvantages of such gasoline stations, as his clients see
them, as follows: Advanta~es: (1) consumer saving $15.00 to $30.00 per year for approximately 30,000 automobiles
in the City of Saint John having an annual mileage of 12,000 miles; or (2) consumer saving $5.00 to $10.00 for a
city having a population of only 90,000 people; Disadvantages: (1) less real taxes being paid and thereby dec-
reasing the revenue the City realizes; (2) reduction in the revenue of other service stations causing more
service stations of a marginal nature; (3) creation of more vacant service stations; (4) creation of more unem-
ployment in the City as a result of the closing of other service stations; (5) increased fire hazard in view of
the fact the pumps are not manned by an attendant; (6) lengthy delay in having minor repair work performed in
service stations and more service stations would close as the work load will increase - in the City of Moncton
customers wait for a period of up to five weeks for work to be done as against the City of Saint John where we
have practically the-same-day-service on minor repairs; (7) increase cost of repair work done in service stations
and the portion of overhead covered by gasoline sales is decreased - the increase being more than the $15.00 to
$30.00 yearly saving. In support of his presentation, !1r. Gillis displayed photographs of eighteen presently
existing boarded-up service stations in the City of Saint John, stating they are just an example of the beginning
of what the City will look like when presently operating service stations are closed up if self-serve stations
are permitted. He pointed out that his clients are men and women who work, live, pay taxes and vote in the City
of Saint John, and who are the same men and women who repair the cars of this city's citizens. He submitted the
view that if the application of Gulf Oil Limited for permission to operate a self-serve gasoline station at its
present service station at City Road and Blair Street, this will open the way for more applications for and the
establishment of more self-serve gasoline stations, and the little man, whom he represents, is not protected. He
stated that, more and more, there is a trend in municipalities in Canada to realize that self-serve is not really
a benefit but is, in fact, a disadvantage in disguise, and people are sorry they got into self-serve. He stated
that even a short trial period for self-serve stations would do irreparable damage to his clients because he ,
could not foresee these dealers coming back in saying that the Council decided that self-serve stations are "out"
after they forced the dealers out of business and that they would go back in as a lessee again; he added that
once the damage is done by the self-serve stations operating, the damage can never be recovered from and it would
take years to recover. He made the point that the decision on whether to permit self-serve stations will make or
break his clients financially, but whether the Council allows or disallows this particular self-serve station at
this time is not going to make or break Gulf Oil Canada Limited which is a multi-million dollar corporation. He
stressed that there are taxpayers of this city who will be destroyed if self-serve stations come in here. He
suggested that the Council examine problems that have been encountered by other areas in New Brunswick by letting
self-serve stations come in, and the effect upon the community. During ensuing discussion with Council members,
!~. Gillis was asked how many service stations have closed within the past ten years, and the number of new
proprietors in existing stations. Mr. Gillis replied that in a ten-year period there were, say, 113 service
stations a little over ten years ago - a total of 16 of those closed from lack of business, 9 from urban renewal,
and there was only a total of 10 erected, so there has been a net decrease of 98. He stated that these figures
were prepared a year and a half ago. He noted that many of the photographs he had just displayed to Council
depict service stations that closed within the last few months, which is exactly his submission to Council. He
noted that among the photographs displayed, he believes are three or four service stations that have been adapted
for other uses. He was asked why the service stations are closing, and replied that he thinks we are feeling the
effects of a. price war among the major retailers of gasoline - as to why they have been building new stations and
at the same time closing over the years in spite of the demand by motorists for gasoline, he noted that it is a
company decision, and the oil companies would have to be asked why they have so many service stations. Councillor
MacGowan suggested that perhaps the answer is to have a "freeze" on further service stations, and that perhaps we
are getting too many service stations and putting some of them out of business. In reply, Mr. Gillis suggested
that maybe the present 1929 Gasoline Service Stations By-Law should be extended to take in all of the City of
Saint John. Councillor Kipping stated he submits that in the free enterprise system, it will be found, in any
case, that some of the closed stations have been marginal operations, and that if this Council were to prohibit
the opening of self-serve stations he thinks that it is an intrusion into the free enterprise competitive field
which is lillwarranted for any government level, and that this Council cannot justify doing that. He confirmed Mr.
Gillis' observation from the aforegoing statement to be that he was saying that a Councillor's duty and the prime
objective is to act in the interests of the City - then, really, the public or the consumer, acting in the
interests of the public. He stated that he has received a large number of calls and has received correspondence
on the question, and has had counters on this on the street, and the ordinary citizen on the street is saying we
should have self-serve because anything that can be done in today's circumstances to bring down the price of fuel
should be done - and he thinks, in our kind of society, we are free to do that, and, in his opinion, we probably
should. Further discussion ensued between Council members and !1r. Gillis.
I ~~~ ~ Mr. Frank W. Landry, Managing Director of the Maritime Retail Gasoline Dealers Association, spoke at
,{~n~)n~ length, elaborating on the various points made in the aforegoing brief submitted by !1r. Gillis, on behalf of his
~"I'tc/~e employers, the members of the said Association. He stated that the said dealers ask that the Council not permit
~~~/'1'~50- the request made to Gulf Oil Canada Limited to establish the above mentioned self-serve gasoline station.
/inl!!! ..2'eakl:!> General discussion ensued between Mr. Landry and the Council members.
/lSSoC'.
~
:lJ,O( ..
~t?"s Fead
.
ll....
Mr. "Bud" Kierstead, of Saint John West, spoke on behalf of the service station dealers, and advised
that the dealers feel that the reason the oil companies want to establish self-serve gasoline stations is because
they want to cut the staff and increase their profit margin. He stated that the dealer gross profit margin in
this city in some cases, in this gasoline prices war, has been cut two-thirds and this is the reason they are
going out of business. He noted that some of the dealers have been operating the same station for a long while,
and a lot of them would like to stay there, and that if self-serve stations go in in this city and they cut the
margin any more the dealers just will not be able to survive - not all dealers are subsidized by their companies _
the majority if them are not - those are the dealers who are going out of business, that is, those who are not
subsidized or who do not get a company "kick-back", and there are a number of them. During discussion with the
Council members, he cited certain service stations that are open for twenty-four hour service for tire repairs
)
468
~
Se/~- serve
~a.sp//ne
s1fa-t-/QhS'
.,( en .5'-tDhe
(J-~d.,t" Cl//
Ca~s;(~ ,,(&-,,{.
tlep':i:e F.
o ~t?n/7e//
tl/a/-ii!'r
~eck~
.,
and minor services and repairs during the night. He stated that the dealers are asking that the Council
prevent the self-serve stations from establishing in this city, and that he thinks the service that the
present service stations provide is needed. Councillor MacGowan, noting that the dealers say they are
operating at a marginal profit, suggested that the gasoline sales and servicing of vehicles be kept sepa~ate.
In reply, Mr. Kierstead stated that when a dealer leases a station from a company, the company's main '
concern is selling the petroleum, the dealers cannot very well have a shut-off time for the sale of gaso~
line so they can work on people's cars. Councillor MacGowan explained that her suggestion was to have the
gasoline pumps a self-serve operation but at the same time retain the service bays at the same station,
which would give the dealer time for servicing of cars. She asked if that could be arranged, or would the
oil companies not subsidize the service bays, as a combination operation. ~tr. Kierstead replied that fo~ a
limited view, this could work but it cannot work for every dealer in the city - it costs a substantial '
amount to lease, build, rent or what have you, a complex where you can be a mechanic - not all the deale~s
in the city giving service are licensed mechanics - they are just mechanics from being in the trade, as he
has been, all his life, and he knows a great deal about cars and has serviced his own trucks, cars, what
have you, but he is not a licensed mechanic. He stated he feels that if the dealers could maintain their
gross margin in petroleum prices they could afford to hire the type of mechanics' service that the public,
needs, but if they cut the gross profit margin the dealer is left in the position that he cannot afford to
hire the type of help he needs to give the service. Regarding the closing of service stations, he stated
that they are closing because they are being forced to close due to marketing procedures and rent structUre
the oil companies want these stations to be closed, for what reason he does not know, but it is not because
the dealer wants them to be closed or that the public needs them to be closed; he stated that it is not
good; he added that no major company gives the consumer a "break" - the oil company is not interested in !
individuals, but only in itself; the oil companies are now cutting the staff and increasing their profit.,
,
.
I
I
Mr. Len Stone, Business Development Representative for Gulf Oil Canada Limited in the Maritimes',
at this time presented the company's case in support of its request for the said self-serve station at City
\ Road and Blair Street. He made observations and comments on a few of the items that were brought to the;
Council's attention during the preceding presentations on the subject, including the fire incident that
occurred at City Road, and stating that if that station were a self-serve station the console operator in'
the kiosk would have simply pushed a button that puts the whole system down and the gasoline cannot come ;
out of the nozzles and it is one of the better safety features of self-serve stations over the conventional,
traditional outlets; regarding the safety question at self-serve gasoline bars, the new National FireCod~
of Canada has now been published and sets out standards to assist in the orderly and safe establishmeqt of
self-serves - the Provincial Fire Marshal has also recommended practices to be adopted as specific re-
gulations governing such installations - very clear requirements for equipment, control consoles and :
operations are now set forth and the regulations have recognized the possible danger areas and have taken'
precautionary and protective measures in the interests of the public. On the subject of automotive ser-
vices by self-serve stations, he noted that the discussion preceding his presentation made reference to the
shortage of bays, and he stated that this depends very much on the location and the need for services.- :
facilities can vary - he elaborated by citing one station in Moncton as an example, also one in Frederict~n,
these being self-serve stations with full service bays, to repair customers' cars. He added that such
station is leased to a lessee - the oil company does not operate it, so the lessee has an opportunity to
make a living, there. He added that there is a self-serve station in St. John's, Newfoundland, combined
with a car wash. With regard to statements that are made that service bays are being eliminated and
automotive to the public suffers as a result, he stated that Gulf Oil has not experienced such a tremem~
endous demand for bay work as a result of self-serve stations - the company is in this business _ the
four-bay complex that it has in Moncton, it would dearly love to get more service work in there - he does:
not think that the company is really doing that well - he made a check just prior to this meeting and
learned that the company has lots of room for lots of repair work and it hopes that some of the people that
cannot get it done will come to the company. He stated that the total number of bays available in Canada;
through service stations has declined in the period 1966-1974 - on the other hand, the bays available
,
through mass-merchandisers and repair specialty chains have increased by a greater number than were closed
,
by service stations - he felt that this information answers this matter that was brought up a couple of .
times in the foregoing presentations and discussion. He stated that self-serves are not causing unem-
ployment and putting lessee dealers out of business; last year, Gulf leased its self-serve and three-bay
outlet in Fredericton to a lessee dealer - within this next month, the company will lease a one and a half
million gallons per annum self-serve in St. John's, Newfoundland - the company.is considering now the
leasing of a self-serve in Moncton - it has self-serve gar bar and service bay facilities under dealer-
lease operation and finds that dealers can operate self-serve just as efficiently as company operation; t~e
economics of self-serve result around staff and labour efficiency of dispensing gasoline under full op-
erator-cashier control; Gulf has stated publicly that its direct retailing activities, while important to
the company, would be limited to ten to fifteen per cent - its plans are that 85 to 90% of its company
oW11ed outlets will continue to be operated by independent businessmen in a franchise relationship with the
company. Mr. Stone advised that he was prepared to show at this meeting of Councilor at any other time
that is convenient to the Council, a videotape of approximately seven minutes in length to inform the
meeting about self-serve outlets, should the Council wish to view it. General discussion ensued between
Council members and Mr. Stone.
.
I
.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the Council view at this time the videotape referred
I
to by Mr. Stone.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Hodges, Cave, MacGowan and Kipping
voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Gould, Davis, Green, Pye and Parfitt voting "nay".
Mr. George F. O'Connell, Q. C., was present on behalf of his client, /1r. Walter Beckett, and
asked that the Council approve in principal Mr. Beckett's proposal to develop his property in the area of,
the Martinon By-Pass at Acamac. He stated that Mr. Beckett confirmed to him that he is still ready, I
willing and able to do those things which he had earlier indicated to the Council he was prepared to do in
developing this sub-division, namely:- to develop about 400 acres of land at the intersection of the Acamac
Backland Road and the Martinon By-Pass, with Mr. Beckett being prepared to put in a water system which '
would meet City standards at his own expense without any City contribution, and put in a sewerage system :
which would meet City standards at his own expense without any City contribution, and to build streets and
build houses. He stated that obstacles were thrown in the way of his proposed development by the Planning
people, but it is his understanding that there is only one difference remaining and that is the matter. of'
the conflict between this concept and the Comprehensive Community Plan. He made the point that the pro- '
perty immediately contiguous to that of Mr. Beckett has been re-zoned for development as a penal site and'
that this, of course, is not in accordance with the provisions of the said Plan - he added that, with the!
authors of the said Plan, believe that it is not to be a stagnant thing (the Plan) but a developing thing: .
and a thing that can be changed. He stated that it was because of the long time it took for the City staff
to submit its report recently on the proposed Beckett development, and, also, because of the advent of the
prison system that he was now before the Council, and he stated that in that regard he would like to read '.
~
".-
469
for payment of the following
Sted.6'n a. .
~'~ ~~A( Stephen Constructlon Company
t7, . Chitticks (1962) Ltd.
C'"f/H/bh-s
I U1'b,.1t).L-t-.
.
I
I
.
I
{k1?1"~e F.
O'r:bF7Qt!?//
Wa/6-er
:BeckeH-
~e-;l!.Oh/>>
/JI'N1K~
~e';p'"
.if'O.::"A-Y ~rKS
7)e,d:
IIla,.Sh aRe I
S'tt'IWI'ti}!? e
Se~eme .-
I $eWl!'n;,~e
7;.e;:;rh"19nT
-<,pan
:lJ eJi?.Irt.uJ"e
(!,fY}, II, C.
/f'eS<:"lh It ;17~
mrl/on
.
J)ebt!?l1-teel"e
lll....
some notes he made some time ago in considering the Comprehensive Community Plan because he believes this is
important: the Planning people tell us that we are in conflict with the Comprehensive Community Plan; he suggests
that that is more apparent than real; referring to Section 152 which makes it clear that the Plan is to be
flexible and that economic considerations are of primary importance, one of the principle objects of the Plan is,
according to 1, 7 and 4 to ensure the greatest benefit to the inhabitants of the Saint John urban region in terms
of the quality of the physical environment and the quality of life available to them while at the same time
minimizing the total cost involved - it is made clear by Section 17 and by Section 18 that housing is of great
importance; his point in emphasizing these things is that when you read the Comprehensive Community Plan you will
find major emphasis is placed upon the cost of provinding a water system, a sewerage system and a street. system,
all of which Mr. Beckett will do at his own expense; in studying the Plan it is clear that the authors considered
a number of possible methods of developing the city - one is the system which was adopted, the other was the
satellite concept - while the authors opted for the development of the city by adopting concept number one the
growth concentrated in the Saint John census metropolitan area by providing for development contiguous with
already developed areas, this was clearly not the only possibility - the decision to adopt the first concept was
clearly made on the basis that in the opinion of the authors of the said Plan this would be the least expensive
method - that decision was based upon the assumption that the community must bear the cost of providing the
essential services of water, of sewerage disposal and of streets; he called the Council's attention to the fact
that while the authors of the Plan opted for the satellite community concept this was not the only possibility -
it was a case of picking one or the other and the basis for it was a matter of cost - and by doing what we are
doing we are, in fact, creating satellites - we have satellites all around Saint John - he thinks caused, at
least in part, by the fact that it is so difficult to develop within the City boundaries. He stated that that
seems to be the bug-bear - the Comprehensive Community Plan. At this point, he referred to a letter he received
from the Deputy Minister of Public Works of New Brunswick which deals with the question of access to Mr. Beckett's
land, and which states that after the Department of Justice investigation it was found that it was not true that
the Acamac Backland Road was not a public road, and which states that the Department would be required to provide
an access for the proper movement of traffic between that Road and Highway Number 7. He recalled that it was
going to cost New Brunswick Telephone Company Limited $85,000.00 to put telephone service in to the Beckett
land - he added that that is no business of the planners and it is up to Mr. Beckett to go to the telephone
company and make arrangements in that regard. He noted that there were other questions raised at the time of Mr.
Beckett's re-zoning application previously, and he stated that if there are any of same that are bothering the
Council members he would appreciate an opportunity of replying to them because he is satisfied that his client
and he have all the answers. He stated that with the prison coming in it is their feeling that the time is right
for them to hold discussion with the Federal people on the possibility, at their (Mr. BeCkett's) expense for
their benefit of connecting their water system and their sewerage system with the Federal water supply and
sewerage disposal system, and it seems rather hopeless to discuss this with the Federal people unless they had
some indication from this Council that providing they can satisfy the City's needs for water and sewerage they
are going to be able to go ahead with the development. He stated that they have had communications with the
Federal people and they are interested in discussing it, but !1r. Beckett and he do not want to put a lot more
money into this thing unless they know that there is some chance of their being able to go ahead. He noted that
the re-zoning application made by Mr. Beckett to Council may be out of date now and that it may be necessary to
re-apply. He stated that what he would like to get from the Council if he possibly can is an indication from the
Council whether it has changed its thinking because of the advent of the prison, or for any other reason, whether
they can expect some support from the Council in their efforts to proceed with the Beckett proposal. He added
that Mr. Beckett says he is prepared to go in there right away, get started, do his planning, honour his earlier
commitment to build so many units - he noted that there is room there for some 1,200 and maybe 1,400 units,
depending on how the land is sub-divided - there may be a substantial advantage in tying in with the prison
complex, or there may not - they would like to investigate that, but they cannot do it unless the Council says
there is some benefit, some likelihood, of obtaining the Council's approval.
Discussion ensued between Council members and Mr. O'Connell during which some Councillors felt they
were prepared to re-open the subject for reconsideration. Mr. O'Connell noted that he thinks that the course of
action for Mr. Beckett and himself to follow is to start over again and make further application to the Planning
Advisory Committee and them come back to the Council with an application for re-zoning regarding Mr. Beckett's
proposed development, and he indicated that they will do this.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the annual report for 1975 of the Recreation and Parks
Department, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded
by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED
named invoices:-
that as recommended by the City l1anager, authority be granted
dated May 17, 1976
dated April 30, 1976
$ 26,347.05
$ 8,439.53
Limited
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Finance, advising that with regard to the Sewerage Treatment Loan regarding Marsh Creek 310-STP-7 (6), the Common
Council on August 25th, 1970 authorized execution of a debenture in the sum of $628,014.02 at 81/4% payable over
twenty years and maturing May 1st, 1992, and further advising that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to
whom the debenture was issued have asked that the principal amount be combined with one for an additional loan
that was authorized by them to cover further project costs - and that it is recommended, accordingly, that the
said Council resolution dated August 25th, 1975 which authorized the creation and issue of a debenture of a
principal amount of $628,014.02, be rescinded, and that the City do create and issue a debenture of the principal
amount of ~734,668.15 bearing interest at the rate of 8 1/4% to be dated May 1st, 1972 with payment of interest
and instalment of principal to be made annually on May 1st for a term of twenty years -- be received and filed
and the recommendations adopted. -
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Se~nded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS the City of Saint John hereinafter called the 'Corporation' is authorized by Chapter 27 of the
Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year 1889, and amendments thereto, and the Municipal
Debentures Act, and amendments thereto, as occasion may in the public interest arise for the carrying on of any
public civic works or need civic improvements, to borrow any sum or sums of money for any such purpose and to
issue debentures to secure the repayment of such monies.
470
~
.7ioJu~ ..L oS $~e
.JJe.6-6'h-eN ;re
CJ.17l.//.~
/l!o~$~ C/.t!'P!Tk
$'t9W'I"~e
-r;:"~/7l9'n -c
..( pan
AND WHEREAS the Corporation by virtue of Section 4 of an agreement dated the 31st day of August:,
1970, between Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the Corporation of The City of Saint John,
pertaining to the construction of a sewage treatment project consisting of approximately 16,300 lineal fe~t
of 8" to 30" interceptor sewers, 6,100 lineal feet of twin 12" :(orcemain, two pumping stations and 1.0 mg'd
sewage treatment plant, has agreed on July 1 in each year to issue and deliver to Central Mortgage and
Housing Corporation a debenture of The City of Saint John equal in amount to the principal amount advanced
in the preceding twelve months period by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to the City of Saint
John:
.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS
That the Corporation do create and issue a debenture of a principal amount of $734,668.15 bearing
interest at the rate of 8 1/4% per annum calculated half-yearly, not in advance, commencing on the FIRST I
day of May, 1973.
That the payment of interest and instalments of principal be made on MAY 1ST annually over a term
of TWENTY years in accordance with the schedule hereto annexed.
That such payment of interest and principal be made at par as they fall due at the main office ~f
The Bank of Nova Scotia in Ottawa, Ontario.
Provided that the Corporation shall have the privilege of paying the whole amount owing hereunder
or any part thereof at any time prior to the FIRST day of MAY in the year 1992.
I
That the Mayor and Common Clerk of the Corporation be hereby authorized to sign the said deb-
enture on behalf of the Corporation and the Common Clerk be hereby authorized to affix thereto the Seal of
the Corporation."
SCHEDULE OF REPAYMENT ATTACHED TO AND FORMING PART OF:
8 1/4~ DEBENTURE $ 734,668.15
ISSUED BY THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
MAY 1, 1972
TO MATURE MAY 1, 1992
.
Payment Date Interest Principal Total
May 1, 1973 $ 24,244.32 ,. 15,322.05 '" 39,566.3'7
<P ,p
" " 1974 32,985.88 16,612.19 49,598.07
" " 1975 50,764.70 18,010.97 68,775.67
" " 1976 57,654.74 19,527.52 77,182.26
" " 1977 56,010.49 21,171. 77 77,182.26
" " 1978 54,227.80 22,954.46 77,182.26
" " 24,887.26 ,
19'79 52,295.00 77,182.26
" " 1980 50,199.45 26,982.81 77,182.26
" " 1981 47,927.46 29,254.80 77,182.26 I
" " 1982 45,464.16 31,718.10 77,182.26
" " 1983 42,793.44 34,388.82 77,182.26
" " 1984 39,897.85 37,284.41 77,182.26
" " 1985 36,758.44 40,423.82 77,182.26
" " 1986 33,354.70 43,827.56 77,182.26
" " 1987 29,664.35 47,517.91 77,182.26
" " 1988 25,663.26 51,519.00 77,182.26
" " 1989 21,325.28 55,856.98 77,182.26
" " 1990 16,622.04 60,560.22 77,182.26
" " 1991 11 ,522.77 65,659.49 77,182.26
" " 1992 5,994.14 71,188.01 77,182.26
$ 735,370.27 $ 734,668.15 $ 1,470,038.4?
(Form of Bond) .
CANADA
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
8 1/4% DEBENTURE
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN in the County of Saint John, Province of New Brunswick, a body
corporate under a Royal Charter dated 18th day of May 1785 under authority of Chapter 27 of the
Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year 1889, and amendments thereto, and
the Municipal Debentures Act, and amendments thereto, and pursuant to a resolution of the Common.
Council passed on the 25th day of May 1976 promises to pay to the registered holder hereof at
the main office of The Bank of Nova Scotia in Ottawa, Ontario, the sum of SEVEN HUNDRED THIRTY
FOUR THOUSAND, SIX HUNDRED SIXTY EIGHT DOLLARS AND FIFTEEN CENTS ($734,668.15) in lawful money
of Canada together with interest thereon at the rate of EIGHT AND ONE QUARTER PER CENTU}1 (8 1/4%)
per annum calculated half-yearly, not in advance, commencing on the 1st day of May 1972 in
TWENTY equal annual instalments, payment of the first instalment to be made on the 1st day of
May 1973. Provided that the City of Saint John shall have the privilege of paying the whole
amount owing hereunder or any part thereof at any time prior to the IST day of MAY in the year
1992.
I
I
This debenture or any interest therein shall not, after a certificate of ownership
has been endorsed thereon by the Chamberlain of the City of Saint John, be transferable except
by entry of the Chamberlain or his Deputy in the debenture registry book of the said City of
Saint John.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the said City of Saint
John has caused this debenture to be signed by
its Mayor and countersigned by its Common Clerk
and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed on this .
25th day of May 1976 at the City of Saint John in
the County of Saint John and Province of New
Brunswick.
,., .................. ..........................
Mayor.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Common' Clerk: . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . , .
~
JII"""
471
.
I CI-t!lPl~I".
I
.
I
.
S,d-,(,'vlslaJ} .
_1 . / _' ~n
C'O::n;-S/)OI1"1 be
PQ//cy
I
'P/s"n, hldv/$-
Com.m.
Consideration was given to the City Manager's report dated May 20th, 1976, which states that it has
been shown by 'the information contained therein that the present sub-division cost-sharing policy of the City of
Saint Johnwustbechahged for two reasons: (a) to bring the City's policy into line with current municipal
practice, and (b) to ensure that the City's limited resources are being used in the best possible way to en-
courage housing of a standard and in aand in a location which is in keeping with the City's future growth.
Councillor Kipping referred to item Number 7 of the recommendations, "That the City assist developers for a
,
stated time after the change-over to the new policy by funding a portion of completed development costs and
holding as security some of the lots which will be serviced in the sub-division", and asked what it would entail,
and for some examples. Mr. Barfoot replied that this report is intended as a general policy guideline, and
before this can be implemented there are a number of other stages to go through - we are legally required to get
the Planning Advisory Committee views - it is also one of the recommendations that we get views from developers _
and, once all these things have come in, these specific recommendations would then result in actual wording for
changes to the By-Law; so, this is the first of many stages - he thinks that this Number 7 is one of the areas
where he thinks a discussion with the developers would kind of generate some useful views on what is an accep-
table, or a good, period of time over the change-over - possibly twelve months would be a starting date here.
Councillor Kipping felt that if the Council adopted this particular recommendation, as is now worded, the Council
would be nullifying what it is trying to do, which is, we are trying to get away from paying anything towards the
cost of sub-divisions - yet, if Council approved Number 7, it would be committed to assisting developers for a
stated time after the change-over to the new policy, as noted. He felt that "by funding a portion of completed
development costs" is too vague and it seems to him that it contravenes what the Council is trying to do. He
stated that he would want to omit Number 7 - that is a suggestion, and the Council can discuss it, later. With
regard to Number 8 recommendation, which talks about a preferred development area, Councillor Kipping stated that
he would want to know how such an area is determined and defined - he felt another loophole is being left there,
"That the City contribute to the attractiveness and saleability of sub-divisions within a preferred development
area by contributing to the cost of better finish services..." - he felt it would appear to be a kind of opening
for discrimination, of which the Council should be very careful. Mr. Barfoot pointed out that the Council has
decided as a policy that a certain area in this city is a Stage I development area as defined in the Compre-
hensive Community Plan, and it is within this area that the present cost-sharing policy applies - if any de-
veloper today is building outside this preferred area the City contributes nothing to that developer's develop-
ment. He pointed out that the philosophy is to encourage development adjacent to present services, and not
encourage development which would require independent services or long service extensions such as the proposal
that was before the Council at this meeting. Councillor Kipping suggested that for the time being, at least,
Number 8 be omitted from any motion that the Council makes, as well. He referred to Number 10, which recommends
that a meeting be held with other municipalities in the Saint John area to discuss a common approach to sub-
division policy. He felt that such meeting should be held previous to the Council adopting any changes in the
sub-division policy - therefore, he felt that Number 10 should be omitted, as well. With regard to Number 11,
"Finally, that the proposed policy be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee as their view is necessary
before any legal changes in the sub-division cost-sharing policy can take place", he stated he feels the Council
should have that Committee's advice before the Council does anything in this matter, really, and before the
matter is brought before Council at all. He stated that he does not feel like voting on these recommendations
with those provisions in there. He suggested that items Numbers 7, 8, 10 and 11 be omitted, and then he would be
prepared to move that the other recommendations be referred.
Councillor Gould made the following comments: if it is our policy to change and we are out of stride
according to this chart with most of the communities - water and sewerage particularly looks like the respon-
sibility of the developer, in Bathurst, Brandon, Burlington, Calgary, Dartmouth, Fredericton, Halifax, Hamilton _
to name but a few that are listed there - we are away out of stride - he does not see any necessity, for in~
stance, to seek the local developers' requests and their views - he thinks that the whole point that this was
raised for is that, hypothetically, by helping in the costs of sewerage and water, it was supposed to invite or
encourage housing and the cost and the benefits were supposed to be passed on to the home buyer, and he is not
convinced that that is taking place, and he does not see that the City should be involved in this at all - the
City is really out of stride with most of the communities from which information was sought, and he does not like
recommendation Number 7 in the City Manager's report - he is not sure he likes recommendation Number 8 - and so
on - so, he cannot approve of the form it is in, right now.
Expressing his disagreement with Councillors Green and Kipping, Councillor Cave pointed out that the
City is committed. He stated that he would like to see the matter tabled temporarily - have most of this carried
out - referred to the Planning Advisory Committee - meet with the other municipalities, and discuss it - but he
thinks, when the time arrives, that the City should notify the subdividers that it is going to cut them off
completely but give them a suggested time - like the end of August, the end of July, the end of June, something
like this.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that recommendations numbered 1 to 8, inclusive, that are contained
the letter from the City Manager dated May 20th, 1976 regarding the City's sub-division cost-sharing policy,
referred to the local developers with the request that they give their views on the proposed cost-sharing
policies, and that. a meeting be held with other municipalities in the Saint John area to discuss a common ap-
proach to sub-division policy, and, finally, that the proposed policy be referred to the Planning Advisory
Committee as the Committee's view is necessary before any legal changes in the.sub-division cost-sharing policy
can take place.
Councillor Davis pointed out that in making the above motion, the Council has discussed the matter in
Committee of the Whole, and it has discussed it in the Land Committee and in the Works Committee - it was re-
(?p~~, ~.6o" ferred to two other Committees who did not get around to discussing it - and that he thinks the Council should
~~hA' ~~~. continue discussing the matter, both between ourselves and with the local developers, neighbouring communities
IA/..L. ~_ and the Planning Advisory Committee.
vv"""'5 L-"",,,,,
I
7ioee
p/~nrihf
.
.....
Councillor Green spoke in support of eliminating the present sub-division cost-sharing policy.
Referring to the recommendations that are contained in the above named letter from the City Manager,
Councillor MacGowan noted that recommendation Number 1 mentions tree planting, "That the City should not be
responsi ble for any costs in a development, except for the inspection services, street signs, and tree-planting...",
and stated that she is all for it, and with respect to the reference in recommendation Number 8, "That the City
contribute to the attractiveness and saleability of sub-divisions within a preferred development area by con-
tributing to the cost of better finish services, such as ...... boulevards...", she is also all for that, but she
is also for it in old areas, and that she does not think it should be kept only for the new areas. She noted
that this year, the City has bought no trees whatsoever, and stated she thinks this is something the Council must
ook at another year because every year lost is important; she thinks it is a pity that this year, in the areas
hat are main thoroughfares, no trees are being planted - she added that we could not even get eight trees for
schools.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Gould voting "nay".
472
C'/t:t /!Iff/".
~~..L hS'p'ecrpr
7Qhder5 ~
J)eh7o//~/uJ?
3.;;".,,( <:'e;>V'e If'd:
/lhl7eX 'pl"Ogepty
S. :T.//5~. '(! Ob?P?
.(~h'" [?,p......n:>.
U/d6n" ~ s~e
/1i!i l- t?s
tv&lUr<l- s.w,h;l.
~5-~w
/l.7?~hecr d>.
re,Pp/pt'
~
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the joint report from the City Manager and the
Building Inspector with regard to tenders received for the demolition of the former Provincial Hospital
Annex on Sand Cove Road, Saint John West, advising that in view of the Common Council's decision on May ,
17th, 1976 to refer the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission with reference to proposals for th~
development of the said Annex property to the Land Committee and to City staff for an appraisal and ,
report, the City Manager recommends that this matter of demolition tenders be laid on the table pending
receipt of such reports, be received and the recommendation adopted.
.
On motion of Councillor Davis
I
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Res.,.
pecting Water and Sewerage", be read a second time.
Councillor Gould stated that he wonders if the City staff, after the recommendation of H. R.
Doane and Company, decided to accept that outright as we did the last time, or has the staff ever con-
sidered looking at the consumption charge of bigger users so that they may be varied in some manner. Mr.:
Barfoot replied that the report of H. R. Doane and Company really is a package expressing a philosophy o~
rates setting - it is very difficult to take a bit of that and modify it and still come up with the
required revenues which are proposed in the report - and for that reason, we have not tried to change any
portion of what H. R. Doane and Company has presented as a package. He advised that he has distributed, ~
for the further information of Council, the actual comparison of block rates and the rates paid by some of
the largest consumers, and a comparison of rates from 1966 to 1976 to illustrate exactly what the changes
are. He felt that the main thing to be got from that information is the fact that water rates have been;
very stable over a long period of time and have only increased a very modest amount this time - but the I
big emphasis has been the change in the sewer rate which has been caused by major programme of construction
and environmental improvement that we have put through.
I
Councillor Cave expressed his support of the above by-law amendment, stating it is because of, .
the fact that when amalgamation went into effect in the Municipality of the County of Saint John he
opposed it from the start and said it was too costly, and he has voted and supported all the extensions
where sewerage was involved to do away with septic tanks and to look after the Marsh Creek. He stated
that he has a list of a few of the many millions of dollars that have been spent since 1971: Marsh Creek:
2.2 million; Champlain Heights-Lakewood collector sewer in Lakewood Heights-Silver Falls sanitary 2.2'
million; collector sewer and pumping station in the West Side 2.1 million; Milford-Randolph-Greendale
collector sewer system 1.2 million; Hazen Creek 1.8 million -- a total of eleven million dollars in
sewerage alone so, we have to raise the rates. He added that this total does not include many other
small projects as far as sewerage is concerned, and he did not have time to look into those.
I
Councillor MacGowan recalled that the Mayor had a few suggestions the other day, and she asked:
if the Mayor had pursued them any further, on ways that we might reduce the rates. The Mayor replied that
he has discussed the subject. Councillor MacGowan asked if there is any possibility that it would have I
any effect on this and that the Council could have it before the third reading of the above named by-law i I
amendment. The Mayor replied that so far,we have not. got any change. With regard to the proposed meeting,
we will have it before the third reading of the said by-law amendment, the Mayor advised.
Councillor Gould expressed his dissatisfaction with the water and sewer rates prediction made by
H. R. Doane and Company the last time the rates were set, as he felt the consultants knew about the works
that were in progress and should have made provision for the rates to increase before now, rather than
have them increase so much all at once now. He stated that what we are now trying to do, as a result, is,
to make up in the next year and a half what we have lost in the first year and a half, and it has to be ,
spread over three years under the Municipalities Act, to pay for the thing. He stated he thinks it could
have been done in a much better way; he thinks that the Council is forced to support this rates increase '
becuase the laws and regulations tell us to do so, and we have to accept that responsibility, but he still
does not think it was very good planning in the past, as he has mentioned.
Mr. Barfoot advised that he has prepared, to go with this reading of the by-law amendment, or ,
the third reading, if the Council gets to it at this meeting, a schedule which shows the bi-monthly rates;
the present schedule which the Council had before it at this meeting shows only the monthly rates. He
stated that prior to third reading of the by-law, this new schedule of bi-monthly rates, et cetera, should
be attached to the back of the said by-law amendment. Copies of the said new schedule were distributed at
this time.
.
Councillor MacGowan asked if it will be necessary for the Council to put a "freeze" on further!
sewerage expansion so the City does not get in this mess in a year or two, again. In reply, Mr. Barfoot
explained that the major sewerage expenditure which we have forecast for the next two years deals mainly.
with the completion of projects under the Department of Regional Economic Expansion and Central Mortgage
and Housing Corporation cost-sharing programmes which, generally speaking, have already been started or
which have a time limit for completion in order to gain cost-sharing; the City will certainly have not
indicated starting any major new projects within the time limit covered by this rates schedule. Councillor
MacGowan asked: then, at the end of next year, for instance, if we felt there was a need for further ;
expansion, or new sewerage somewhere, would it means that we would have to raise this (the rates) again? '
or else operate at a deficit, as we have been doing? She stated she thinks we should know, before we '
start talking about expansion again, just how it will affect us. Mr. Barfoot replied that if we continue'
to go into major sewerage expansions then the rates will have to continue to rise to pay for such major '
capital expenditures. Councillor MacGowan asked Mr. Barfoot: do you see any urgency for future expansion
within the next two, three, four years? Mr. Barfoot replied that he thinks we should restrain future,
expansion in order to restrain the rate of increase of the sewer rate. Councillor Green spoke, noting that
the Council should watch what expenditure it is going to get into, and then it will know where it is
going.
I
I
,
I
Councillor Davis advised that the Council ordered this study by H. R. Doane and Company beca11se
Mr. Park told the Council the City had a 25% deficiency in water and an 80% deficiency in sewerage _ this'
was over a year ago, and Mr. Park told the Council that the City was over by five hundred and some thous~nd
dollars, and he and Mr. Barfoot told the Council that the Council had better have this firm or somebody I
like that look at the rate structure again. Councillor Davis stated that he therefore does not know why;
this rate increase has come a sudden shock to everybody - this is why he has written his brief that is on'
the agenda of this meeting, regarding water rate changes, because he has all this information in his own i
files, back to 1974, regarding the deficit then and the deficit in 1975 -- the Council was told that the:
rate was going to run over and was told that it had better hire the consultants, and the Council did hire,
them. Referring to the remarks made at the opening of this meeting by the Mayor, Councillor Davis stated
that as far as he is concerned, there are no secrets - as far as he is concerned everybody is anti-manag~-
.
~
II""
.
I
I
t1/.;, Ie,. +-
Seli/terCiule
Y'a-t"es
If/atfer 0;1
$' 4wer~.ffe
:B!f- .1.01 W
(''(C//'pt Ph
-table *")
.!
.
~
,T"(/Inff
Il7iel"ests
-Pro//. flt,vt:
I
$:/ /I~a",M
.s. *hrt' ;YefJJ-
bpgPjgpd
..7JeJ/te~/I??e.
P/6IJ?
.JjIDt:'1r /0
C..,/II't?r
7)evDaj?me
'P"tposals
I
47a
ment and you take a "whack" at them every once in a while -- but the City staff gave the Council the information,
and he has all that information himself. He stated that there were no secrets, the Council knew what the City
was spending and knew what the City was going to have to pay for it. He stated that there is nothing wrong with
the new Schedule "A" submitted at this meeting by the City Manager for attachment to the by-law amendment - all
that was changed from the Schedule ;'A" that was submitted with the City Solicitor's letter at this meeting was
that the bi-monthly column was added in the new Schedule "A".
Councillor Pye stated that his opposition to the proposed increase is because industry has, for many
years now, reneged in its responsibilities in relation to paying its share of water consumption - the little man
has carried the water burden of industry until he has reached the saturation point. He felt that it is a tragic
situation, but we just cannot rectify the situation until industry is taken to task and made pay its way.
Councillor Gould agreed that the Council knew this rate increase was coming and stated his feeling that it would
have been easier to take had it been brought in in two stages, rather than in one stage as at present.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green and Pye voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting
Water and Sewerage", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Councillor MacGowan noted that some of the Council members voted against the by-law amendment on May
17th last, and voted against it at this meeting, as well, and she urged that if anyone has the answer as to how
the Council can avoid such rates they let the Council know what it is, because the Council has not had it pre-
sented to it - and if anybody has any information that the Council members do not have as to how the Council can
possibly avoid these increased rates she would like to know, because she does not like to have such an increase,
and she knows that most of the Councillors feel the same way. She noted that it is easy to vote against the
increases, but until there is an alternative she does not know what the Council can do.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the third reading of the said by-law amendment be laid on
the table until after the Council has the forthcoming meeting to see if there is any way these water and sewerage
rates can be reduced from the presently proposed rates.
Councillor Pye replied to Councillor MacGowan's question, stating that one thing the Council can do is
to exert more pressure on a certain industrial giant in this city for that fabulous water bill that has been
owing to the City for a long time. Councillor Green pointed out that there is also a large sum of money in there
for the Musquash which the Provincial Government helped to encourage previous Councils into a heavy investment
for Lorneville, and they are now billing the City for quite a large sum. He stated that he still claims that
this is negotiable and that until it is resolved there should be no figure put in there for it because he believes
that they (the Provincial Government) are also responsible for some of the heavy developments around here that
the Council is committed for and which they should have paid a larger part for - in his opinion, it is still open
for negotiation. Councillor Cave noted that a meeting is being arranged with the Provincial Government on this.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillors Parfitt, Cave, Davis and Gould
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission, advising
that by resolution of April 12th, 1976, the Common Council adopted the South End Neighbourhood Development Plan,
which contains a recommendation that a programme of housing construction of approximately 674 units be initiated
in the South End and that included in this recommendation was the construction of 275 housing units in the Block
10 area; and further advising that the Commission has subsequently. approved a "Call for Development Proposals"
for the first phase of this project, which is for the development of Block 10 being the area bounded by Sydney,
Britain, Charlotte and Broad Streets, and advising that the plan made provision for the relocation of recre-
ational services presently located on this land and this requirement is being met; and submitting a copy of the
said "Call for Development Proposals", and stating that this document has been reviewed by the Board of Directors
of the South End Development Corporation Ltd. and has received their approval, and it is expected that the
Corporation will respond to the said Call; and requesting that the Common Council give approval for the immediate
advertising of the "Call for Development Proposals - Block 10 area - South End" -- be received and filed and the
Common Council grant approval for the immediate advertising of the said "Call for Development Proposals - Block
10 area - South End", as set forth in the copy of the said Call that was submitted with the said letter from the
Saint John Housing Commission.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the letter dated May 21st, 1976 from Councillor Davis in
/? rn . rebuttal of some statements made concerning the water rate changes, and expressing the view that these rates and
(,oUh....J/ciJV/S the property tax rates are becoming intolerable and that too much of the cost of municipal operations is being
~~ ,.qnfes placed on the cost of shelter, and it is not fair to most of our citizens, nor to those who are governing our
~ ~~~ city, and stating that the solution is, of course, to transfer more of the cost of municipal government from
~~e. zfe$ shelter tax to income tax and this is done by changing the grant formula; and stating that it is the respon-
I ~ sibility of this Council to see that these changes are made by the Provincial Government and made this year, and
~)7eev.ve t?~X that it is the responsibility of this Council to argue with the government of New Brunswick that the Provincial
67~~ share of the municipal expenses be increased - and stating that there is no other way that this city can share in
~o~~~I'~ the increased business and income in the city - and further stating that it is the responsibility of this Council
~~.v. ~~ to press with both senior governments that assistance in the cost of shelter should be given, not just to new
~ 6?0~. owners and a few others, but to everyone by removing some of the tax burden from shelter cost - and further
stating that it is the responsibility of this Council to examine the many things that affect the quality of life
~;I/;e J9r/~ in this city and to take action to counter the lethargy, defeatism, the apathy and the depressive mood of the
total community, otherwise, the Council shirks its responsibility -- be received and filed.
. F;;'~'".?
eM"? ;;;' ~
a,.eGJ
C?:Jtcn. 7}e
IJ'/lIl7ii!.o<fPl/
:lk"ek>pme n"t'
~-A'.;;>W
.... FlI/,'"q "e'l'tf,
Councillor Pye advised that he visited the Glen Road area to investigate a report concerning unneces-
sary and periodic flooding - not as a result of the Marsh Creek, but as a result of what might have been lack of
judgment a few years back, but lack of "teeth" in the Comprehensive planning by-law. He stated that, because of
the fact that a local construction company has placed three feet of fill on a lot situated on the eastern side of
Glen Road and as a result of the .said deposit, has caused periodic flooding of an adjoining property, and whereas
it is lawful to place three feet of fill on any premises without obtaining a building permit, and whereas damages
-/OI?S
474
"
.~
{>'#h. ~e
,c/ood'/I1!J
tJle~ ?fa': c,u.e.-
h'/~~ff "9N/;m'
(}Ph;h;Nh/~Y
'P/CilhP//ty /leT-
PA/I;? $(7"1'/,7
C'HII/'~~
$;/??pso~ .7),...
P(/-t-",A
.J}ep~. ;?fun,
/l-lifa; Jos
F/o,d ?/aln
mani1~emenr
Fjp~L/h~
2)IQ/ hdff:
II/CTkr ~17~
/lc~
IAlII. ~J~stpn
$~/f"- serve
~dlSo/; he s-lI7S.
8kl1~ohd
Sel"J'/'t!e s-t-ns.
Rt"-;? on.l~!I.
Se.>lS',de n-t?
~-t-d.
?/ahh. I9..,t!W8,
{>pmPl.
~ Clh,( Conlin.
7it11~e,. eleee.
kfwan/.s ""~,
lo~
~"/()I1Elkn~
to such adjoining property can only be recovered through the institution of legal proceedings, a process
which can be both costly and inconveniencing to the aggrieved person, it is extremely essential that this
legal loophole be plugged. He stated that in order to prevent future occurrences of this nature in any
area, he would propose the following motion, "that the Community Planning Act be amended to read as
follows: 'No person shall deposit any fill on any property without first obtaining a permit to do so.'''.
He stated that in view of the fact that because of the ineffectiveness of the Community Planning Act the.
aforementioned flooding has been permitted to develop, and being opposed to compelling the aggrieved
property owner to seek financial satisfaction through legal channels, he would propose the following
motion, "That Common Council instruct the Director of Works to rectify this disheartening and nerve
racking situation by running a 12-inch culvert, approximately 130 feet in length, from the premises of the
affected property owner, one Philip Morris, 81 Glen Road, to the drainage ditch on Simpson Drive. There;
was no seconder to the said proposed motions, or to the motion proposed singly by Councillor Pye, that the
Common Council instruct the Director of Works to rectify the said situation by running a 12-inch culvert,:
approximately 130 feet in length, from the premises of the affected property owner, one Philip Morris, 81:
Glen Road, to the drainage ditch on Simpson Drive.
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Zides stated that there is an apparent weakness in the Communit~
Planning Act because there seems to be no way to regulate or control, if you want to do so, somebody who'
is going to "make land" by cutting or filling land to three feet or less; that is a weakness - we have ha.d
occasion to raise the problem now with the Provincial Department of Municipal Affairs - obviously, we have
gotten noplace, so far, although for all he knows, that Department might be considering it for amendment.:
He stated that regarding the areas of flooding, the Province is looking at a flood plain management act, :
and he has had occasion to write to them to suggest that areas that may absorb water - what you might call
"wet lands" - outside of the flood plain also be included for control as far as filling or dumping mat- :
erial into - that is, he has asked for this kind of an amendment in the Community Planning Act, but he has
had no real action or response. He suggested that perhaps the question could be raised (with the Pro-
vince) by someone else, as well. Councillor Kipping noted that the motion proposed by Councillor Pye
would mean that every citizen would be required to obtain a building permit before placing any fill,
anywhere, and stated he felt that we would only be promoting disobedience of the law if we were to bring
in such a drastic solution, and that he does not think drastic measures like this, unless they have been
very carefully considered, are the answer. He asked if Mr. Zides would be prepared to take this matter
under advisement to the Planning Advisory Committee, if this were to be agreed upon by Council, and have
it considered there, or have some other suitable solution considered there, and brought forward as a
recommendation. Mr. Zides stated that he does not mind doing that, but he wanted to raise the point that:
there are two different areas: the one area where you are doing the normal cutting and filling of land, I
and, also, an area where by doing that you are creating a potential flood hazard or a drainage problem for
somebody else - and so we might be running into two different Acts, one being the Community Planning Act,:
and the other, the act that is now allegedly being prepared for the Province - the Water Management Act. .
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that this matter be referred to the Planning Advisory
Committee for study and a recommendation to Council.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. W.. H. Johnston of 36 Pugsley
Avenue, submitting comments with regard to self-service gasoline outlets, and with regard to gasoline
prices, and suggesting that oil companies, if they want new outlets, could take over those that are now i
closed in various locations throughout the city, and also suggesting that the Council consider requesting'
I
the oil companies to demolish abandoned gasoline outlets in the city before considering new ones and enter
. ,
into agreements containing a limitation clause in this regard, as outlined in his letter -- be received
and filed and forwarded to the appropriate City staff.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the application from Sea Side Co-Op. Ltd. of 25
Summer Street, making the request that the said property be re-zoned to permit it to be used for office
space, storage and as a retail food outlet and insulation storage premises, be referred to the Planning
Advisory Committee for a recommendation, and that authority be given to proceed to advertise the said
proposed re-zoning.
Councillor Davis asked that permission be given to introduce two items from the Land Committee
at this time, the first being the sale of Lot 1 at Kiwanis Court. Councillor Pye advised that he might
possibly be involved in a conflict of interest in this matter. He thereupon withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee concerning sale
of Lot 1 on Kiwanis Court, be placed on the agenda at this time.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee advising that in
answer to an invitation to bid on Lot 1, Kiwanis Court off Thornbrough Street, that was made in the
Evening Times-Globe on May 15th, 1976, Mr. Gerard Chiasson offered a bid of $8,000.00, Mr. Alexander W.
LeBlanc offered a bid of $8,500.00, and Mrs. Marion Ellen Pye offered a bid of $8,801.00 - and recom-
mending that the bid of $8,801.00 from Mrs. Marion Ellen Pye be accepted, be received and filed and the
said recommendation adopted.
Councillor Pye re-entered the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
of land
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED'that the letter from
on the northern side of Molson Avenue to Mr. Leigh Webster,
I
the Land Committee with regard to sale
be placed on the agenda at this time.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that by
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"...
475
,(ah~ Ph..m,
....(e/~h
fI//JS-ter
,c;'",.e lone
e/osin.ff
(befw.ee n
$Q/sP-'7/Jve.
I-/.;J"~n!l ~
I
I (!Ny /I'J~r.
e'A/M. a.~~
/!~ 7l!.onn. "If"
.ffeve/opn;eJ?t-
,c;'",e eAiff
$elf'- se"v.e
!}QS ,//>> e
s1!J7.
.
.z,m'A.q'
2Iy-MW
Gul/' t///
L.;J11.iI4l'01 -<-I-.
Se/-/'- ~e,.pe
ff"sollhe .ff.
I
.
I
I
.
Ill....
resolution of June 9th, 1975 the Common Council approved the sale of land on the north side of 110lson Avenue to
Mr. Leigh H. Webster, but legal problems have prevented the transfer of title and the Committee has been advised
by the Legal Department of the City that it will be necessary to extinguish a fire lane at the rear of the
property and for the City to acquire title to this land before the fee simple can be transferred to Mr. Webster,
and recommending that the Council acquire title to the said "lane" by publishing the following Public Notice in
accordance with the Legislature requirements: "Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of the City
of Saint John intends to move on 1976, a resolution ordering that the fee simple in a so-called 'fire lane'
or 'service lane', commencing at Harding Street between Montreal and Molson Avenues and running westerly and
southwesterly from Harding Street to Molson Avenue, shown on a Plan entitled, 'Plan of Fairville Plateau', dated
May 2, 1912, and filed in the Office of the Registrar of Deeds in and for the County of Saint John on May 16,
1912, in Drawer 6, File 8, Number 63, vest in the City of Saint John, subject to any easements to the same
expressly granted to or otherwise acquired by adjoining lots owners. This Notice is published in accordance with
An Act to Authorize the City of Saint John to Discontinue or Temporarily Close Up Public Streets within The City
of Saint John When Necessary (N. B. Sts. 56 Victoria (1893) C.41 as amended)." -- be received and filed and the
recommendation contained therein adopted.
At this time, consideration was given to the letter from the City Manager, dated May 21st, 1976, which
advises that the Common Council on May lOth, 1976 laid on the table the application of Gulf Oil Canada Ltd. to
switch the company's service station on City Road from a manned-gasoline operation to a self-serve operation, for
two weeks so that Council could have a teach-in with City staff in open session of Council to find out what the
complications would be, and that, for Council's information, he was submitting reports prepared by the Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development and by the Fire Chief, and that he concurs in the recommendations of the
City staff, which are: that self-serve gasoline service stations meet all the requirements of the 1975 National
Fire Code of Canada, as well as the requirements of the Provincial Fire Marshal; that Council permit the con-
version of the Gulf Oil Station, and all others which might be applied for in the next twelve months, and new
service stations, according to the present procedures for approval; and that a report and recommendations be
submitted for Council's consideration after this policy has been in effect for one year.
It was noted that the letter from the Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, dated May
21st, 1976, addressed to the City Manager states that if the self-serve facility is to be permitted, it will be
necessary to repeal sub-section (2) of Section 197 of the Zoning By-Law which now prohibits this, and that a
recommendation will be sought from the Planning Advisory Committee.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the application from Gulf Oil Canada Limited for the estab-
lishment of a self-service gasoline station be refused.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Kipping voting "nay".
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
J7'/~
;' Common rk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the thirty-first day
of May, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal
Services, G. Baird, Commissioner of Economic Development, C. Nicolle,
Director of Recreation and Parks, D. McCaig, Parks Planning Assistant
of the Recreation and Parks Department, and A. W. C. Robertson, Deputy
Fire Chief
The Reverend Canon W. A. Bockus, rector of St. George's Church, offered a prayer which opened the
meeting.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on May
17th last, be confirmed.
476
~
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt .
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on May
25th .last, be confirmed.
(!PUh. tl>Y~
Councillor Cave stated that he is concerned regarding the statement made by the Mayor at the May
1?100~P~ . 25th, 1976 Council meeting where ,the Mayor condemned staff for lack of information. He stated that he is
~~hC/j1-~~~ sure that he had all the information he needed, and he voted to have sewerage extended in those areas, and
(!p-~~/on y- that those Councillors .who voted against that - especially those Councillors from the eastern and western
CP~~Arh/~~/Pn sectors of the City - should be ashamed of themselves because they are the ones who told the people they
1'.. b .~. J. were going to do something for them. He stated that he intends to take the matter further.
l!'~ r~P'" Pt/hff
/17 -/Ol"~-t-/. (:In)
~~h. #/U/hS
;B<<A'~ec
reSt! ~/n~ 5
[>P<<I1. K:p'piJ?~
C'I1Uh. 2).;,v/s
/J101!/P~
Ceneh, &ve
CbUh. ~,...f'/-H-
aah, ~ Wh~'!'n
Speaking to business arising from the minutes, Councillor Higgins stated that he regrets he was
not in attendance at the said May 25th Council meeting because he was in bed with a heavy sinus cold, and
he stated that had he been in attendance, he would have taken exception to certain comments made by the
Mayor in the Mayor's prepared statement. He noted that the Mayor made the statement that the failure of,
.City staff to provide Council with full information before Council has made important policy decisions has
contributed to a financial programme of restraints in services and increases in rates and taxes imposed in
recent months. He stated that this statement, as well as others he will cite, he will presume is the
Mayor's personal opinion - and that it certainly does not reflect his opinion. He stated that in his seven
years on Council, he has been besieged with full information on every subject from historical background of
a project to cost implementation .to future.tax load; in addition, having his Council meeting kit in his
possession two or three days prior to any .Council meeting offers him ample time to check with City staff or
fellow Councillors regarding any further information he may need. He stated he would suggest that re-
straints in our budget was a Provincial-Federal decision and that increases in rates and taxes is the
result mainly of vast expenditures in sewage collection and treatment, recreational facilities, and cost-
sharing with Provincial and Federal Governments in urban renewal projects; the undertaking of these pro-
jects was, and is, right and justified for the betterment and growth of this city. He noted that the Mayor
also said that Council h~s been placed .in a difficult posi~ion in decision-making because of a lack of
information from City staff and has had to work hard from being placed in the position of being a rubber
stamp. He stated that, if, at any time, he believes further in-put from staff is needed before a vote is
taken, he moved the matter .tabled for further staff in-put; he stated that he has never rubber-stamped any
suggestion placed by staff before Council, and that he resents being generalized as a member of a rubber-:
stamp Council, or a.potential rubber-stamp Council. He stated that with reference to the Mayor's comment
of the difficulty in establishing and approving budget by Council because of negotiations between the ,City
Unions and staff, he would remind the Mayor that the reason three of our Unions went to conciliation was
that City staff, representing us in negotiations, did not go .along with the Union proposals - that was the
cause of the delay. He stated that, finally, it was this Council, and this Council alone, that went along
with the Conciliation Boards' decisions and awarded the Unions the contracts they>now have. He stated that
he believes these decisions to be right. He stated that he has had many disagreements with City staff but
these disagreements were ironed out in intelligent discussion; disagreements - yes; lack of information and
lack of communication - never. He stated that he appreciates the Mayor's right to express his opinion, and
that he hopes the Mayor appreciates his right to do likewise. .
I
I
.
(Councillors Hodges and Green entered the meeting during the aforegoing discussion)
I
Councillor Kipping stated that he guesses if it is time to give opinions on the matter of the
Mayor's unexpected statement on May 25th last, he will also offer his opinion. He thinks that there has,
been, apparently, by what has been said, a fair amount of misunderstanding as to the Mayor's exact meaning
when the Mayor made his statements, because he did not get the same meanings that some Council members (who
have spoken at this meeting) have now expressed out of what the Mayor has said. He stated that he thinks,
also, to say that we have never had difficulties in communication with staff is a gross mis-statement - if
he may venture that strong an opinion - because one of the things that he has tried to do is improve
communications, not only by his motion several weeks ago, not only between staff and Council where he feels
that good communication is rather badly lacking, but also between Council and the public where he also
feels the Council's communications are rather poor, to say the least, and this is for a variety of rea-
sons - but, certainly, as far as staff work is concerned, it, in his opinion, varies up and down - at
times, it is extremely well done, at other times, it is lacking, and this, he thinks, is to be expected in
a large organization; however, he thinks that timing is probably even more important than the information'
itself, and that the Council has suffered from very poor timing of the offering of information in many .
cases whereby decisions are taken and moves are made, action is taken, before the proper and sufficient and
full information was received - and this has to be poor staff work. He stated that he did not interpret :
the Mayor's remarks as a sweeping condemnation of staff in its entirety - he interpreted it as a const_
ructive criticism of staff which needs to be made - and he rather agreed with what the Mayor had to say.
He noted that people will take different interpretations of what is said at any time, and it is unfortunate
of incorrect interpretations have been taken and if too much emphasis has been placed on certain statements
of which only the Mayor knows the true interpretation of - but, generally speaking, he thinks that, in his
opinion, the Mayor's remarks were timely and were called for, and he hopes that staff does not take them as
a sweeping condemnation - it was, in his opinion, constructive and timely criticism.
.
Councillor Davis at this point stated he would like to move that the statements made by the May~r
and himself at the said May 25th meeting and the statements being made at this meeting of Council be
recorded permanently in the minutes.
I
Councillor Cave stated that, contrary to what Councillor Kipping has said, there is no lack of
communication, and that he can get any information he wishes - and if he does not like the information he'
gets he takes it up with the Council _ then, it comes out in the public, and that is the time it should
come out, after it is discussed at full length, not prior to it.
Councillor Parfitt stated that in an organization that has approximately 1,000 employees, we know
there is the good and the bad - the same as in the Council - and she feels that any Councillor who has not
got the information there is something wrong, because long before she even thought of Council, she was'in
touch with senior staff in City Hall and would get information on finances, and so on. She stated she ha~
heard questions asked here at Council that if that Councillor had been at a "teach-in" or at a Committee of
the Whole, that was discussed. She stated she feels that senior staff has always been very co-operative
with her and she believes that-these Executive Committees were set up - Personnel, Finance, and so on - so
the Council members could have a closer relationship with the City's senior staff, and she just wishes '
there was a better attendance at these meetings and then the Council members would certainly know what is ,
going on from week to week. She stated that she knows that some of the senior staff felt badly, because
they were doing a good job, but we all need correcting - we can all do better - and it just a case of the,
Council members digging in and getting their in-formation - and the information is there and it is the
Council members' responsibility to get it.
I
.
Councillor M. Vincent noted that he missed the May 25th Council meeting due to a commitment in
Charlotte County, and that he did have a chance to try to find out what was discussed and the content of it
~
,...
47.7
.
I
(}QUh.~/S
I
. /IJl~P./'1';
st..,-temed-
{lpuhci/-
sC.;Jrr e~
.,. (!um;sr"" I?~(;;I
-{-lUll (;.e
p'1""V;~/h'T
/n-l'o"m.;t.,r/M)
I
.
I
I
t?l?lth, :J}aH s
ru~
Se~".;a!/e
:By-~w
el/.'R.:lJihlne-l-
~o. s-iu.d!f
.....
by reading the newspaper and enqulrlng a little bit about what had taken place. He stated that rather than
making any comments about whether he believes it to be correct or not, he thinks that it does prove out and is
indicative of perhaps a great need for Council and staff to sit down in the immediate future and discuss problems
that were mentioned if, in fact, some Councillors - individually, or collectively - are, in fact, having a
problem getting information. . He suggested that perhaps if the Council members told what the problems were, that
problem could be resolved; on the other hand, if Councillors present - individually, or collectively - are
satisfied, as some are stating at this meeting, that they are able. to get information and that staff is doing the
job it is doing, it could be told that, too; his point is that it is all well and good to be critical of some-
thing - it is all well and good to perhaps compliment something, but it does not resolve it until you sit down
with the principals and the parties involved and come to a satisfactory conclusion - and he knows, in reading the
article that he read in the newspaper, the first thing that went through his mind is that there are problems - it
need not necessarily be an open expose - it need not be a Committee meeting, but the only way we will get around
them to correct them and to carry out the rest of this term (of office) is if the Council members sit down and
face them and attempt to resolve them, and then go forward for the time that is left. He stated that he would
suggest that that be done as soon as possible.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Gould voting "nay".
Councillor Davis advised that there is omission in the minutes of Common Council of May 25th, 1976, and
he felt that statements made then be fully recorded in those minutes. He explained that he feels that the
prepared statement that the Mayor read at that meeting should be recorded in the May 25th minutes, and that the
prepared statement he himself read at that meeting should be recorded in the said minutes.
On motion of Countillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the minutes of May 25th, 1976 of Common Council, which
omitted recording in full the prepared statements of the Mayor and of Councillor Davis, be corrected by so
recording the said statements, which are as follows.
The statement read on May 25th, 1976 at the Common Council by Mayor Flewwelling is as follows:
"It is time I feel that I make known the many problems that Council face in their desire to set the
policy for the operation of the City.
The passing of the first reading of the new water and sewerage rate, on recommendation by staff, has
brought into focus the many factors that have been, and are being, faced by Council, lacking information that
should be made available to the Councillors, to help in their decision making.
Council has been informed the cost of supplying water and sewerage services has been a greater amount
than the revenue received over the past two or three years and if the rate was not approved this year it would be
even greater next year. On that information Council passed the first reading.
If the financial problem had been made known to the Council two or three years ago Council would have
been in a position to take action, such as reduce to nil the cost sharing policy for sub-divisions as now recom-
mended by the Land Committee. This would have placed the City in a better financial position with the water and
sewerage.
Over the past twenty-two months, due to lack of information Council has been many times placed in a
difficult position in decision making. Council must and has, worked hard to keep from being placed in the
position of a rubber stamp.
The setting of the tax rate which is the results of establishing and approving the budget was made
difficult for Council due to the negotiations between the City Unions and the staff in which the results as
recommended to Council created the problems which we now have to live with in reduced spending for services and
maintenance of. our city, e.g., the new garbage by-law, the lack of street repairs, school cross-walks, et cetera.
It was fortunate for the tax payers that the Governments placed restrictions on our increased. spending over 1975
budget, otherwise taxes would be sky high.
It becomes difficult to obtain full information from staff in regards to many items requested: number
of persons hired to work for the City, amount of taxes outstanding for water and sewerage, requests for designs
of street corners, and many other that I will repeat the request for from time to time.
It is necessary for department heads to start pulling the employees together - good man management by
examples, hours of employment, et cetera.
Council has asked for reports on, all persons leaving the province, and this information must be kept up
to date.
There is a slacking in supervision of by-laws in the City, such as building codes, gravel pit operating
without authority.
All this leads to a breakdown between staff and the elected representatives of the people - lack of
communications which must and will be corrected.
Any elected representative must be concerned and duly dismayed at the escalating of taxes and the
reduction of services.
Basically, we are paying more and getting less.
Trust and good will must prevail and our City business will be conducted in an orderly manner by
Council and staff working as a team."
The following are the verbal statements made by Councillor Davis at the Council meeting of May 25th,
1976 during discussion on second reading of "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting Water and Sewerage":-
"We ordered this study by H. R. Doane because Mr. Park told us we had a twenty-five per cent deficiency
in water and an eighty per cent deficiency in sewerage - this is over a year ago - he told us that we were over
by five hundred and some thousand dollars, and he told us that we - and the City Manager - they told us that we
had better have H. R. Doane or somebody like that look at it again - and I do not know why this has come as a
sudden shock to everybody - this is why I wrote Number 23 - because I have it all in my files - I do not know
what secrets have been held from the Council because I have all this information - I have the information from
'74 - the deficit then, the deficit in '75 - now, suddenly, we are faced with something that is mysterious -
there is nothing mysterious about this - we were told that it was going to run over - we were told that we had
better hire these people - and we did it - so what is mysterious - why this secrecy. I couldn't follow your
1478,
I
,
~
C'P~I1. .2JClV~S
W~~dl" I"dl-e3
p,.~/'-t!:l tares
r~-t-I!s
In~ome T-cnr
&I'>..;,d" ";;r,.,g~
'PI'>~V'- {l-o~.
,cd. b!ovr.
C'/Y/c: 'prt-"'e
{!f4~,.,
{/I"pan Ir'e'~~
c~"$ky ~
binL K$e~
,(~11~ €I({"~';:lh~e
:z;.V/h~ ; J;k~.st:
('/ we 7 ",/M-.11 e
rbhl_.
..L,.,ili'al1{-OW#1
WateffrMt-
e/e.i1I7-,:"p
/Y. *hL lYelfhb"..r.
hOld l/'Ifl',/Jssot!'o
/Y. /fnll /Yl!iI'~l(.ml
:in? 1" 'P/ci>?
~"'.1'a <1' oIK~
117 ,.Ivers {"/~-
Fire :J)1;ff-
introduction, Your Worship - I am sorry - your Item 2 - as far as I am concerned, there are no secrets _
as far as I am concerned, ev~rybody is anti-management and you take a 'whack' at them every once in a
while, but they gave us the information - we have it here - I have the whole thing here, and I am quite ...
upset by it - there are no secrets, we knew what we were spending, we knew what we were going to have to:
pay for it - and that is exactly what bothers me - there is nothing wrong with this new Schedule 'A' _ all
they did was add the bi-monthly column - it changed to have monthly $4.96, bi-monthly $9.92."
The following letter was read by Councillor Davis at the May 25th, 1976 Council meeting, copies
of which had been supplied to all Council members and to members of the news media; and which letter, by'
Council resolution, was received and filed at that meeting:-
"His Worship Mayor E. A. Flewwelling
and Members of the Common Council,
City Hall,
Saint John, N. B.
May 21st, 1976.
Your Worship and Fellow Councillors:
There has been some statements made concerning the water rate changes that should be rebutted
because they are, so far as I am concerned, irresponsible.
To be a City Councillor is to assume responsibility and responsibility is something that cannot
be delegated. Authority can be delegated but responsibility is an English word that is derived from the
same Latin verb that gave us respond, which means to answer. Responsibility means to answer for the
performance of subordinates.
Therefore, this Council is responsibile for its actions and the acts of previous Councils in
approving new sewers and water mains, in the operation and performances of the department, in the wage aqd
salary agreements, in the borrowing of money, in everything. The Councillor demonstrates responsibility:
by either approving or disapproving projects and agreements for reasons which include consideration of
costs and fiscal limitations.
I
I
Now that we have come to the point where we must pay for Councils' actions, the Council must ...
take a responsible action and to suggest that deficits be spread over periods longer than 2 or 3 years 'is
what I consider fiscal irresponsibility to force our citizens to borrow in order to pay the interest on
loans may reduce the rates today, but is financial manipulation at its very worst and should not even be :
considered. To transfer more load to industry is certainly possible, but this cannot be done arbitrarily.
These rates were developed carefully and painfully and not by the 'let's do this, let's do that' system :
that some are now suggesting.
This is not meant to say that everything is alright with these rates. My personal opinion is
that these rates and the property tax rates are becoming intolerable and that much too much of the cost of
municipal operations is being placed on the, cost of shelter. It is not fair to most of our citziens, nor:
to those of us who are governing our city.
The solution is, of course, to transfer more of the cost of municipal government from shelter I
tax to income tax and this is done by changing the grant formula.
It is the responsibility of this Council to see that these changes are made by the Provincial
Government and made this year.
I
It is the responsibility of this Council to argue with the government of this Province that the!
Provincial share of the municipal expenses be in~reased. There is no other way that this City can share
in the increased business and income in the City.
It is the responsibility of this Council to press with both senior governments that assistance
in the cost of shelter should be given, not just to new owners and a few others, but to everyone by
removing some of the tax burden from shelter cost.
Finally, it is the~esponsibility of this Council to examine the many things that affect the
quality of life in our City and to take action to counter the lethargy, defeatism, the apathy and the
depressive mood of the total community.
Otherwise, we shirk our responsibility.
Yours very truly,
(sgd.) Samuel Davis,
Councillor.
"
The Mayor stated that he has stated to the Councillors that he would ask certain questions for
information that the Council members have not received, and that he has explained this to the City Manage~:
on January 27th, 1975, Councillor MacGowan and Councillor Gould asked for information concerning the use
of the land on the south side of Chesley Drive and it was rumoured that it was to be used as a parking
place for a trucking company - this land being known as Part "A". Mr. Barfoot replied that that land is
part of a land exchange agreement with the Irving interests on Chesley Drive and that it is still in
progress and has not been finalized - there is very little, really, that can be reported at this time on
that transaction. Councillor MacGowan asked how many years it has been on the planned exchange and how
many years will it take to have it finalized. Mr. Barfoot replied that the agreement dates from April,
1974, he believes. Councillor MacGowan recalled that last year, or the year before, the Civic Improvemen~
and Beautification Committee was concerned about it and she thought it had been agreed to something before
that - she asked if it was an exchange of land, was it not, previous to that? Mr. Barfoot replied: that I
is correct, and he believes that the exchange agreement was in 1974. The Mayor stated that the second
item was March 3rd, 1975 when Councillors Hodges and Gould asked for a report as to who was responsible
for the cleaning up of the waterfront area in Indiantown. He asked if Mr. Barfoot could give a report on:
that. Mr. Barfoot replied that the staff looked into that, and it is a whole amalgam of private and
public ownership in that area and he understands that the North End Neighbourhood Improvement Group is
including the clean-up of this area as one of the parts of the North End Neighbourhood improvement plan
which will, hopefully, be presented shortly. Councillor Gould asked: who is responsible for cleaning up
old barges that are semi-sunk on our rivers? Mr. Barfoot replied that he does not know and that he will
have to get an answer to that question. Councillor Gould explained that that is the reason he asked the
question when he did because that was one of the specific items that he mentioned, and that situation has
been the same for four years. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he thinks that the problem that was
discussed at the time Councillors Gould and Hodges brought this up was the fact that some of those old
barges and what have you are in the water, and he knows from the City's Fire Department's point of view
.
I
I
...
~
""'"
479
.
that they do not have jurisdiction for that type of craft that might be in the water. Councillor Gould stated
that the reason he was bringing the matter up was that if the City has no jurisdiction over cleaning up the water
frontage on a river then the City should get the people who are responsible for doing it, to do it - that is his
point: if the City is responsible, then it should enforce whatever laws it has - if the Federal or Provincial
Goverments are responsible, then they should do likewise.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
I :J)P/7,,! ./SSV
"WHEREAS the City of Saint John hereinafter called the 'Corporation' is authorized by Chapter 27 of the
Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year 1889, and amendments thereto, and the Municipal
Debentures Act, and amendments thereto, as occasion may in the public interest arise for the carrying on of any
public civic works or needed civic improvements, to borrow any sum or sums of money for any such purpose and to
issue debentures to secure the repayment of such monies;
{1, /IJ. //. e
Iff k"nd
(/,.bcll1
1?1?J1t'WCiI/
.$c,fehJe
AND WHEREAS the Corporation by virtue of Section B (3) of an Agreement dated the 28th day of November
1968 between Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and The Corporation of The City of Saint John and Her
Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of New Brunswick pertaining to an urban renewal scheme in an area
comprising approximately 198 acres of land in the North End Area of The City of Saint John has agreed on July 1st
in each year to issue and deliver to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation a debenture of The City of Saint
John equal in amount to the principal amount advanced in the preceding twelve months period by Central Mortgage
and Housing Corporation to The City of Saint John:
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS
That the Corporation do create and issue a debenture of a principal amount of $348,530.48 bearing
interest at the rate of 6 7/8% per annum commencing on the first day of July, 1975.
.
That payment of interest and instalments of principal be made on July first annually over a term of
fifteen years in accordance with the schedule hereto annexed.
That such payments of interest and principal be made at par as ,they fall due at the main office of The
Bank of Nova Scotia in Ottawa, Ontario.
Provided that the Corporation shall have the privilege of paying the whole amount owing hereunder or
any part thereof at any time prior to the first day.of July in the year 1990.
That the Mayor and Common Clerk of the Corporation is hereby authorized to sign the said debenture on
behalf of the Corporation and the Common Clerk be hereby authorized to affix thereto the Seal of the Corporation."
SCHEDULE OF REPAYMENT ATTACHED TO AND FORMING PART OF:
I
6 7/8% DEBENTURE $ 348,530.48
ISSUED BY THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
JULY 1, 1975
TO MATURE JULY 1, 1990
Payment Date Interest Principal Total
July 1, 1976 $ 24,373.31 $ 13,876.94 $ 38,250.25
" " 1977 23,402.87 14,847.38 38,250.25
" " 1978 22,364.57 15,885.68 38,250.25
" " 1979 21,253.66 16,996.59 38,250.25
" " 1980 20,065.06 18,185.19 38,250.25
" " 1981 18,793.34 19,456.91 38,250.25
" " 1982 17,432.68 20,817.57 38,250.25
" " 1983 15,976.88 22,273.37 38,250.25
. " " 1984 14,419.26 23,830.99 38,250.25
" " 1985 12,752.72 25,497.53 38,250.25
" " 1986 10,969.64 27,280.61 38,250.25
" " 1987 9,061. 86 29,188.39 38,250.25
" " 1988 7,020.67 31,229.58 38,250.25
" " 1989 4,836.73 33,413.52 38,250.25
" " 1990 2,500.07 35,750.23 38,250.25
$ 225,223.32 $ 348,530.48 $ 573,753.80
I (Form of Bond)
CANADA
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
6 7/8% DEBENTURE
I
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN in the County of Saint John, Province of New Brunswick, a body
corporate under a Royal Charter dated 18th day of May 1785 under authority of Chapter 27 of the
Acts of the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick for the year 1889, and amendments thereto, and
the Municipal Debentures Act, and amendments thereto, and pursuant to a resolution of the Common
Council passed on the 3lst day of May, 1976 promises to pay to the registered holder hereof at
the main office of The Bank of Nova Scotia in Ottawa, Ontario, the sum of THREE HUNDRED FORTY
EIGHT THOVSAND FIVE HUNDRED THIRTY DOLLARS AND FORTY EIGHT CENTS ($348,530.48) in lawful money
of Canada together with interest thereon at the rate of SIX AND SEVEN-EIGHTS PERCENTUM (6 7/8%)
per annum commencing on the IST DAY OF JULY, 1975, in fifteen equal annual instalments, payment
of the first instalment to be made on the 1ST DAY OF JULY, 1976. Provided that the City of
Saint John shall have the privilege of paying the whole amount owing hereunder or any part
thereof at any time perior to the IST DAY OF JULY in the year 1990.
.
This debenture or any interest therein shall not, after a certificate of ownership
has been endorsed thereon by the Chamberlain of the City of Saint John, be transferable except by
entry of the Chamberlain or his Deputy in the debenture registry book of the said City of Saint
John.
~
1480
I"
~
t!~/#/CkS(/"J.. )
.<rPl.
~ //Jt-he/~ .(-td
:z;, 7? k f
./~~. ~~6(!~f;:. 1.
W//'(1~J?~6iI/'/-
1'95$0~ .
$/"'/lSPJ? a/'rs&r.
~-tf~
Ca"pP~'" 'P/.
L/-f't- $in.
FreLeN(;o-{o;, #5.:1-
LbhS.,f".., CP.
1/01 ~f?n ('~~
-r;.~ehT'JlA,Ji
adlJ.6>~ /JSS~C',
~~L.
t1///~or~ ~ &~
$B~,.S!1~h1
G?/f".Ie/s #~,4: "
t'$P1~/~""A-e
WfJJ /#s.6#: St"l
7J~on.., ,r>dA:
L--t-t.f.
~US6'a/"ff
CJY-~
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the said City of Saint
John has caused this debenture to be signed by
its Mayor and countersigned by its Common Clerk
and its corporate seal to be hereto affixed on
this 31st day of May 1976 at the City of Saint
John in the County of Saint John and Province
of New Brunswick.
..............................................
Mayor.
...... ........................................
Common Clerk.
On motion of Councillor MacGcwan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, the bid of A. B. McLean & Co. be accepted for supplying two only Model DH6000T hose dryers at a
cost of $2,729.00 each, plus Federal and Provincial Sales Taxes, funds having been provided for this
expenditure in the Capital Budget.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be granted
for payment of the following named invoices:-
Chitticks (1962)
Chitticks (1962)
D. Hatfield Ltd.
D. Hatfield Ltd.
Chitticks (1962)
dated April 30, 1976
dated May 13, 1976
dated May 10, 1976
dated May 10, 1976
dated May 18, 1976
$ 3,637.19
$ 2,241. 00
$ 2,257.70
$n,966.35
$10,060.38
Ltd.
Ltd.
Ltd.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for eng-
ineering services, regarding projects that have been undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic!
Expansion programme:-
Lancaster La~oon Lift Station
(a) W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 8,
dated May 18, 1976
.
I
I
.
$ 61,171. 77 I
$ 3,776.94
$ 589,600.00
n8,720.00
16,418.25
55,866.25
$ 46,435.50
(b) Simpson Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously approved
, Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated May 12, 1976
2.
Carpenter Place Lift Station
Fredericton Housing & Construction Co.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 9
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 9,
dated April 30, 1976
$ 658,850.00
526,563.85
27,493.14
415,066.77
$ 84,003.94
3.
Hazen Creek Sewa~e Treatment Plant
Godfrey Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 36,
dated April 30, 1976
$ 37,139.23
$ 833.20
4.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer System
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 54,
dated May 14, 1976
$ 189,595.18
$ 8,310.37
5.
Champlain and Lakewood Hei~hts Collector Sewer
Proctor & Redfern Ltd.
Engineering Services for Champlain Heights
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 32,
dated April 30, 1976
$ 1,198.27
$ 201 ,161. 33
6.
Courtenay Bay Causeway
C. N. R.
Automatic Protection Relocation
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated April 15, 1976
6,089.37
$
6,089.37
6,089.37
Nil
Nil
$
.
I
I
.
....1
,...
481
. .
CaU6~Je)&'y
I
~.;1h7.P~~S -
Feb-~ s-lol'.
- ,.e!".;J iJ's
Felt'. GOv!.
Prpv. b?Dv&-.
I
S //,./n),- leI"
S ;Idem
Sboilh?P60 k
. ~I"k new
e/....b A Dee:; e
I
1"7~ fln~
1?epl7n-
'Pp//ce.1)o/J
Pro c eP{se,.,
Y'e
J);kjJiPCCJf&
.". 1/ iiJe.,;J n-&-
6/,(.15".
re?<,l"~
Po //c:I
.
I
I
.
~
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the above invoice regarding the Courtenay Bay causeway is the last
appearance of that project in relation to payments, to come before Council; that is, does the said invoice finish
what was planned to be done. Making negative reply, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the items dealing with the
contractor completing the project, for example, have not been completed. He added that the City is still negot-
iating with the contractor on the penalty clauses; the above named invoice is on the C. N. R. signals being
relocated. Councillor Green asked what information is available on what assistance will be forthcoming in the
repair of the causeway regarding damages that were sustained in the severe storm on February 2nd last. Mr.
MacKinnon replied that a meeting was held this past week to finalize the costs on the causeway; in the process of
computing the cost, the City, in turn, had a figure on it showing a design that the City wanted the completed
causeway to look like, and the Federal Government in placing costs for the emergency damage that was done were
arguing, he thinks, about the City's particular design, and, at the moment, that figure has yet to be completed;
Mr. Remete, the City's engineer who has been dealing with this matter, called the Province just prior to this
Council meeting, and the Provincial person the City was dealing with was not in at the time, but it is hoped to
have more information tomorrow on that - as soon as the completed information is available, the staff will come
back to Council with it.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City 11anager, advising that tenders
closed on May 20th, 1976 for athletic facilities at Shamrock Park, and all tenders received were found to be in
compliance with the tendering procedures, and that all contractors submitted a bid on the installation of a
sprinkler system and the necessary service connection and that the price of W. E. Kelly Ltd. for same, which is
$9,000.00, is the lowest among the three received for a sprinkler system - and recommending that the tender be
awarded to the low bidder, namely, W. E. Kelly Ltd., in the amount of $212,900.00 for the building and $9,000.00
for the sprinkler system -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
The Mayor asked what prices for the sprinkler system were received from the other two bidders on the
Shamrock Park athletic facilities building. Mr. Barfoot and Mr. McCaig advised that this information was not
available at the moment at the meeting, but that it can be obtained.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table until the above requested
information is provided for the Council.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
Councillor M. Vincent suggested that as the senior members of the Saint John Police Department are
involved in an arbitration case and in the event the Council would have some questions it might like to direct to
the Chief of Police or Deputy Chief of Police, the Council might consider tabling the 1975 annual report of the
Police Department for one week so they might be present and can answer questions the Council members may have.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the 1975 annual report of the Police Department be laid on
the table for one week until the Chief of Police or the Deputy Chief of Police are available to answer any
questions the Council members may have with regard to the said report.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager in reply to the request made
at the Council meeting of April 5th, 1976 for a report as to what is going to be done about vacant and dilapidated
buildings in the city, advising that since that time various departments have been meeting and looking into the
current procedures for handling this problem which is a very complex one; and submitting a report prepared by
the Commissioner of Community Planning and Development which details the current status of vacant and dilapidated
buildings, the causes of the problem, the legal instruments relative to vacant and dilapidated buildings, and
what steps should be taken to improve the present procedures in dealing with the problem - and noting that it
should be emphasized that the list of properties attached to the said report of Mr. Zides was compiled at the end
of April and since that time the status of many of these properties has changed, and that should the Council
adopt the policy recommendations as presented, it is intended that a current list of properties recommended for
demolition will be brought to Council; and further advising that the City Manager has reviewed the submitted
recommendations with Mr. Zides, with the Fire Chief, and with the City Solicitor, and there is an agreement on
procedure - and noting that with respect to title searches, the City Solicitor advised the City Manager that he
has already obtained additional assistance in this area, which will greatly expedite the legal procedures in-
volved -- and recommending that the said submitted policies on vacant and dilapidated buildings be adopted by
Common Council -- be received and the necessary recommendations implemented.
Councillor M. Vincent expressed his thanks to the City staff for having brought in the above requested
report. He stated that he is concerned about two points: one is that he thinks we will find, upon a closer
examination, that there a great many more than the number of buildings that are mentioned in the report to the
City Manager - more than the 68 buildings, and more than the other 38 mentioned - he felt that that information
can be easily corroborated; more importantly than that, he is pleased to see that some thought was given to what
can be done about it - if was for that reason that he raised this matter - again, realizing that the situation
existed, there was not much sense in letting it go by without trying to get some action to be taken. He asked if
Mr. Zides feels, in his opinion, there is sufficient staff in the appropriate City departments to carry out the
recommendations Mr. Zides is bringing forward in this report. Mr. Zides replied that it is combination of things
here, because this is obviously going to mean a great deal of work but it will cut across several departments,
one of which will be the Community Planning and Development Department - another one would be the Legal Depart-
ment - and if we take the route that is now being adopted, the Fire Department and probably the Provincial Fire
Marshal's Office - he cannot speak for them all - one of the things that has happened here, in the meantime, is
that the Legal Department has made arrangements to have somebody do some of these title searches which is a first
step. He stated that he thinks there is no intimation from the Fire Department that they need more people - at
least not to him. He stated that he believes that some of this shows up a lack of enforcement through the Community
Planning and Development Department and has to do with its relationship, first of all, with its own staff situation
and ultimately with the Legal Department. He stated that he will not speak for the Legal Department, but in his
own case, he thinks that the Department of Community Planning and Development we need one person who can be
allotted full time to enforcement of these kinds of problems and other by-law problems. He recalled that this
was agreed to in principle by the Council but has been deleted this year because of budgetary restrictions;
however, he stated that he believes this is a first step. Councillor M. Vincent stated that his reason for
asking the question was twofold in that he sees no sense in passing recommendations or accepting reports if we
are going to end up two months from now raising complaints about the work not being done if we know at the time
482
~
pplt.cy re
a./la f/ir;t at-t!?,/
4- Y.;JCDJJ1-r
bltK'~.s.
~u.i/a/J?~
.Lhsp~7ft?r
~/re ::t>apf-
; hspec-E()/'s
71e~ab/~ .;rf-it7J?
PI" P(enJf?I/'~/t?h
or:' ot.t //oI/J?ffs
we are adopting the report that we cannot carry it out. He stated that his other point is that he raiseq
that question in the Personnel Committee and he was given the impression at that time that excluding the
Legal Department, because of the legal build-up there, that we would probably have enough staff to show i
some tangible results, if we adopted those recommendations. He asked Mr. Zides if he was correct in that
impression. Mr. Zides replied that one of the recommendations here is that we add to the Department of '
Community Planning and Development by bringing someone in to deal with by-law enforcement. Councillor M.
Vincent commented that in suggesting in his motion that the necessary recommendations be adopted he would
point out to the rest of Council that that includes that additional person to make this applicable - it '
~as not just accepting recommendations to carry out work - it a recommendation regarding additional staff
in the department Mr. Zides has mentioned. Councillor MacGowan stated that it is for that reason that she
is wondering if the Council should not be taking these recommendations, one after another, because 4(c)
says "aim at improved and enlarged inspection staff...." which may not necessarily be one - it could
possibly be six - and she thinks the Council should look at that. She'added that recommendation 6 is the
one that she thinks that the Council must get moving on immediately, and that she thinks that "the City
could seek legislation which will authorize a simple form of notice...", and that she thinks that this is
something that the Council must take action on immediately - she urged that the Council not fool around.
She added that she thinks that is most important - more important than all the rest (the other recom-
mendations) put together, perhaps. Referring to the recommendation (number 7) regarding vacating of
affected buildings, Councillor MacGowan stated that her concern is "it should therefore be continuing City
policy to maintain a register of existing rentable housing stock.....", and that she hopes that this
recommendation means that this would be properties that are available - that the City is not going to get
involved in purchasing. Mr. Zides confirmed that that is correct. Councillor MacGowan stated that she '
feels this needs to be pointed out because the City does not want to buy properties and use them for
emergency housing because they turn into permanent housing. Mr. Zides pointed out that he has said it
might be possible in other buildings which the City might have, here and there, which are not really
suitable for long-term occupancy, to put people in in case of emergency - if we develop a programme to
that end. He confirmed that that is what he had in mind in the said recommendation 7, "it should there-
fore be continuing City policy to maintain a register of existing rentable housing stock, to seek such
available housing if necessary, and to consider the provision of short-term and non-permanent accommo-
dations for emergency situations". Councillor MacGowan stated that she thinks this is something that
needs a lot of discussion because we have had emergency housing before and it has not proven too satis-
factory, so she thinks that the Council should be taking these recommendations, one at a time.
Councillor Gould referred to recommendation 2 which deals with City inspections and reporting,
"it. should be City policy to approve optimum co-ordination between various City agencies to the point of
joint inspections but with the appropriate staff final reporting to the relevant authority, that is
Councilor the Provincial Fire Marshal; as the case may require", and which recommends same in view of the
fact that current laws provide for decentralized regulation and control of dilapidated buildings. He '
asked if, by making this recommendation, Mr. Zides is saying that there is little, or none, or what have
you, optimum co-ordination between the departments. He stated that he would think that if the Fire
Department had just made a check on a building that they might let ~IT. Zides know or that Mr. Zides might,
be telling them that there is a building they should check. Mr. Zides replied that that is exactly what
he is saying. Councillor Gould noted that Mr. Zides is recommending that, and stated that he wants to
know why it is not taking place, now. Mr. Zides stated that he cannot answer that, except that we are
bringing it together by agreement of the parties involved. Referring to recommendation 4(b), dealing with
conservation of buildings, which states that "it should be City policy (because the loss of buildings by
fire and demolition reduce usable building space, housing accommodations and tax revenue) to ...(b) extend
the inspection and enforcement of the Minimum Residential Property Standards By-Law to the whole City... ''',
Councillor Gould stated that he was not aware than when the Council passed the said By-Law that it applied
to only sectional part of the city. Mr. Zides replied that there are people doing standards in the South:
End and in the North End, and there are standards applicable but not really being enforced to the extent '
that they might be in the rest of the city - the recommendation in the said section is to enforce them in
the rest of the city, and the By-Law already exists for doing so.
Councillor Higgins observed that this is too fine a report and that the Council was getting
bogged down on one item. He stated that what he would like to see is the adoption of this report in order
to get the procedures under way - and, since the Council will be expecting an up-dated list that the '
Council might very well expect, at the same time, a report from the City Manager after consultation with
the various members of City staff as to how best to implement the addition of another person or a person
within the present structure to carry out Mr. Zides' recommendation.
Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Zides: in your report, you are making reference to several City:
departments, and, for clarification purposes, Councillor M. Vincent wants to know that it is not the '
intention of the author of this report or of the departments involved to lessen the identity of any
department but to have them more closely associated to accomplish their objectives -- is that correct?
Mr. Zides confirmed that that is correct.
Councillor Parfitt spoke of the complexities that are involved in endeavouring to accomplish
demolition of properties that are dilapidated.
Councillor Davis advised that the Organizational Report does create a position for a by-law
inspection person, and that person is an enforcement person who enforces by-laws other than the ones with:
which the Council was now dealing. He stated that he thinks that, for the present, if we have the co-
operation of all the departments - and he noted that it appears that we have - the staff that the Building
Inspector has and the inspectors on the Fire Department should be able to co-ordinate their efforts for
six months and really clean up ninety per cent of the problem. He pointed out that the by-law enforcemen~
officer is needed to enforce these by-laws and many others that are on the City's books that we cannot
really get at -- so, he does not think the Council should confuse the two. He stated that, at the moment;
he feels that we have added something like two inspectors to the Fire Department, and he is sure that the~
Fire Chief and the Building Inspector will get together because this report results from the co-operation:
of all concerned, and he is sure that it will continue. Mr. Zides pointed out that the staff is not '
stressing the knocking down of buildings - they are stressing enforcement and the attempt to rehabilitate,
to save buildings where possible, and that is going to take a little bit more cajoling than we are able to
do, with the present staff.
Councillor MacGowan asked if seeking legislation is automatically included in the acceptance of:
the recommendations in the above named report. The Mayor made affirmative reply, stating: everything that
is on the report. Mr. Rodgers stated that he does not read it that way - that the adoption of the said
report is authorizing the City to seek legislation, as it says, in simpler form, with respect to notifying
owners - maybe the City Manager intended Council to seek legislation, and he could probably clarify it.
Mr. Barfoot explained that the reference (in the said report) as to seeking legislation - it 'says in
recommendation 6, for instance, "Ultimately, ...." which is a subsequent phase, he thinks, depending on
how the first part goes - he does not think there was any intention in this report to immediately look for
legislation on any of these items. Councillor MacGowan stated that her personal feeling is that it is a '
good recommendation and why fool around with it - why not get the simpler form, because this is what has I
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"'"'
483
.
l~e5l/:ft-/a
Jlroee"/U/'1t?
I"t: d/j(;.)>/-
d~-t-e~ .9/~
,u6ees 1ft>
.d}j/peOl/"
I r:I1fPl-/<?J?
/",$-1-)
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
been creating the problems - and it will cut down on the legal fees - she thinks it is an excellent recommendation.
Mr. Zides advised that he might have written something twice as long as this (what is in the report) and that
some of the problems are very complicated. He stated that the thing that startled him is the fact that some of
the very problems that the City staff raised still had not been overcome, which deals with demolitions under the
Fire Prevention Act. He stated that the Provincial Fire Marshal's office are looking at some of these very
problems and are supposed to be in the middle of some of these points, and he suggested that it might well be that
the Council should see how they make out, and come back to them - and this is why he used the term "ultimately"
in this case, because it might be necessary to go with the route he is suggesting on the other hand, it might
not; if the Provincial Fire Marshal and other people in the Province would have to serve notice on property
owners and find some other new technique, maybe it will be extended to municipalities - he does not know.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the City of Saint John seek legislation which will authorize
a simple form of notice such as to the person or persons who appear as owners on the Provincial assessment rolls
or on the Land Registration and Information Service's property owner's identification list, in regard to dem-
olition proceedings.
Mr. Rodgers pointed out that there are two types of legislation: private and public - that the Legis-
lative Assembly can enact. He stated that if the above motion means that the City seek a private Bill affecting
Saint John only that is one thing, but if she means some public Act in the Province - like the Registry Act - be
amended to include all the Pr~vince and make the serving of notices simpler, that is another question. Coun-
cillor MacGowan stated that she does not care which way it is done, as long as it is done in the City of Saint
John - if the Province wants to pursue it further and pay for the Province, that is alright, that is up to the
Province, but her concern right now is that the City of Saint John is the one with the problems and goes through
all this "red tape" and is told why it cannot demolish buildings and that the owners cannot be found - and she
suggested even advertising, but that does not do it - so, let us get on, so we can do it, fast, instead of
spending a lot of money on legal fees. Mr. Rodgers replied that it is not "red tape", it is protection to the
property owners. Councillor MacGowan stated that she is trying to overcome some of this. Councillor Cave com-
mented that he thinks the matter of legislation should be referred to the Fire Marshal to take more appropriate
action. He added that, in his opinion, the Fire Marshal is slipping up on these cases. Councillor Kipping
stated that he sees the above motion that the City seek legislation as a very simple proposition that the City
try to find the appropriate type of legislation which will help simplify this very complex and very expensive
procedure which the City goes through, right now - consistent with the necessary protection of the City's legal
position which the City Solicitor will be in the only position to know, from among the Council members - the City
Solicitor will know what that protection is - so, let us go on with this matter. Councillor M. Vincent offered
the following comments, noting that they might be helpful to the Council: first of all, the City of Saint John,
other than a by-law that was dated back in the 1920's, has no authority to tear down buildings in the City of
Saint John under any other section of any Act other than that; the authority of the City of Saint John has to
demolish buildings stems from a Provincial Act known as the Fire Marshal's Act of the Province of New Brunswick;
the City of Saint John has no inspectors other than representatives of the Saint John Fire Department who are
eligible to enforce the provisions of that Act, and that authority, however, is vested in the Fire Prevention
Bureau of the City of Saint John; the problem to which the City Solicitor is referring is the fact that if the
City of Saint John is going to have its own legislation, Councillor M. Vincent would rather suspect it is in for
a very expensive route to accomplish that, both in terms of getting the legislation and enforcing it after it has
been adopted; there is an excellent working relationship between the City of Saint John Fire Department and
representatives of the Provincial Fire Marshal's Office and, at the present time, the authority vested in the
Fire Department and in the Provincial Fire Marshal's Office enables the City of Saint John to get a certain
amount of work done legally without having its own by-laws or its own enforcement agency -- and he would suggest,
as has been suggested to the Council, that rather than passing a motion now to have separate legislation that it
be delayed until the problems that are being discussed between the City staff and the Fire Marshal's Office are
concluded, and that it might be a lot of money saved to the City and perhaps be a more expedient way in getting
the work done. Councillor Kipping felt that this is entirely contradictory to what has been said in Mr. Zides'
memorandum, which memorandum states that there appears to be at least four separate legal instruments operating
in the City relative to vacant and dilapidated buildings, and he noted that the memorandum names these different
Acts, some of Which have to do with demolition, he felt. Councillors M. Vincent and Davis replied that they do
not have to do with demolition. Councillor MacGowan noted that the memorandum states that the City Solicitor
prefers either the Act of 1925 or the Fire Prevention Act over the Unsightly Premises Act. Councillor Kipping
noted that there are two contradictory opinions: that of Mr. Zides in writing, and Councillor M. Vincent's
experience with the Fire side of it and perhaps the Fire Marshal's legislation side of it, which is only one of
four, according to what Mr. Zides has said -- according to Councillor Kipping's interpretation of the memorandum.
Mr. Rodgers advised that of the four, two are very relevant - the Fire Prevention Act which is a Provincial
public statute, and the 1925 Act which is private legislation for the City of Saint John, which is what Councillor
M. Vincent was referring to; under these two Acts, in the City Solicitor's opinion, there is sufficient authority
to order buildings demolished if proper procedures are taken; with respect to.the Residential Properties Stand-
ards By-Law and the Dangerous and Dilapidated Buildings By-Law, he stated that he would not recommend that
Council get involved with demolishing buildings under those two by-laws when there are two statutes available.
He stated that the said statutes are safer for both parties concerned. Councillor Kipping maintained that that
is not what is being proposed. Mr. Zides explained that what is being proposed is just what is being said at
this meeting. He stated that he mentioned four different pieces of legislation that cut across vacant and
dilapidated buildings - he has not said all that might and can be used for knocking down buildings; he added that
he has also ended up by saying that the staff recommends that the City go the Fire Prevention Act route, using
the 1925 Act in the few odd cases where buildings should be demolished but not due to fire preventative or fire
safety aspects; the other two he mentioned as being effectual or in a marginal way - you can knock down a building
under the Unsightly Premises By-Law, but he mentioned in there, as well, that the City Solicitor does not feel
that is the route to go; he stated that he mentioned that the other by-law is the Minimum Residential Properties
because it results sometimes in the vacating of buildings. Councillor MacGowan asked Mr. Zides: so, you see no
need whatsoever, right now, of the above motion? Mr. Zides replied that he would prefer to wait and see how the
Fire Marshal makes out. Councillor MacGowan asked: if we were to table it - for how long? In reply, Mr. Zides
stated that he thinks until after presumably the spring sitting of the Legislature. He suggested that the motion
of Councillor MacGowan be tabled until after the present spring session of the Legislature. The Council members
decided to take the vote on the said motion, although Councillor MacGowan offered to propose a motion to table
this matter.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with only Councillors MacGowan and Kipping voting "yea".
Councillor MacGowan expressed the hope that the above matter will be brought out again, and she sug-
gested that maybe Mr. Zides will bring it out again, at the right time.
The Mayor advised that the requested information has been obtained pertaining to the tenders for
athletic facilities at Shamrock Park, which report had been laid on the table earlier in this meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
time.
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named matter be taken from the table at this
! 484
I
7e"uJ'? .,q e~
$Adh7~p~k p~Jo,
~~~pu$e '11-
S/r'j:L7ii. r s~~
U/J;, . e/(y j(-t-A
C!/iy .5t?I/(:!'lror
s.:J:IIs~, (Pmh'?
~- kw J"e
<1dee>n?n?e>k 'c-/o.
s -t- .;;Jnd'dJ-otf!t' $
C/iy /IJ~~.
C"hlm, hnClI?~
Mr. Barfoot advised that the requested information regarding the sprinkler system is as fol~
ows:- W. E. Kelly Ltd. bid $9,000.00, John Flood & Sons (1961) Ltd. bid $14,287.00, and Rocca Const-
Ltd. bid $16,500.00.
Question being taken, the motion to award the tender for the above named athletic facilities
ork at Shamrock Park, to W. E. Kelly Ltd., as was moved earlier in the meeting by Councillor Higgins, aqd
seconded by Councillor M. Vincent, was carried.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter, dated May 27th, 1976, from the City
Solicitor to whom had been referred for study and a report the correspondence from the Saint John Housing
Commission to Council on May 17th last containing a draft proposal of a by-law respecting accommodations
standards, which draft proposal of the by-law the Housing Commission will be recommending to Council for,
adoption if legislation is obtained from the Provincial Government -- advising that he has examined the
proposed Accommodation Standard Control of Rents By-Law in light of the provincial Residential Rent Review
Act, which is proclaimed and is now law in the Province, and the proposed Residential Tenancies Act, which
has not yet been proclaimed, and that he does not see any similarities between the proposed private
legislation and the non-proclaimed Residential Tenancies Act - however, there is a similarity between the
Residential Rent Review Act, which is now in force in the Province and the proposed private legislation ~_
and citing pertinent details of the said Act and said proposed by-law in this regard -- and stating that,
however, with these similarities in existence, Council may still seek private legislation, if it so
wishes, and 'if private legislation is granted as proposed, Council will then have the authority to enact 'a
by-law to control this matter - but, before seeking such legislation, he believes the Council ought to b~
aware of these similarities, and also re~uest in-put from the City Manager and the Commissioner of Finance
with respect to such policy and costs associated with administering such a programme at the local level
be received and filed and referred to the City Manager and the Commissioner of Finance for a report.
Councillor MacGowan proposed an amendment to the above motion, that the said letter from the
City Solicitor be received and filed and referred to the City Manager and the Commissioner of Finance for
a report, and that, at the same time, the City seek legislation in this regard. She explained that the
Bill can be withdrawn if the Council finds such legislation is not what we want, but if it is what we want
we are wasting time in not applying for legislation now. There was no seconder to the proposed amendIDent'
to the motion.
Councillor Parfitt expressed the view that there is effective legislation now, that can deal
with these problems, and that the City only.has to enforce the legislation, and she felt that the sug-
gestion made by the Housing Commission is mere duplication in some things, according to her assessment,
and according to what the City Solicitor's letter has to say about the fact that there is a similarity
between the Residential Rent Review Act and this proposed private legislation. Mr. Rodgers advised that,;
a few months back, the Housing Commission recommended that the Council seek this piece of private legis- ,
lation to authorize the Council to adopt the by-law in this matter, and that it was referred to him for a'
recommendation and a report and he said he did not have enough information to comment on it, and the
Housing Commission then came back with a proposed by-law that the Commission would wish Council to adopt !
if private legislation was granted; he added that the Council is free to go for private legislation and if
Fredericton grants that legislation the Council would then have the authority to enact the by-law -
however, he believes that Council should be aware of those similarities that exist between the proposed
by-law and what is in force now in the Province under a Provincial statute. He stated that he is not
recommending that the Council do not go, or that it do go - this is a policy matter and it should come
from the City Manager, but the Council should be aware of the similarities. The Mayor noted that the
difference was that in the Provincial legislation, they state the amount that you can increase your rent I
over a previous period, but what we were looking for was something that would divide the rent into stages:
as to the condition of the accommodations you were receiving - it was an open-ended in that if you had a
first-class accommodation the market stated the price, but now the Government has controlled that end of
it, so our problem was to get it divided as they are doing, he thinks, in the neighbourhood Improvement
Programme where they are controlling it, where if you get so much money you are allowed after you are i
finished it to a certain degree you charge so much. Mr. Buck confirmed that this is the principal that i~
employed regarding the said Programme referred to by the Mayor. Councillor MacGowan stated that it was
the feeling of the Housing Commission today that while the report is being prepared by the City Manager
and the Commissioner of Finance, as requested in the above motion, we could seek legislation, to save
time - and if we find from the City Manager and the said Commissioner that it is not practical, we could
always withdraw the legislation Bill, and no harm would be done, but we are wasting time because this
matter has been before Council for over a year. Councillor Davis pointed out that the Council has just i
had debate on the problem of enforcing dilapidated by-laws and all those other by-laws and the problem of,
hiring new staff to enforce these by-laws, and he stated that he thinks it is an exercise in impotency to:
pass a by-law that cannot be enforced. He therefore suggested that the Council wait for a while until the
Protection Committee and everyone else gets through with the problem that we have now, before we add more:
He stated that he feels there is very little to be gained by going after legislation that ultimately is
cancelled before completed - in other words, the Council is doing something, just in case, and he does not
think you do that with legislation. Councillor Hodges noted that the Act that has not been proclaimed as
yet practically covers everything that the proposed by-law would cover, and stated that he does not
understand what the Housing Commission is after. The Mayor replied that he believes that this will do it
now; he added that the Housing Commission was really after the grading of houses. Councillor Hodges '
replied that the said non-proclaimed Act covers that. Councillor Parfitt expressed the view that in the
next year the housing picture will be changing so that people can be selective and she felt that with
substandard housing the landlords will be forced to up-grade that housing if they want to keep it re-
ntable, and she thinks that in a se~uence of things, it will correct itself. Councillor Kipping stated
that he, too, had thought of the same question expressed by Councillor Hodges, and that he satisfied it by
thinking that that is why the Council is passing the matter to the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Finance, so that they can tell Council whether the proposed legislation actually covers the problems that,
the City has. Councillor Higgins noted that the said City officials also will tell the Council the cost, ,
if the City runs it itself.
On motion of Councillor Cave
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter, dated May 28th, 1976, from the City
~/'~ ~ ;jel'~ Solicitor, advising that the Garbage By-Law does not presently contain a minimum penalty, and that he '
~ 0 I Or recommends that the said by-law be amended to contain a minimum penalty of $25.00, and that he is also
6?~';~~;r~ ~- recommending a provision in the by-law which will allow a person who violates the by-law to pay the ' , .
, . ::ilminimum penalty to the Police if he so wishes, without further prosecution action; and further advising
n?1J71n?~ ~)?~~~~that he is also recommending that the Anti-litter By-Law be amepded to allow a person to pay the minimum
penalty, if he so wishes -- be received and filed and the said recommendations be adopted.
.{/Her:Ey-.4 '
h1;l1imHPI pen_#.
~
I /fJ;I5Ier m
.Ex~m;>>iht/
If/ds~r ~
/Ieel?sf"!s
:M,,?ss ~~
~~,,~// ~
~ ~~h? Read a letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee which recommends that (a) left turns be prohibited
~~'J,1~ from City Road to Meadow Street and to and from City Road at the Saint John Shopping Centre (Save-Easy Plaza) at
7i: ~ S~ Haymarket Square, and that (b) business establishment located in the Plaza be approached on the matter of paying
... na .~ ~ the estimated cost of $5,000.00 for extending the median in a westerly direction from the existing contract
~ tc~ ~~~. limits so as to create a physical barrier to prevent left turns and in lieu of curbing or eliminating the ent-
~~ 4( ~ ranee to the Plaza at City Road -- and advising that the Committee makes these recommendations to Council in
~"IP~~ _ order to improve traffic operations at Haymarket Square and to improve safety conditions at Meadow Street which
sf5h '. is located at a blind knoll where left turns are dangerous. Mr. Barfoot advised that he thinks that the City
cj,~brl(;lJf. _ staff have a few questions on these Committee recommendations.
m.ilrKef- J.;fJ
'p/'Pj,j6"~
"'"
.6k...t~e
.11~-~w
1/IJ/l?iI'1'}UoP?
lJen.;;;/-I-ff
I
. t1It"'ih'l~m
Pe~OJlty
'Pldh,J, Ildv/s
C"h7/'W.
~!f~enr in
/;eet ~f1v.M'
pU,,?ose '
/C1 nd
IJJet{4/,fPJ?
,(..;uu{ Su-J-
~/v.
~J/k ~GJMe.
s-t-dy
.
I
.....
485
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide
for the Collection of Garbage in The City of Saint John", be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide for the Collection of
Garbage in The City of saint John".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled,"A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to
Provide for the Collection of Garbage in The City of Saint John", be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide for the Collection of
Garbage in The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Gould
the
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law
Throwing or Depositing of Litter on Streets in The City of
By-Law to Amend a By-Law Prohibiting
be read a first time.
entitled, "A
Saint John",
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Prohibiting the Throwing or De-
of Litter on Streets in The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Prohibiting
the Throwing or Depositing of Litter on Streets in The City of Saint John", be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Prohibiting the Throwing or Depositinl
of Litter on Streets in The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recommending
that the Common Council accept the sum of $496.00 in lieu of land for public purposes in respect to the sub-
division of Lot 8 in the DeWaldon Land Sub~division, and advising that this money is to be deposited in the
City's trust fund for the acquisition and development of land for public purposes, and advising that Lot 8 lies
between Green and Shallow Lakes south of Sunrise Road in the said Sub-division south of Dolan Lake and off the
Golden Grove Road, and that it is proposed to sub-divide. the five-acre Lot 8 into two equal areas on each of
which a home would be constructed; and further advising that the Real Estate Property Management Branch estimates
that the market value, before a sub-division, of any resulting new lot would be $6,200.00, and that at eight per
cent of that figure, the sum of $496.00 is payable to the City -- be ~eceived and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, stating
that the Committee has established a sub-committee which will examine the history and effects of mobile homes
being permitted within the City outside of mobile home parks and that this sub-committee will review past pol-
icies, historical information and may invite comments from interested parties; and further stating that, in the
meantime, the Committee has moved that it will entertain no further applications for the placement of mobile
homes outside of mobile home parks until the report of the sub-committee has been reviewed and adopted; and
further stating that the permanent placement of a mobile home is permitted under the Zoning By-Law at the dis-
cretion of the Planning Advisory Committee and that this usually follows a review of the location and notice and
consideration of the views of the neighbouring property owners; and further stating that it is the intent of the
Committee to publish a notice in the newspaper so that the general public will be advised of what is happening
with an invitation to submit briefs to the sub-committee within the next several weeks -- be received and filed.
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Zides advised that only new mobile home placement proposals will be
deferred for consideration until the report of the above named sub-committee has been reviewed and adopted.
Also, during the discussion, Councillor Kipping broached the question of why the Planning Advisory Committee
could not also have the power to authorize temporary placement of mobile homes, as well as the power to authorize
permanent placement of mobile homes, and thus relieve the Council of the chore of dealing with applications for
such temporary placement permission. Mr. Zides pointed out that it would require an amendment to the Munici-
palities Act. Councillor Cave asked how long it would be before a report might be expected from the said sub-
committee, bearing in mind that an emergency might arise and that under compassionate grounds, we have no other
alternative but to extend existing mobile home permissions because there is no other place for these people to
go. Mr. Zides replied that he does not think that the intent is to do anything about mobile homes that are there
now - we are talking about new applications. He anticipated that the report would be received in less than a
year to six months.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letters dated May 14th and 31st, 1976 from the I~ster
lumbers' Examining Board, advising that Messrs. James Lawton of the Old Black River Road and Raymond Harquail
702 Highmeadow Park, and Mr. Barry McManus of 19 Woodward Avenue, have successfully passed the recent Master
Plumbers' examinations, and recommending that their applications be approved and a 1976 license be issued to
them, be received and filed and the recommendations adopted.
of
486
~
7j&;,N?/c. ~
$,;;> /'d-!f Cb.mh?
(se~ ~ ~f!fi")
s.J: S~o'p~h7ff
e"n~J'le rSOlvt!?-
~$~)
/I.;J~ """'''ff'?~~9'"-
/J1e~I:t't?W ~T":
C/-&:f 7(,,1,
lJI/ae~OJ;'''~ .zvvA',
?:iI9.1t?r /1 ye. .
"P.ill'>Ir/n~ t:wer-
n/ h-t-: fil?-
~,.ee:t-: ~'Q
Vii nd"..;i/ /s 11?
"P/?//~~ 2>t'lJ
S.;r.II.s~,HU1
,(1.r1!n~ f7I!
park/~ .5~S
:8u. S 5 ~, /.IS
/OCDI -t-/fI n
TN:lJJsporCO/~iQn
(} p~P7,
J3U5 :5he/u/'.
City 7i.ah$/~
A-6,c.
aHQ. /IJ~~/J?$
~t?Oh A/?J?;I1h4
1///101 $/',
C'lil;?e'ls
PP~;"l!' :lJerd:
?::r/;ot?1 COIl"
~,..I-A Fn",
C/J1'e~ orPt?/"~e
KKee SS
TI"'d 1'~/t: Slffl1S,
pClvtlh;en{- marl--
/n~S, e-t-c.
eph7Pl,k,,!rff'~
t(/pPk$
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Traffic and Safety
Committee be turned over to the City staff for their recommendation.
Councillor Kipping asked that the City. staff consider for clarification the question as to how,
one gets into the Save-Easy shopping centre coming from the west. It was noted that the City staff is
going to look at that question. Councillor Kipping noted that the City staff also might clarify where
Meadow Street is, and that it is not visible on any of the maps that are available for sale in the city
and are readily available to the public. He stated that a third question which might be considered also;
is a clarification of why business establishments located in the Plaza would be asked to share in the cost
of extending the median in a westerly direction, and he noted that it seems an unusual procedure.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee,
recommending that requests to staff from residents of MacLaren Boulevard and Taylor Avenue to permit
overnight parking on these streets be denied, and advising that the Committee makes this recommendation
because it feels that vandalism taking place in the parking areas located at the rear of Saint John
Housing Authority building does not warrant on-street parking, and that vandalism should be curbed by
proper supervision, lighting and enforcement and city streets should not be used for parking when off-
street parking is available, be received and filed, referred to the Police Department for enforcement of
no on-street parking in that area and that the Saint John Housing Authority be asked to provide all-night
lighting at the rear of the said Authority's buildings in question.
Councillor Kipping stated that last week, prior to the making up of this Council agenda, he ,had
a call from a local resident in the MacLaren Boulevard area who mentioned that there seemed to be quite a
drive on by the Police to enforce the no on-street parking rule and that tickets were being handed out
quite severely quite often, thus providing pretty good enforcement; the point the caller made was that
there was one compassionate case there - some person who cannot walk any distance and has to be wheeled tp
and from the car and, apparently, it could not be done from the back lot at least without great difficulty.
He stated that he presumes that the Traffic and Safety Committee did consider that case - if, indeed the
caller got her information to them as Councillor Kipping recommended she do to that Committee. He stated
that he just wanted to be sure, before the Council throws it back, that this kind of thing might be '
considered, although he knows it is difficult and it throws the whole thing off.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee
recommending that bus stops in the city be installed at mid-block locations so as not to interfere with
traffic at intersections and for greater pedestrian safety and that the Transportation Committee be so
advised, be referred to the City staff for a report, and that a copy of the said letter be sent to the
Transportation Committee for its information.
Councillor Kipping pointed that the improving of the type of bus shelter in the city is a
pressing need and he asked if the Council is going to do anything about that. He stated that he knows it,
costs money - he asked if some kind of consideration can be given to this problem, at the same time. The:
Mayor pointed out that the Committee's letter is with reference to location of bus stops, and Councillor
Kipping is talking about condition of bus shelters. Councillor Kipping felt that because of the poor
\
condition of many of these bus shelters and if the bus stops are to be moved, maybe it is the time, if we:
are ever going to do anything about up-grading the bus stop shelters, to do it now, or at the same time
the bus stops are moved. The Mayor replied that the staff can make note of this question, and the cost of
the shelters and who is going to pay for such shelters. Councillor Cave noted that the City would be
involved in the moving of the bus stops because they would have to move them at the City's expense. He
recalled that the Council had a requested on January 12th, 1976, with reference to the request received '
from senior citizens at Loch Lomond Villa for a bus shelter on Ellerdale Street, that a meeting take plac~
between a member of City staff and the executive of the Lions Club to discuss the problem of this re- '
quested bus shelter and to report back to Council regarding the mutual requirements, and, also, that
Deputy Mayor Higgins and Councillor A. Vincent were appointed a committee with regard to obtaining this
bus shelter at no cost to the City. He noted that with the warm weather now here, that bus shelter should'
be provided on Ridge Street, as requested by the senior citizens. Councillor Kipping stated that he
understands that it is the responsibility of City Transit Limited to provide bus stops. Mr. Barfoot
replied that the bus shelters are the City's problem, and that he believes it comes within the juris-
diction of the Transportation Committee to work out suitable locations for bus stops - it is part of the
operation of the bus system. Deputy Mayor Higgins, in reply to Councillor Cave's reference to the bus
shelter that was requested by the senior citizens, advised that there is going to be evidently some
radical changes made in that corner at Loch Lomond Road and that was the reason for the hold-up regarding
the bus shelter. He added that he will follow this matter through.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee,
strongly recommending to Council that another police patrol car be assigned to the North End of the City
to assist the one unit presently patrolling the entire area, and advising that the Committee makes this
recommendation for the safety and protection of citizens and property against vandalism and to assist
police officers in crime prevention in the following north end area:- north of the Viaduct to Millidge-
ville; west of Haymarket Square, Gilbert's Street; Rockwood Park; Douglas Avenue and Chesley Drive -- be
referred to the Chief of Police.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee.,
recommending that all unnecessary signs, pavement markings and other traffic control devices be elimin~
ated, with prudence, and advising that the Committee makes this recommendation because the present over-
signing of the City creates unsafe conditions for pedestrians and motorists by reducing the effectiveness
of legitimate and essential signs -- be referred to the City staff and to the Commissioner of Engineering,
and Works for a recommendation.
Councillor Pye stated that he finds the above rather an unusual request in view of the fact that
many traffic cases have been lost because of lack of sufficient signing; he felt the Committee's above ,
request is rather a contradictory situation. In reply to the question, llwhat is necessary!! regarding such:
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...
.
I
heass
-i-1'bI1f/e>
S/ffns,
pavement-
nldl>J-/h!lS'
et-c,
/naH;e~
Sa-l'el-;t
(!pm.ln.
I
a.lQ.m.,(J.
q-- fV',n s
.
I
.
IY//h/$MJ'I /)
lIewlf-A
(! oud-y
CCi/O /
I /Il/hlsier fJ-f
7<<d/ce
/('a'M~'/J
, -a"r
l/1tj~~
~A 1?L
h1r.1:<(j- /f/p,
JJept:
C7g'fcv I
::!J{,(.a~et-
/I!~~pr
. f/t'ckt!'!f 1?d
-P,;;wln.9
PJ1P~ ~Iff.
.-freil~ A1r
r,all n?-fce.
eH/es oF
fY,..:B.
lI....
40....
: .Q:&
signs, Mr. Barfoot stated that what is necessary is what is called for in the by-laws under the Motor Vehicle
Act, and only those necessary signs are put up as required by the various by-laws and regulations. Councillor M.
Vincent stated that he felt that the intent of the request of the Committee would be, perhaps, that in cases or
in places where there might be "stop" signs that are broken or where there might be speed signs that are down or
twisted around on poles so that they reflect to other streets and not to the streets for which they were orig-
inally intended, and where there were cases that street marking might still be there with.other marking over the
top of it - that it could cause confusion - and he thinks that this was the intent, that where this is in exis-
tence, that it be removed. Councillor MacGowan recalled that this was discussed at the meeting of The Cities of
New Brunswick and there are a lot of signs that the Province required that we put up and it was requested that
they make this.a little bit easier so that are not so repititious - and this would remove a lot of unnecessary
signs. Councillor Gould felt that it would seem strange that the above recommendation of the Committee would come
in as a very general recommendation. He asked: if the Committee has specifics, why does it not list them? He
felt that the Council should refer this letter back to the Committee and ask which signs the Committee is talking
about and their locations - and then City staff will determine whether they are redundant, or not. Councillor
Hodges asked for an explanation of "pavement markings" that the Committee's letter refers to. Mr. MacKinnon
advised that the reference is more specific to signs such as, "caution", "Children playing", or speed signs in
the areas where the speed limit is known to be 30 m.p.h. - for example, the speed is 30 any place in the City
limits except those areas that are so designated as 40 m.p.h. zones or, there may be a 20 m.p.h. zone, he bel-
ieves - all other areas are 30 m.p.h. zones. He stated that quite a number of calls are being received, part-
icularly at this time of the year, for speed signs to be erected on back streets, main streets, side street - any
street at all - merely to tell the residents on that street what the speed limit is - the requests are for
"caution", "children playing", or "advance, cross-walks", or "advance, school zones", et cetera - and the intent
here is that the signing, in most cases, is really for the people living in the residential areas who are driving
their own cars, and it is meant to protect the children of the people who are driving the cars, he supposes, and
we do not see the validity in putting up all of these signs. He stated that at the present time there are some
10,000 signs in the city and more and more of them are going up, and the staff is trying to control these signs
so that they are confined to the standards set out by the Province, and they are only in those locations where
they are actually required. He stated that with regard to the reference to cross-walks or pavement markings:
again, people are calling for cross-walks where they are advantageous for their children to cross streets, and
the City staff, in turn, are trying to put them where they are beneficial for the intersections, and he supposes
they are more pointed towards the control of not only the vehicular traffic but the pedestrian traffic rather
than having cross-walks at any location, and many of the present ones are not in good locations; they should be
in locations where they can be seen, he thinks, by motorists. He stated that this can also be referred to the
bus stops, which should be in locations where pedestrians alighting from the bus can be seen from the bus and
they can then proceed to a cross-walk in safety. With regard to cross-walks, Councillor MacGowan stated that it
was brought to her attention yesterday the serious problem of crossing the street on the corner of Union and
Charlotte Streets, and she noted that there is no cross-walk on the southern side, there and there is no "walk"
light there for pedestrians. She asked if it is illegal for pedestrians to cross there. Mr. MacKinnon replied
that it is a difficult phasing of the traffic lights there - it is a four-way intersection but not for four-way
operation of traffic; there are three legs of that intersection that are only going in one direction - the other
leg is going in two directions; the pedestrians are going in every direction. Councillor MacGowan asked: should
the pedestrians be going in every direction, there? Mr. MacKinnon replied that there should be a different
controller there to control the traffic patterns and allow the pedestrians to cross, alone. He confirmed that
the City staff are looking into that particular situation, and he added that this is an old controller, and the
staff are looking at it. Councillor MacGowan then referred to the traffic lights at the corner of Union and
Sydney Streets, stating that citizens feel that they are not synchronized properly for pedestrians. She asked
that Mr. MacKinnon also check that, and she added that the citizens feel those lights may not be working pro-
perly. Mr. MacKinnon replied that this will be checked. In answer to Councillor MacGowan's query, Councillor Pye
stated that in relation to Union and Charlotte Streets intersection, the pedestrian has the right-of-way when the
traffic light is green, but in view of the fact that traffic is moving from three different directions at the
point, the pedestrian must proceed with caution in stepping into the cross-walk and if he suddenly darts into the
cross-walk, he does so at his own risk, but if there are no vehicles in sight and he uses caution and then he
steps into the cross-walk, that half of the cross-walk he is entitled to - the other portion of it belongs, of
course, to the car coming from the other side of the street. He stated that in relation to the junction of
Sydney, Waterloo and Union Streets, the pedestrian light there is not too slow - it is properly regulated - you
have to consider that you have motor vehicle traffic coming from three directions so the pedestrian has to be
patient - and most pedestrians are impatient - in fact, many pedestrians forget there is a button there to press,
to.facilitate matters for him. Councillor MacGowan stated that it is the button to which she refers.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Minister of Health of the Province of New
Brunswick in reply to Common Council resolution of March 29th last with respect to a thorough investigation into
the matter of antiquated, obsolete, inadequate, and overcrowded conditions at the County Gaol, with immediate
remedial action, advising that he has been in contact with the Minister of Justice concerning the suggested
review and that, as a result, members of the Health Department will be reviewing the conditions at the said Gaol
within the next few weeks and the Minister of Health shall be informing the Minister of Justice of the results,
and expressing his appreciation of the concern of the Mayor and members of the Common Council in this matter, be
received and filed and receipt acknowledged, and that the Minister of Health be informed that the Common Council
is anxiously awaiting his review of conditions in the Gaol and that the Council trusts that following that, we
will have the appropriate remedial action to correct the conditions of the Gaol, and that, hopefully, a new Gaol
will be the result.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Kathleen Carr of the Acamac Beach Road,
describing the present condition of the said Road, and also referring to the condition of the main road starting
just before entering the underpass and ending at the Castle, and urging that the necessary measures be taken to
rectify same, be referred to the Engineering and Works D~partment for a report.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if any money has been allowed this year in the Capital Budget for repair
work on the Acamac Beach Road. Mr. Barfoot replied in the negative, adding that there is some money in that
Budget for some maintenance on this Road, but for no major reconstruction and rebuilding of it.
The Mayor stated that he was out on the Hickey Road yesterday and noted that paving of that road is
being made, from in front of Century 21 and along by Simonds School, back as far as the Loch Lomond Road, and
that this is being done over fairly good pavement, and he asked for information on that work, noting that the
money used on that paving work could have been used to improve some other section, he would have thought, that is
down, like the Acamac Beach Road and some other roads that he has seen. Mr. Barfoot explained that that the
paving work on Hickey Road is the completion of the job - the base was put down in the previous year and now, the
seal has been put over, to finish the job. Councillor Parfitt asked if it is correct that, as discussed at the
recent meeting of The Cities of New Brunswick, there would be an announcement this week regarding some amounts to
be given for road maintenance. Mr. Barfoot replied that he would presume that is the Provincial Government's
48B
;P,.p~ G!od.
.Ira!?#- -flpp
1J~),We9.:ts mk.
/('qt-A/t!?~n (brr
Ilcah1pC' :l}e.ac.
'Rd.
C/-6-fj rp;}~ s
-take-oVer ..,q""
1/1"'0/1', G?-pvt:.
~/"/{PJ" /'~~s;
.I/~~PJ" //&Ince
Cerard 2JP~/;.
~fit.
1?es-Er/ ~l-il1~
hllmber t:J~
h91.t,r t7td/e&-$
f:li-6!f JP~t!/7fpr
e"mh?/H~
tt/hP/~
~hh7tJh C/erk
Spl't.eee: ~dFe/"~
PI' O/;;!f 81m,,;, yin.
,P",6//I/-te;{ (7/''I
t!/-t-!f
/J1iJ7/~p' #~1t1'b7
71(f!5P~~$
('I t!f .5",;;t:'ltoY'
-pJy(/, C-pvf;
S'p~ff/ Jo?!j Pan
7)epI. /0WIj.p;,.
tl/.;,ler su./,,P,y
iestflhff re
Sl'rd~;J?I{ ,
f7rn51~1 PhS
(}I't.ff . Sf7hi:l-tfJ'"
-<i9UP'" t7dle
h#fhJ~r I"t'sfr/c-
-c-iQn
,
assistance to provincial highways, and that the City should be hearing shortly on that matter. The Mayor
confirmed that the said reference was for Provincial highways. CouncIlor Kipping stated that there is
probably what is a misstatement in Mrs. Carr's letter where she says that since City Hall took over in ,
1967 - presumably, referring to the takeover from the Province by the City of certain roads - he recalled
that it was not 1967, but 1973 or 1974, and it is believed by the City that Province allowed the roads to
run down for a few years in advance of the City taking them over. He stated that he would like to se~
that misapprehension corrected when reply is given to Kathleen Carr. Mr. Barfoot noted that the said
roads were taken over by the City in stages - he does not exactly recall what year the City took over this
particular road. Councillor Cave stated that he feels that the anticipated report to Council in this
matter will explain all that.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Liquor Licensing Board advising
that the application of Gerard Douglas Ltd. for a dining room and lounge licenses for premises located at
Hilyard Place, Saint John, N. B. will be heard at a public hearing of the Liquor Licensing Board on June:
4th, 1976 commencing at 10.00 a.m. in the Hearing Room, Head Office, New Brunswick Liquor Corporation,
Wilsey Road, Fredericton, N. B., be received and filed.
The Mayor stated that he has asked, and he is wondering if the Council will consider this
sometime: the Council can on service stations, saying there are to be no more service stations in the 'city
.... why cannot the Council do the same about liquor outlets? He suggested that the Council could obtain
a legal report on restricting the number of liquor outlets in the city, on what the Council's legal action
is on it. Councillor Green stated that he agrees with the Mayor; but under the jurisdiction the New '
Brunswick Licensing Board has the control, at the present time. Councillor Gould noted that if the
Council wished to oppose this license, it is perfectly at liberty to do so, if that is the wish of the
Council. Councillor Kipping asked: but, on what basis would the Council oppose? He then asked: could we
request that information from the City Solicitor - would that be appropriate?
The Mayor advised that the Common Clerk wished to introduce a matter at this time.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould ;
RESOLVED that the item that the Common Clerk wishes to introduce be
,
included on the agenda at this time.
"
The Common Clerk advised that the following resolution was adopted in Committee of the ,Thole o~
May 25th, 1976, "RESOLVED that the Common Council go on record and communicate to the Provincial author- :
ities concerned that no spraying of any kind take place in the City of Saint John's watershed areas", and
that, normally, that recommendation would be reported to Council in a Committee of the Whole report from:
that meeting, but, due to the time element and after discussion with the Mayor in this regard it was felt'
that perhaps the spraying might be completed before this letter went out from this meeting of Council, and
so the letter containing this resolution was sent out last week. He asked for ratification on the actio~
taken in sending out such letter prior to this meeting of Council. :
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the action taken by the C01llIDon Clerk in forwarding to:
the Minister of Natural Resources of the Province of New Brunswick the above noted resolution that was
adopted in Committee of the Whole on May 25th, 1976, and that is ratified at this meeting of Common
Council, be ratified.
Councillor M. Vincent raised the question as to whether a municipality can restrict the Province
of New Brunswick from spraying on or over a municipality. The Mayor replied that he does not think we
know that, but the thing is that we are protesting, that the Province not do it. He added that the City
Solicitor says he does not know, either, and that he looked it up. Councillor MacGowan asked if the
Council could ask the Legal Department to find out if it is possible to stop any spraying in a munici-
pality. Mr. Rodgers replied that if it is Council's wish to ask for an opinion on that, he believes it
should be in the form of a motion of Council.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be asked for an opinion on the
question of whether or not it is possible for a municipality to ban spraying in the community by the
Provincial Government.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that past and future reports be requested from the
Department of the Environment of the Province of New Brunswick of the before and after testing on water
bodies of interest to the City ~ that is, the results of the test they take of lakes such as Loch Lomond
and Spruce Lake to determine whether any of the spray is getting into the water supply.
Councillor Cave stated that he believes the above subject matter, regarding spraying of City
watershed areas, is going to be on the agenda of the Works Committee meeting of June 3rd next.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be asked to advise the Common
Council as to whether or not it is possible for the Council to limit the number of liquor outlets in the
City of Saint John.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting.
A Committee of the Whole session was then held, . following which the Committee arose and the
Mayor resumed the Chair, in legal session of Common Council.
t!fJhJml tFkt! ~"Ai
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
.~
JIll""
LEGAL
. J) Y'. "J3/,e"Z. 7.. d
u;;,pd s
s. .T.PPh~J}
'P~f, 19.s~p
C}.r/e(/~e
-1'; he$,; ""~.
/!rb/i-n;:d-j{)
:Ba-
l. .1/11(7 t:t/este
7)/1. ,(epJ;l:O?,
S6e~~el7
I Pn:;>y- Gt7ve--.
II1HIJ/cip/i-
-ties fic-i.
f/r./It."/dim/n!f
s~~t-/t71?
./'(7I/t#;~
/39(b)
.
I
.
/IIayPI' ,$
stO/tf?P?t?h'C
C6'HhC'/f-.
c()-~n;d-io~
re I~-
l-lion,
c t?h7/17K,h/t!d-
-t-ipl7~, et-c,
489
Mr. Barfoot reported that Dr. "Buzz" Woods was approached and asked to be the City's appointee to the
Board of Arbitration with regard to Article 6(4) of the 1975-1976 Working Agreement between the City of Saint
John and the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., but that Dr. Woods declined
stating that he does not take part in arbitrations except as chairman of arbitration boards. He recalled that
when the matter was discussed by Council in legal session on May 17th last, names of appointees were suggested,
and he added that the Director of Personnel and Training has suggested the name of Dr. Leonard .Stephen, as well.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the City's first choice be Mr. Lino Celeste to the above
named Board of Arbitration, and that the City's second choice be Dr. Leonard Stephen, as the City's appointee to
the said Board.
Councillor Cave withdrew from the meeting during the above named discussion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the Provincial Government be asked to proclaim the section
shown in brackets following Section l89(6) of the Municipalities Act, R.S.N.B. 1973.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
;z;(:;!~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the seventh day of
June, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Com-
missioner of Community Planning and Development, C. Nicolle, Director
of Recreation and Parks, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
A. W. C. Robertson, Deputy Fire Chief, and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Layne M. Daggett, pastor of Hillcrest
Baptist Church.
The Mayor made the following statement at this time:
"When I presented to Council, a couple of weeks ago, items that I feel affect the operations of the
ity, I did so with no intent to incriminate anyone individual or groups of individuals employed by the City.
My intention was, and is, to inform Council of some of the problems that I am convinced are hindering the good,
smooth operation of the City. I referred to: (1) communications lacking between management and Council, (2)
recommendations that are not giving good direction, (3) man management, (4) administration.
I will entertain a motion tonight for Council as a committee to meet, interview and discuss with the
City Manager and Directors of all Departments to cover the points to which I referred and any new areas which to
date have not been discussed, with a view to correcting the problems that exist."
On motion of Councillor Kipping
l?t?hVI1,IV~/t. Whole meet
I tJ/klf /11",,,. w~ich the
er~/./ dlscussed,
(re elboye)
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Common Council as a Committee in Committee of the
, interview and discuss with the City Manager and Directors of all civic Departments the points to
Mayor has referred in his above mentioned statement and any new areas which to date have not been
with a view to correcting the problems that exist.
('iVle Jtc;.q.-
~_ O,m...,.
~;;;;'ds re
PP.:!:ier~ (!S.
CP'7~
~
During ensuing discussion, Councillor Higgins
the manner outlined above in the resolving of problems,
type of problem.
made the point that the Council has always proceeded in
and that he felt this matter was going to be an on-going
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Higgins voting "nay".
At this time, Councillor MacGowan, Chairman of the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee,
introduced to the meeting the following groups and individuals who were present for the purpose of receiving
awards and recognition resulting from recently held contests that were sponsored for 1976 by the said Committee:-
Champlain Heights School Grade I, who won first prize in the poster contest - $25.00 - this was a class project;
Havelock School, who won second prize in the poster contest - $15.00; Gordon Dow of Grade VIII, Beaconsfield
School, who won first prize in the essay contest - $25.00; Chris Sherwood of Champlain Heights School, who won
second prize in the essay contest - $15.00; Estey McKim, of Hazen-White-St. Francis School, who won honourable
490
~
UM//'f ~5dh
/V.wt-;~nill hIm
2JK. (?.,c C6'-'7o;l,4
(/. $./7. $/-
C't?nfennlcl/
I/d/ume p..,c
pju?~pyr~A$
J> 4um. /9,( v /s_
C:omh?
J?e-~ e?J?/l?ff
.lJu/1 L">>ff of ~
I-'7 ves1fh7f? -'7r- s
~~~.
7i' e- ~P'#?/nff
1?e-~P'#?/J?.ff
11/~~;>tZ
,?/pld/J1ffS L-c-L
PI::1hn. /!R{//s.
CI?~h1.
7?e-~OhlJ,ff
I/a,..,.ya/we//
/l11P(er SP/7
Ihsul'WJ1ce ...6
mention in the essay contest; Stephen Craig of Hazen-White-St. Francis School, who won honourable mention
in the essay contest. The Mayor thereupon welcomed these young people who were accompanied by citizen
spectators, to the meeting. The prize-winning essays were read by their authors, in turn, following which
Councillor Hodges, the Mayor and Councillor MacGowan, who are members of the Civic Improvement and Beauti-
fication Committee, presented the awards to each winner; and also presented awards to the winners of the'
poster contest; and presented scrolls to those two recipients of honourable mention awards.
Mr. Wally Wason of the National Film Board of Canada presented at this time the new volume
composed of still photographs that were compiled to commemorate the Bi-Centennial of the United States of
I
America, and stated that it is hoped by the National Film Board that many citizens of the City of Saint
John will be able to peruse this volume. Deputy Mayor Higgins accepted the gift on behalf of the City of
Saint John with complimentary remarks to Mr. Wason for his participation in the preparation of this
valuable volume, and expressed the appreciation of the City and its citizens in receiving this momento.
The Mayor joined the Deputy Mayor in expressing thanks on behalf of the City for this gift.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding the proposal of Building Space
Investments Ltd. that 1.52 acres of land on the westerly side of Linton Road behind 1141, 1149 and 1157 :
Manawagonish Road be re-zoned to Light Industrial Park classification, to permit the construction thereon
of a commercial building, and that no written objection had been received in this regard. It was noted ,
that no person was present to speak to the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that the area shown on the submitted Flan." which lies on the westerly side of Linton Road and
behind the houses numbered 1141, 1149 and 1157 Manawagonish Road, is part of Lot 74-1 which Building Spa~e
Investments Limited aCQuired from the City of Saint John for the purposes of erecting a two-storey com- :
mercial building consisting of two service bays, general offices, a general office for a construction. ,
company and rental offices for manufacturers agents, and there is ,a sharp drop between the properties on:
Manawagonish Road and the land proposed to be re~zoned; and advising that Lot 74-1 cuts across zoning
lines, with most of the lot already zoned for Light Industrial purposes, and the proposed re-zoning is
ce>:tainly in order; and recommending that the area in question be rezoned from "R-2" One- and Two-Family
Residential district to "I-3" Light Industrial Park district -- be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the westerly side of Linton
Road behind 1141, 1149 and 1157 Manawagonish Road, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district to
"I-3" Light Industrial Park district, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green ,
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the
westerly side of Linton Road behind 114, 1149 and 1157 Manawagonish Road, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family
Residential district to "I-3" Light Industrial Park district, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
The Common Clerk stated that the necessary advertising took place regarding the proposed amend-i
ment to the Zoning By-Law to re-zone for Hilyard Holdings Ltd. the former church building at 77 Coburg
Street and an adjoining lot to its rear which fronts on Garden Street, to permit the conversion of the
building to business offices of a general insurance agency.. He advised that no written objection had been,
received regarding the proposed amendment. No person was present to speak against the said proposed re.- '
zoning.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated June 2nd,
1976, which states that the above named applicant proposes to use the building on Coburg Street for a
general insurance office and the lot on Garden Street as a parking lot, and to create and use three floors
in the building consisting of a total of 6,600 square feet of office space, and that sixty employees would
use this building; that under the parking requirements in the Zoning By-Law, the minimum number of :
off-street parking spaces required for this use are eleven, while the plans for the parking lot show that'
nine spaces might be provided on the Garden Street property - the applicant alleges that two additional
spaces could be provided_on the Coburg Street property at the rear of the building provided that per-
mission can be obtained from adjoining property owners to use an alley way for access - and, as it hap-
pens, the property owners object to the proposed re-zoning; that Hilyard Holdings Ltd. is not yet the
owner of the property; that the owners of the property are Joseph Duguay and Son Limited who, sometime
ago, had asked the Committee about converting the church building to apartments - and at that time, the
Committee felt that this use was consistent with surrounding land uses and gave this permission - the
members of the Committee now felt that this would be wrong to introduce a business of this size with a
staff of sixty to start with to what is still predominantly a residential area - and it was also felt
that, notwithstanding Zoning By-Law requirements, a very serious parking problem could be created with
such a large number of employees and periodic visitors. The letter advises that the said Committee
recommends that the application be refused as it would be wrong to introduce a business of this scale int~
this residential area.
Mr. Harry Colwell, Barrister, was present on behalf of and/~51icitor for Hilyard Holdings Ltd.,:
I
and advised that tbe principal officer of the company is ~IT. Mike Brown, who is President of Anderson
Insurance, which company is presently located on Prince William Street, and that is his client. He added
that Mr. Brown was present at the meeting at this time, as well. l~. Colwell advised that neither his
client nor himself had received a copy of the Planning Advisory Committee's recommendation regarding the
proposed re-zoning, and although he had been informed that the recommendation was contrary to the ap-
plication, he was not exactly sure of the Committee's exact reason for that recommendation. He stated
that, as indicated in the Committee's letter (Mr. Colwell at this time was provided with a copy of the
said letter), it had been explained to him that the basic objection of the Advisory Committee was based
primarily upon the number of potential employees that would be occupying the building when it became.a~
business use. In reply to this, Mr. Colwell supplied the following information: the present complement
of Anderson Insurance at this time is sixty employees; the application made by his client would be to
acquire the Coburg Street property with the existing building and to renovate it by the addition of an
additional floor in what would have been the open church facility previously; it would be designated
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,..
49),
.
I
&I';'!f
~Iw~/I
1?e-xPI7/J?
I
f/ily.;7l;'d'
!/p/;i/n.1s
..( ht.
/!",Le;'.;5pJ7
MSU
A-C-a:
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
Agency; the Garden Street property (upon which there had been a boarding house which burned down within the past
year) is also to be acquired and will be able to provide eleven parking spaces - based on the 6,600 square feet
that is to be created in the said building interior and that is required under the proposal for building space,
the City by-law requires that one parking. space must be provided for each 600 square feet of space which means
that eleven parking spaces are required according to the terms of the existing by-law; one fact that may not have
been brought home to the Planning Advisory Committee but which he thinks is significant at this point in time, is
that of the present complement of sixty employees at this company's location on Prince William Street, eighteen
including Mr. Brown, bring vehicles to work - forty-two of the sixty employees travel to work by way of public
transit or within car pools and have no vehicle to park during the day; Mr. Brown, as well, lives on Coburg
Street and has parking on his private property for three spaces which he would be using for himself, his private
secretary, and one other person - so they can provide fourteen spaces - they have four vehicles possibly with the
present complement of staff at Anderson Insurance who would be without parking - he believes it would be fair to
say that this was the primary objection of the Planning Advisory Committee who anticipated that with sixty
employees they were probably talking a complement of forty or fifty vehicles to be parked somewhere, and the by-
law requiring eleven, and they were afraid of the size of the business. With respect to the proposed building
alterations, Mr. Colwell advised that there were photographs available for anyone who wished to view them, of the
existing front and rear of the building on Coburg Street; that it is proposed that the exterior of the building
would be completely refinished - a new exterior on all four walls - appropriate renovations made to the rear of
the building for access to the parking lot, and the anticipated expenditure on behalf of his client would be in
the area of $160,000.00 to accomplish these renovations, and that figure includes the land cost for acquiring the
properties. With respect to the area, Mr. Colwell submitted the following general comment and referred the
Council to the Comprehensive Community Plan with respect to this particular area and noted the appreciably larger
area in the immediate area has been indicated on the said Plan for major institutional uses; he stated he agrees
that major institutional uses is not a business use, but he felt that it is certainly a use that would be en-
visaged for the area under the Comprehensive Community Plan that would certainly envisage a great many more
people that his client is proposing from the point of view of a business use. He noted that a major instit~tional
use includes schools, hospitals and this sort of thing, so that the proposed density under the Comprehensive
Community Plan, which has been, adopted by the City of Saint John as a by-law, has indicated that they are willing
to permit much greater densities than his client is asking for, here. He pointed out that his client complies
with the by-law as required from the point of view of parking space, and stated that he believes that the ex-
planation he had just given with respect to parking deserves the consideration of Council, and the expenditures
that could be anticipated - again, with the economic climate that the City is in, and some of the Council members
may be familiar with the change of events going on within the insurance industry - particularly from the point of
view of general insurance agents, of which Anderson Insurance is one - that the proposed move is being made to
facilitate an economic move on behalf of the insurance agency to acquire space smaller than it presently has and
to own some real estate as opposed to paying rent, with the possibility, of course, in the future, depending on
what happens within the industry, of a possible decline in the employee population of the firm.
Mr. Colwell supplied the following reply to Councillor Higgins' question with regard to where the
eighteen employees in the Prince William Street area now park, of that number who bring vehicles to work, four-
teen employees are presently provided parking within the adjacent parking lot of the Harbour Building which
parking spaces have been designated to the agency by the landlord - those fOurteen spaces have been arbitrarily
assessed to various employees by Mr. Brown and other members of his executive - so, the existing fourteen can be
accommodated in the same manner with the new premises.
Councillor Higgins asked Mr. Zides to explain the Duguay proposal for the said former church property.
Mr. Zides advised that it was simply a proposal that was brought to the Planning Advisory Committee by the
present owners of the building, who wanted to convert the church building to a number of bachelor apartments.
Councillor Higgins asked: was 18 Garden Street considered as a parking lot at that time, or has it burned since
that time? Mr. Zides replied that the said building burned since then. He confirmed that the proposal of Duguay
and Son Limited was for eleven apartments in the old church building and the Advisory Committee gave permission
for eight. Councillor Higgins noted that was without 18 Garden Street for parking which meant that there would
have had to be on-street parking (on Coburg Street). Mr. Zides confirmed this observation. Councillor Higgins
noted that unless this large, former church building is renovated, rebuilt or refurbished, it will constitute a
problem if fire ever occurs there. In reply, Mr. Zides stated that he is not qualified to say whether it would
constitute a fire hazard; he added that it is not a very big church as it has only 2,200 square feet. Councillor
Higgins noted that Dr. Zed used to have a doctor's office next door to this particular building, and that Dr. M.
Keating is a medical doctor two houses down from this building and has an office there, next to St. John and St.
Stephen Church, and that a day care centre is across the way, St. Vincent's High School is down the street _ and
what have you. He stated that he sees the proposed use of the church building by the insurance agency as an
improvement over the Duguay proposal which would have involved on-street parking. He pointed out that traffic
has a difficult time in driving even on Cliff Street now due to the parking in the area because of hospital
visiting, and what have you - therefore, he feels that the proposal of Hilyard Holdings Ltd. is an improvement
for 77 Coburg Street and this applicant is talking about 18 Garden Street with so many parking spaces. He stated
that the Advisory Committee has not given to him a real, legitimate reason for refusing the re-zoning application.
Mr. Zides replied that the Committee's reason is very simple: it believes that putting businesses of this scale
into an area that admittedly is an institutional type of an area, and when you take the head of from there on
down and around Garden Street, it is a residential area, regardless of what it is up above - and the Committee
believes that bringing this kind of business activity in this location is the beginning of the end. Councillor
Higgins pointed out that a large volume of an insurance company's business is usually done by telephone and
raised the question as to how many people, day and night, would use parking space in connection with the eight
bachelor apartments that the Committee approved for this building, including guests at the said proposed ap-
artments. Mr. Zides replied that, basically, a normal household averages between six and ten car trips per day _
you are probably going to get a little bit less in the case of an apartment building, so with regard to an eight-
or nine-unit apartment building, you are talking 54 car trips per day. Councillor Higgins replied that Mr. Zides
is talking about parking, which is what he, too, is talking about, and that he does not think that people go to
an insurance company and park - and this is what he cannot understand, and this does not just ring true with him,
that if there is an eight-unit apartment building he would presume the owner of the apartment or the person in
the apartment, nine chances out of ten, will park his car and if his wife has a car there might be another car
and if he invites people in the evening, that would be additional parking that would be required. Mr. Zides made
the point that the apartment units that were being talked about were bachelor apartments, with one bedrooms, so
not many people were being talked about in this regard. Councillor Higgins stated that his point is that an
insurance office would not normally generate parking requirements for customers. Mr. Zides replied that, non-
etheless, the business in point is larger than all the ones Councillor Higgins has mentioned, together - sixty
people work at the Anderson Insurance agency, and people come and go to business of that type.
During further discussion, /1r. Colwell noted that Mr. Brown would be permitting three parking spaces on
his own personal property on Coburg Street and this would eliminate Mr. Brown's car as he would be walking to
work, and that this is a general insurance agency and that it is not like a dentist's or a doctor's office - the
people who go in and out of the building during the day are primarily the staff of the office. Councillor M.
Vincent asked if the Planning Advisory Committee and Mr. Zides were aware of the eleven plus three parking spaces
when the Committee made its recommendation. Mr. Zides stated that he was not aware of the three at all, in that
sense. He added that he does not think that we want to start that practice, either - of starting to get people to
park three blocks or a block away for commercial purposes - and if you carry that to the extreme, you would have
another problem. He stated that there is no question that they can get twenty spaces if they jam themselves in,
492
~
7?e- ,Zon/n l'
IItlr.rd
f/o/d/~.s /-t'L
/I"Ltl)"St7h
MSH:rdJ?Ce ..&
but there are only nine in the normal lay-out, on the Garden Street parking lot in question - two other
parking spaces were also talked about for that lot, as well, at the Advisory Committee meeting but there
is a problem in that regard because the alley way is owned by the Zeds who are opposed to this project.
He added that that was not the main concern: the main concern was that the Committee as a group felt that,
regardless of what the by-law says, with that many people coming and going, which is sixty in number, the
eighteen who are supposed to be coming now, and regarding the forty-two - if, somehow, some of their
present car pool should disappear, the Committee was concerned that a parking problem would be the resul~.
He added that he believes that the scale of the business was the number one priority reason for the
Committee's rejection of the re-zoning application. Councillor Parfitt noted that under the requirements
of the Zoning By-Law, ten parking spaces would have had to be provided for the eight apartments that the.
Committee approved for this building, and that at that time, there was not that empty lot on Garden Stre~t,
which means that those ten spaces would have to be on the street. Mr. Zides replied that the Advisory
Committee does not see the problem in quite the same way: first of all, when the Committee resolves a
problem like this, its first concern is to get that building back to residential because, in the Com-
mittee's opinion, it is a residential area, and should be maintained at the head of Garden Street -
secondly, if you apply that by-law.strictly, the Committe can make a variance, which it did - it felt that
in order to make the best use of that church it should be converted to residential use, and the Committee
is allowed to make the variance. He added that the Committee has another lever there, too, because of the
fact that the church itself had no parking - the Committee can equate it. Councillor Parfitt stated that
she recalls that some business offices have been put in residential areas - she could think of one, on
Duke Street, and so on, which, she felt that we are starting to do that. Mr. Zides pointed out the
difference between these two types of businesses: on Duke Street, it has meant two people going into an
office. He stated that the Duguays obviously found it economic at one point in time, to convert that
church building ~ and that what has probably happened is that they have had a better offer that is more
lucrative for them, than going into apartments - it is as simple as that. Councillor Gould asked: would'
not the parking on Coburg Street be the very same thing as parking up-town (on the street). ~rr. Zides
made affirmative reply. Councillor Kipping asked for an explanation of Councillor Gould's question - in.
what sense- the very same thing as parking up-town. Councillor Gould replied that there are no parking
facilities provided by ninety-nine per cent of all the stores up-town - and this particular location is
about two city blocks from the up-town area. Councillor Kipping commented that that is a past mistake,
and there is nO sense in perpetuating it, perhaps. Councillor Kipping asked if Joseph Duguay and Son
Limited are still the owners of this Coburg Street property. Mr. Zides stated that they are, to the best
of his knowledge. Mr. Colwell, in this regard, stated that he was not a representative of Joseph Duguay'
and Son Limited, but through their solicitors and through the principals of Joseph Duguay and Son Limite~,
they are not interested in proceeding with the proposed residential use because of the economics of it -:
so it was not a question of a higher price - they listed it for sale to see if they could sell it, and '
there has been the offer made; Hilyard Holdings Ltd. is not yet the owner of the property. Mr. Colwell
provided the following information concerning his client: this is a general insurance agency - it. is the
agency that primarily deals with the sub-agents who are the people dealing with the public from the poinV
of view of buying and selling insurance - these are the people who write the policies for the sub-agents
and for the companies, and this sort of thing - so, going to your local insurance agent is not the concept
when you go to Anderson Insurance; because of the economics and the situation now existing in the in-
surance industry, it is anticipated that there will be a decline, if anything, as far as the employee
population of Anderson Insurance is concern. In reply to Councillor Kipping's question as to whether
Hilyard Holdings has an option or an agreement to buy the Coburg Street property, Mr. Colwell advised tha~
Hilyard Holdings Ltd. is really a nominee company for Mr. Anderson' and Anderson Insurance for the purpose
of making the offer on the property - the property is under agreement of purchase and sale and the ability
to purchase the property expires on June 15th. Councillor Green noted that after office hours, the '
parking lot of the proposed office building would be vacant of cars and there would be no parking proble~
whatsoever except for custodial staff on occasional evenings during the week, and that there might even be
parking space that could be made available during evenings and nights to those who might want to use it.
He noted that Anderson Insurance at present allows many people to use its Prince William Street parking
space after hours. Mr. Colwell replied that his client has no objection, from that point of view.
Councillor Green stated that his point is that this company would not be creating any problem regarding
parking, after office hours, at the Coburg Street location. 14r. Colwell stated: they feel that this is
another point - from the point of view of the use that was approved, from the point of view of residential
use with a twenty-four hour situation from the point of view of parking - and the coming and going of '
vehicles - this is.a nine to five operation. Councillor Green made a further point; the present business:
underwrites many of the other agents - the sub-agents - the policies for them, and that is one reason why:
there would be such a staff at the Anderson offices - it is not that so many people would be going there.
Mr. Colwell confirmed these comments.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table for one week and
that the Planning Advisory Committee, through 11r. Zides, be asked to bring in more information on its
refusal of the above named application and the Council perhaps ask Mr. Colwell on behalf of his client to
bring in more regarding his client's reasons, other than those Mr. Colwell has given at this meeting.
.
I
I
.
I
.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors M. Vincent, MacGowan, Kipping and th~ I
Mayor voting "yea" and Councillors Higgins, Green, Pye, Hodges, Gould and Parfitt voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the former church
building at 77 Coburg Street and the lot at its rear next to 28 Garden Street and across the street from
21, 23 and 25 Garden Street, from "RM-l" Multiple Family district to "B-2" General Business district, be
read a first time.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Higgins, Green,
Hodges, Gould and Pye voting "yea" and Councillors Kipping, MacGowan, M. Vincent and Parfitt voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the former church:
building at 77 Coburg Street and the lot at its rear next to 28 Garden Street and across the street from '
21, 23.and 25 Garden Street, from "RM-l" Multiple Family district to "B_2" General Business district, be
read a second time'.
I
.
~
,....
493
.
I
?~/7,#dv/
t11>>/?7.
I
J( e- X(}/lI IJ.f
.
I
fi leeI'}
HuL.fe
1fe-Z{)/?ll?ff
.lJ/'>u.ee J
. Stevens
7iJler
Hillman
I
P,{;m I?,
/1l'ltvis. COh
I
.
~
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Higgins, Hodges, Green,
Gould and Pye voting "yea" and Councillors Parfitt, MacGowan, M. Vincent and Kipping voting "nay".
The Common Clerk advised that with regard to the proposed re-zoning for Mrs. Eileen Fudge, of an area
of land on the northwesterly corner of Sandy Point Road and MacLaren Boulevard, with a frontage of about 275 feet
on Sandy Point Road and about 170 feet on MacLaren Boulevard to permit erection of a building containing three
small stores on the ground floor and three bachelor apartments upstairs, advertising was completed and no written
objections were received. It was noted that no person was present to speak to this proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recom-
mending that the area indicated on the submitted print (re-zoning sketch 76-3), at the corner of MacLaren Boule-
vard and Sandy Point Road, be rezoned from "RM-I" Multiple Family Residential to "B_1" Local Business classifi-
cation, pursuant to a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act tying the development to a plan
filed with the Common Clerk and signed by the Planning Director and advising that a reduction of the said plan is
also submitted; and further advising that the proposal is to construct a building with three small commercial
outlets on the ground floor and a one bedroom and two bedsitting room apartments on the second floor, and that
the commercial aspect, as presently proposed, includes a beauty salon, a dry cleaning business and a bakery, and
that because of poor sight distances on Sandy Point Road, the project is being oriented so that the driveway and
parking area will be located on MacLaren Boulevard and there will be no parking or driveways off Sandy Point
Road -- be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on the northwesterly corner of Sandy Point
Road and MacLaren Boulevard, with a frontage of about 275 feet on Sandy Point Road and about 170 feet on MacLaren
Boulevard, from "RM-l" Multiple Residential district to "B_1" Local Business district, be read a first time.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the reference in the Planning Advisory Committee's letter regarding the
above rezoning, regarding it being pursuant to a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act tying
the development to a plan filed with the Common Clerk and signed by the Planning Director - includes the grass
the landscaping as in the plan- does it tie it in. Mr. Zides replied that it is intended to do so - in fact,
the sketch of the rezoning talks about a resolution and an agreement, and the agreement can put in any covering
point that you care to take care of. Councillor MacGowan asked if this would be the time to include in the
agreement that this landscaping as shown in the plan, be included. The Mayor replied that the Council can do
that on the third reading. Councillor MacGowan stated that she would like to make sure it was in the first
reading of the said Zoning By-Law amendment in this matter. The Common Clerk pointed out that it is pursuant to
the third reading.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on the north-
westerly corner of Sandy Point Road and MacLaren Boulevard, with a frontage of about 275 feet on Sandy Point Road
and about 170 feet on MacLaren Boulevard, from "RM-l" Multiple Residential district to "B-I" Local Business
district, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
The Common Clerk stated that with respect to the proposed re-zoning for Mr. Bruce J. Stevens of the
former Beck Cleaners property on the southwesterly corner of Lowell Street and City Line (and possibly one or
more adjoining or nearby lots now occupied by multiple family dwellings), to allow the construction of a twelve-
unit apartment building on the former Beck lot (and possibly to re-zone to multiple family classification ex-
isting multiple family lots nearby), the necessary advertising took place, and that a letter was received from
I~. Tyler Hillman of 339 Lowell Street, objecting to the proposed 12-unit apartment on the said site, for ap-
pearance, and because he does not think apartment buildings should be mixed in with one- and two-family homes. No
person was presented to speak either for, or against, the said proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee recommending
against the re-zoning of the property at the southeast corner of Lowell Street and City Line (that was formerly
occupied by Beck's Dry Cleaners) for the construction of an apartment building, and advising that the applicants
at the May lIth last meeting of the Committee advised that the proposal was to use the former Beck Dry Cleaning
building for a paint contractor or similar storage and to erect a 12 or less unit building on the adjoining part
of the property and the Committee felt that the proposal might be alright if the existing industrial use of the
former dry cleaning building was eliminated and asked the applicants to investigate the possibility of purchasing
and demolishing that building so that a non-conforming use would not be created upon the re-zoning; and advising
that one of the applicants appeared before the Committee's May 25th last meeting and stated that, following the
earlier meeting of the Committee, he had discussed the possibility of purchasing the former dry cleaning building
with the owner and was unsuccessful, and the best that he could obtain was a statement that the owner would be
selling the building in about two years time and would give him the first option if he intended to buy the
building - however, no price has been agreed upon nor was there a firm commitment that the owner would have to
sell the building - in other words, the owner might change his mind and continue this industrial use as a non-
conforming one or perhaps even expand it throughout the building or possibly onto the premises itself; and
further advising that the applicant told the Committee that he would like to change his application to request
permission to erect a six-unit apartment building and a six-unit apartment building later after acquisition of
the dry cleaning building - he also mentioned that the people in the area would like to see the continuing change
of portions of heavy industrial use to a residential use as it is more appropriatie; and noting that there are
other apartment buildings in the immediate area of this site; and further advising that the Committee members
agreed that the residential zoning would be desirable except that they could not recommend re-zoning while the
former Beck Dry Cleaning building is there being used for contractor's storage, and that there are certain rights
an owner has in regards to non-conforming uses and such uses can be carried on for an indefinite period - more-
over, it was suggested to the applicant that having an industrial building of this type continue along side of a
new apartment building could be to his detriment in the long run; and further advising that the Committee is not
against the principle of re-zoning at this location but would not recommend this as long as the present lot is to
contain a building which is to be utilized for industrial purposes, and that the Committee believes that the
building in its present condition should be purchased and demolished or used as part of the proposed housing
494
~
lle-Z~>nin~
:!Jplet:e J:
Srevens
development, and the Committee thus resolved to recommend that the application, as now submitted, be
refused -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Hodges asked if it would be necessary for the applicant to come back to another re-
zoning if the above named building is torn down; he added that he notes from the above letter of the
Advisory Committee that if the building is torn down, the Committee would be in favour of the re-zoning. '
Mr. Zides replied that that is correct. In reply to the question as to whether, in that case, it would De
necessary for them to ask again for the re-zoning or whether it is one, automatically, Mr. Zides stated
that he thinks there are some legal points here, that should be brought out by the City Solicitor, re~
garding a re-zoning application after demolition. Mr. Rodgers stated that he thinks the key to that
question is if the use is discontinued for a period of over four months. Councillor Hodges noted that the
answer is, that another application for re-zoning will be necessary. Mr. Zides replied in the affirm~
ative.
On motion of Councillor Gould
1Jf~~ ~~~J? received and filed.
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter from Mr. Tyler Hillman, be
IJaI"Y/ E
Wed- $On
G-~lden
C"pve ~L.
Cd/ r;/eJ?
(Jrove :;f'1l.
l/earber l14y
I,q
Mr. Daryl E. Watson at this time presented a brief on behalf of residents of Golden Grove Road,
a number of whom were in attendance at this meeting, which brief makes the following points:- the lengthy
patches that have been made to repair the Golden Grove this season amount to almost fifty per cent of four
miles of the Road that have been recently patches, and in some locations the asphalt is four to six inch~s
thick in such patching work, which these residents believe is a type of upgrading that is a waste of
asphalt as well as a waste of tax dollars; it is believed that upgrading should be done with gravel as it
makes a good base and is not as costly as asphalt, and that the asphalt would go down smoother and pack
better if a roller were used in place of the grader on this Road, and that the end result would be a
smoother and less expensive as well as a longer lasting job, thus leaving more money in aim of a total
upgrading and resurfacing of the said Road; with regard to straightening of the Golden Grove Road, which
would be a major cost, the residents wish to declare that they are not searching for a straight highway,
but merely for an upgraded, resurfaced and properly drained road, free of areas where water has been known
to collect and free of pot-holes; that since a number of trees have been removed and replaced with ap-
artment buildings, the surface of the Golden Grove Road has become the victim of a steady stream of water
in this area whenever it rains, therefore worsening already bad road conditions, and for this reason,' ~
these residents are also asking for ditching as well as for upgrading and resurfacing work; on May 21st
last, 46 trucks were hauling gravel over the Golden Grove Road, each truck making at least eight round
trip; according to a local contractor, a sum of $700.00 per truck per year is paid to the Provincial
Government to compensate for any damages that might be rendered to road surfaces - in addition, funds are
rendered through gasoline taxes; in the original agreement of amalgamation, the Golden Grove Road was'
specifically named as receiver of funds, sufficient at that time, to resurface the said Road; the Mayor, ,
in late June of 1975, assured Mr. Watson that the City of Saint John had received funds to resurface four
roads and that the Golden Grove Road was, in fact, one of these four; taking into consideration the '
previous facts and figures along with the amount of taxes collected from residents and businesses on the
Golden Grove Road and, also, because some public services are virtually non-existant to most residents on
this Road while other services are distant, these residents feel that and upgraded, properly drained,
resurfaced Golden Grove Road is long past due and well paid in advance. The brief asks that time be
allowed at this meeting for citizen participation in further discussion of this matter - some questions
needing to be answered - some facts needing to.be stated. The brief advises that Mr. Watson would like to
know: for what reason has $30,400.00 been designated to be used on Heather Way?
The Mayor asked if there was anything Mr. Watson would like to add to the above na~ed brief,
copies of which had already been received and read by the Council members prior to this meeting, with the'
Council meeting correspondence items. Mr. Watson replied that he had a letter he would like to read to
the meeting at this time, both for the information of the Council members and of the members of the
delegation who accompanied him. The Mayor noted that that is a Council decision, and if the Council would
like to have the letter read, a motion would be required.
.
I
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye .
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Daryl E. Watson asked to read, in
addition to the above named brief, be heard.
Question being taken, the motion was lost, with a majority of Council members casting negative
votes.
Councillor Parfitt noted that several Council members made a tour of the Saint John East area
this afternoon and were on the Golden Grove Road.
i
In addition to the above named brief, ~tt. Watson advised that the Golden Grove Road is also used
as an emergency route for traffic during Glen Falls flooding of Rothesay Avenue; and that trucks travelling
on the Golden Grove Road may well not be overloaded to the expression of weight but to the desperate '
condition of the Road; the shoulder of the Road is gradually slipping away leaving residents with litfle
choice but to walk on the Road; he finds it tactical for City work crews to fill in pot-holes this morning
in preparation of an afternoon drive by members of Common Council. He stated that he has also been asked'
to point out that the Commissioner of Engineering and Works seems to have misinterpreted a letter from Mr~
Marvin Hunter -'Mr. Hunter did not say, and none of the residents of the Golden Grove Road said, they
would be satisfied with patchwork - Mr. Hunter, like most of the residents are seriously asking for an
upgraded, resurfaced and properly drained Golden Grove Road. He stated that it is also obvious that the
City representatives do not believe the residents' confrontation with Common Council is not a serious
situation: Ellerdale Street is presently undergoing preparations for resurfacing - a street that is not as
long, nor as populated, and not likely as heavily travelled as the Golden Grove Road; in reference to f
Hickey Road, a road that may well see a large amount of traffic, however, it did not, prior to the laying;
of new asphalt - four lanes wide - have as many nor as bad pot-holes - this road was paved to the entrance
to the second addition of Century 21 apartments and just beyond the recently-constructed Heather Way. He
stated that he has been asked by the Golden Grove Road residents to. demand that time be allowed at the
completion of this brief for citizen participation in further discussion of this matter - some questions
needing to be answered - and some facts needing to be stated. At this time, Mr. Watson reiterated the
above noted question in his brief regarding $30,400.00 designated to be used on Heather Way, under the
heading "Transportation".
In reply to Mr. Watson's question regarding the above mentioned sum of
advised that it is designated to be used on Heather Way in 1977 and will not, of
such time the sub-division agreement is concluded with the developer. Mr. Watson
that this sum may well be better placed on the Golden Grove Road.
$30,400.00, 11r. Barfoot
course, be spent unti~
advised that his point i
I
I
.
~
"""
495
~r*/f
. WJF$~J1
~1t&}J
b!,.4?Pt!? ~,t.
P.d-.:Rc?eea
S.T :B~.
I trade
bl"leF to
'Pl"el'17/er 9-
'Pro"..
Cabl/1e-r
re Sdl'n-t-
Jb6h 0/$
l/i'JFII<fd-/'i.riJ
~l'J1~/'e o~
IV- .13.
.
E/sie
~YJ?e
C/en NI/$
F/t?oL U
ifl?et'ei a
o.
tlksfh?Pr!a1?
I Crwe /lcs.
.sub-LN.
r/oott/17f
tl/ate,.,
$-tol'b/,ffe
-ranks
/JM"5~ a
.f-'/r?t?d/n5
.
1?oCCOl
C"oup .J-t-~.
I
I
. Roet%l
Cn;up .L-t-L
.....
Councillor Higgins asked if Mr. Watson, heading up this delegation, has ever met with a Committee of
Councilor with the Commissioner of Works, with reference to their problems. 11r. Watson replied that he has not
done so, but that he would like to do so. Councillor Higgins intimated that later in the meeting he might make a
motion that a Committee of Council meet with Mr. Watson, two or three other people representing Mr. Watson, and
the Commissioner of Works, and discuss the matter.
Mr. Pat Rocca, President of the Saint John Board of Trade, was present at the meeting, accompanied by
members of the Executive Council of the Board of Trade, and at this time he expressed the appreciation of the
Board for the opportunity to appear before this meeting of Council to present the brief that the Board presented
on June 2nd, 1976 to Premier Richard B. Hatfield and to members of the Provincial Cabinet of New Brunswick, which
brief points out that the City of Saint John today is prepared to move ahead and that the ground work in this
regard has been substantial and, with the encouragement of senior levels of government, the Board is confident
that we can build Saint John up to a standard that befits its size and place in Canada; that the Atlantic Region
has had a lack of complementary industries in the area and this has been a major obstacle to substantial in-
dustrialization - and that New Brunswick must have at least one large scale industrial centre to serve the region
and must have at least one city that can compare and compete in the national sense, and the Board believes that
Saint John has the base to become such a centre and we must capitalize on this opportunity, and that with con-
tinued support for expansion in Saint John, we could realistically reach a level of self-sustained growth in a
relatively short period of time, permitting "spin-off" benefits to the rest of the Province. The brief seeks
assistance and direction of the Premier and Cabinet for Saint John to attain its potential in contributing to New
Brunswick's economic growth, and submits several points by which this aim can be achieved, namely:- (1) any
suggestion that Saint John should be "cooled off" must be repudiated by all levels of government; (2) while Saint
John has had a boom in construction, this should not lessen the effort of all levels of government to promote
industrial expansion in Saint John, which is the industrial centre of the Atlantic Provinces; (3) we must all
reaffirm our commitment to industrial incentives as this is the only way New Brunswick can become a "have"
province; (4) civic and business leaders in Saint John are anxious to offer every co-operation to all areas of
the Province in order to bring a better standard of living for all New Brunswick citizens; (5) we must re-dedic-
ate ourselves to the principle that all areas of New Brunswick are linked together culturally and economically
and every New Brunswick citizen will be affected benefic ally or adversely by the level of economic activity in
New Brunswick's largest city.
Council members spoke in commendation of the Saint John Board of Trade for the initiative it has shown
in presenting the above named brief in the interests of promoting economic growth in this city.
Mrs. Elsie Wayne, Chairman of the Glen Falls Flood Committee, at this time ~ade a presentation in a
written brief which states that with regard to the approval given by Common Council to Mr. Rocca of Rocca Con-
struction Company to develop the Westmorland Grove Heights sub-division off the Golden Grove Road because Mr.
Rocca had stated that the said developer would be installing detention storage tanks and therefore would not be
adding to the run-off water down on the residents of the Glen Falls area during flooding time, Mr. Zides on July
31st, 1975 stated that the area should be re-zoned to "RM-l" and "RM-2" classification because "the design takes
into consideration the excess storm water run-off that would be created by a project of this magnitude. Provision
is being made for on-site storage to be built by the developers to restrict storm water run-off from the property
to about what is now in the natural state of the site"; and which points out that Mr. Zides was promised and
shown the plans for the said storage tanks and recommended the development to Council and Mr. Rocca appeared
before Council on August 5th, 1975 and stated to Council that the Council should approve his development as they
would not be creating any problems for the Glen Falls residents - so, the Council gave its approval for the
development; and which states that on June 3rd, 1976, lrr. Vicars and Mrs. Wayne went to the Westmorland Grove
development to see the holding tanks and spoke with the project manager, Mr. Robert McKinstry, and asked to be
shown the holding tanks, and found there are no holding tanks - and that there will be no holding tanks unless
they are instructed ~o put them in by the City, and/or the Province. The brief points out that this was not the
agreement that the Glen Falls Flood Committee heard, nor the agreement that the Council heard on August 5th, 1975
from Mr. Rocca, and states that these holdings tanks should have been installed, as promised, as shown to Mr.
Zides. The brief also states that Mr. McKinstry informed Mr. Vicars and Mrs. Wayne that occupancy would be
taking place by July 1st, 1976. The brief maintains that this development should not be opened for occupancy
until the Rocca Group has complied with the statements made to Council and to the Committee to instal these
holding tanks in order to hold back any extra run-off water. The brief further advises that after having visited
the site, Mrs. Wayne received a call from Mr. McKinstry informing her that Mr. Rocca told him to advise her that
the company had the money for the holding tanks but was waiting for the City or Province to tell it to instal
them; furthermore, now the company is not sure that holding tanks are the answer, yet on August 5th, 1975 the
company was positively sure - and, in fact, stated that all developers should put in holding tanks in the area _
now, the company says that maybe it should use the money in another manner. The brief submits a copy of a letter
to Mrs. Wayne from Mr. Pat Rocca, of the Rocca Group Limited, dated November 17th, 1975, which cites projects
being built in the Glen Falls area that are not taking any detention storage tanks precautions whatsoever, and
which suggests that she should give credit to the Rocca Group's Westmorland Grove project and criticize all the
other projects, and which points out that the solution is not to stop well.planned developments such as the Rocca
Group's that do not aggravate the existing problem but to ensure that the Proctor and Redfern Report is impl-
emented immediately and that all future projects are designed and built in such a way that they do not add to the
existing Marsh Creek flooding - and which states that this firm is prepared to co-operate with the Glen Falls
Flood Committee in every way possible to correct the problems that exist.
Mrs. Wayne thereupon presented the following information, which she has learned since writing the above
named brief: on the afternoon of June 4th, 1976, Mr. Vicars and she made an unannounced visit to the Westmorland
Grove Heights development and they asked Mr. Robert McKinstry, the project manager, to show them the holding
tanks and his reply was that there is no holding tank; they asked when occupancy of the housing development will
take place in Westmorland Grove Heights and Mr. McKinstry's reply was July 1st; in reply to the question as to
when the holding tank will be put in, Mr. McKinstry said there will be no holding tank in that development unless
the City and/or the Province tell the said developer to do so. Mrs. Wayne recalled that on August 5th, 1975 when
before Council, Mr. Rocca said to the Council and to her, on asking for re-zoning, that tqe company will not
contribute to the flooding in the Glen Falls area because it will put in a holding tank which will hold the run-
off .water so that the company will not contribute to the flooding in the Glen Falls area. She noted that when
Mr. McKinstry telephoned her, as noted in the above brief, he informed her that the money was there for the
holding tank but now, the company felt to put the holding tank in would be "throwing money down the drain". She
recalled that on August 5th, 1975, when another development had an application before Council for re-zoning,
which her .group opposed, the Council refused that devleopment in Glen Falls because it would contribute to the
flooding problem, but that at that meeting, when Mr. Rocca's request for re-zoning was considered, it was ap-
proved because Mr. Rocca said he was going to put in a holding tank.
The Mayor advised that a letter was just received at this meeting, dated June 7th, 1976 and addressed
to the City Manager, by Mr. Pat Rocca of The Rocca Group Limited, asking that the Council be advised that the
company is going to build the holding tank in the area in which the company said it would so do. Mrs. Wayne
asked if the holding tank can now be put in, and if it will be the engineers of lrr. Rocca or of the City who are
going to tell the Council whether it is possible now, since all of these apartment buildings are up, to put in
the holding tanks. She stated that she would like the Council members to go and look at the site, and at the
plans, personally, and tell her if the area is still available is shown on the plan for the holding tank, and if
it is possible to put it in, now that the whole development out there is completed. Mrs. Wayne advised that she
496
~
"?dW 7( QCca
J(f76Ca {;!rOf,e1'
~f~.
Westmpl' kn
G",pye /lt$.
$".b-d/v.
UM-kr .stP~..r
t-G1J7~ .s
~/I?#?//Inf '
91e~ ~#s
C!/eJ? h//s
F/",,;( ammo
~h c;ee/r
Ss/; U/~J1e
~t?t"t"~ C1>".,dl".
.Ifp{'.
$v./-dly. a!/p~-
nuu?-&-
spoke with Mr. Walker of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and asked him if there was an agreement
between the Corporation and the Rocca development for the Westmorland Grove Heights and his reply was. .
affirmative and he checked this and told her there was to be a holding tank in there - there is a par~graph .
(in the agreement) on it. She stated that she asked Mr. Walker the following: if the Glen Falls repre-
sentatives had not appeared on the scene on June 4th last (Mr. Vicars and Mrs. Wayne) does Mr. Walker feel
that the Rocca development would have put in the holding tank, would have thought of a holding tank, or
would have offered the $50,000.00 in another manner -- and Mr. Walker replied to her that he does not.
Mr. Pat Rocca was present and advised that he has talked with Mrs. Wayne during the last year on
many occasions and has had meetings with her and the Glen Falls Flood Committee several evenings; Mrs.
Wayne has not called him personally on this particular subject - he heard about it from Mr. ~cKinstry.after
he had a conversation with Mrs. Wayne - and on the same day - he immediately told 11r. McKinstry what the,
company's position was and Mr. McKinstry called Mrs. Wayne, and the said letter of June 7th, 1976 addressed
to the City Manager from The Rocca Group Limited is only a confirmation of what Mr. McKinstry said to Mr~.
Wayne - that the company might not put the holding tank. Mr. Rocca stated that, regardless - the company's
re-zoning was approved by the Common Council to the Planning Advisory Committee with the holding tank -
there is no question in the company's mind that it is going to instal the holding tank. He stated that
there have been several occasions on which he has mentioned to Mrs. Wayne himself that now that the Common
Council has received this report (Proctor & Redfern Ltd.) and it looks as if there will be action taken on
a long-term solution for the Glen falls flooding, maybe the $50,000.00 that it will cost should be put up
against that cost. He stated that the company is not trying to get away from spending $50,000.00 - it is
prepared to give it to the City - so on and so forth; but this idea was advanced the last time, by himself
personally, at a meeting as soon as the Proctor & Redfern Report came out. He stated that the idea that
the company will not build a tank, in his mind, has never crossed unless the City went ahead with this
major expenditure and the City felt that there was a better solution. Councillor /1. Vincent, referring to
the site shown on a drawing by Mrs. Wayne where the holding tank was proposed to go, asked if that site is
still available for the tank on application. Mr. Rocca replied that he can assure the Council and Mrs.
Wayne that the location that the holding tank was shown is still there and there are no apartment buildings
situated on it. In reply to Councillor MacGowan's question, Mr. Rocca felt that it would take maybe six
weeks to instal the holding tanks. She expressed the hope that the said tanks are installed before the
apartments are rented. Mr. Rocca replied that the major part of the project is the high rise buildings and
the foundations for those are just being started now - the foundations are not even twenty-five per cent
finished; in the smaller apartments, there are 15 buildings of twelve units each and these will all be
completed by the end of the summer; two or three buildings will be ready for occupancy by July 1st this
year, he believes; the project is one Phase and it is not going to be completed until next spring; the
holding tanks will be done this summer. Councillor MacGowan noted that the few houses that would be ther~
this summer in this development would not add to the problem of flooding. Mr. Rocca confirmed this ob- ,
servation. During ensuing discussion between Councillor Parfitt and Mr. Rocca, the point was brought out:
that Westmorland Grove sub-division, Phase I, also included one high-rise building the foundation of which
was just started two weeks ago.
I
I
.
Mrs. Wayne advised that during discussion between Mr. Vicars, herself and Mr. McKinstry, she
asked the question as to whether the holding tank in question was installed, who was going to operate ,the'
tilllk, and Mr. McKinstry replied that the City's men would operate it. She asked if that was the agreement
that the Council heard on August 5th, 1975. At the request of the Council members, the Common Clerk at
this time read the above named letter written by Mr. Rocca of The Rocca Group Limited to the City Manager',
dated June 7th, 1976, which states "We understand Mrs. Elsie Wayne has written a letter to the Mayor and
Council saying that our firm will not be constructing a drainage holding tank at the Westmorland Grove
project. If this subject comes up at tonight's Council meeting, would you please inform the Mayor and
Council'that we are definitely constructing the tank at the same location that was always shown on the
plans. It should be kept in mind that Phase I of Westmorland Grove will not be completed until next
spring."
I
,
,
Councillor Higgins stated that he sees a little bit of hedging here, and it may not necessarily,
be Mr. Rocca's fault: we started with an understanding, in order to get the re-zoning; if he interprets M~.
Rocca's words correctly, Mr. Rocca was saying that the company, of course, was willing to put the $50,'000,00
into a holding tank but now that the Proctor & Redfern Report came in maybe the company might be able to
use its money in a sharing over the over-all project - and he thinks that is a very gracious gesture on Mr.
Rocca's part. Councillor Higgins stated that he is saying that this Council and with all the turmoil 'it
has gone through over the last few years on re-zonings in the City of Saint John - we say that this is
going to be done, he does not want anybody from the City or any outside report to change it that the said' ...
company can move its money elsewhere - if Mr. Rocca and the said company has the responsibility of a
holding tank and that is how they got their re-zoning - whether or not it has to be ripped up two years
from now for the over-all good of the Glen Falls area - Councillor Higgins still thinks that holding tank
has to go in. In reply, Mr. Rocca stated that he wholeheartedly agrees, except that this was only a ,
suggestion to the Glen Falls Flood Committee that he made to that Committee, and the Committee did not :
accept it, and he never carried the suggestion any further. Councillor Higgins pointed out that I~. Rocc~
still has the obligation to the Mayor and Common Council of the City of Saint John that said he got the re-
zoning because of these following stipulations. Mr. Rocca stated that that is correct. Councillor Pye
stated that in order to be assured that no further complications occur in this regard, he would like to .
propose a motion at this time. The Mayor pointed out that a motion is not made while a delegation is
,
before the Council. Councillor Pye stated that, therefore, he would like to comment, and would later put
it in the form of a motion, that in order to be assured that there be no other hitches in this programme,: III
that Rocca Construction Limited be bound by a later motion compelling the company to install the holding
tanks before occupancy of any unit is permitted in the complex in question.
Councillor Gould asked if the City has a sub-division agreement with the Rocca Group regarding ,
thi~ matter. Mr. Zides replied that there is a subdivision agreement on the cost-sharing between the City
and the Rocca Group, or Rocca Construction Limited. Councillor Gould asked if there is agreement, in that
agreement on the part of Rocca Construction Limited, or Rocca Group, to install one retaining tank. Mr.
Zides made, affirmative reply. Councillor Gould asked if there are specifications of that retaining tank in
that agreement. Mr. Zides replied that there is subsidiary to it, and among the plans that are approved by
the Commissioner of Engineering and Works and his Department. Councillor Gould commented that, in that
case, all we now have to do is enforce the agreement. Mr. Zides replied that that is correct. Councillor
Gould added that, then, the tank will be put in, and there is no problem. Mr. Zides agreed with that
comment. Councillor Gould asked Mr. Zides: why would we not, in the future - obviously, we cannot do it
right now - when we have sort of an extra part of the agreement, or a condition, that we are concerned
with - for the agreement to be signed that certain specifications are met - in this case, namely, one
retaining tank - why would we not have in the agreement that that must be installed first before any other
construction takes place - that would be the sensible thing on the City's part, before construction could:
even take place and the City would not get itself in all these "hassles" - why do we not make that part of
our agreement? Mr. Zides replied that he thinks it depends on the particular issue at that point in time'-
whether it is logical to do one thing first, or not; sometimes, it certainly would be.
I
.
Councillor Kipping asked for clarification on whether this project is to have one holding tank,:
or more than one. Mr. Barfoot stated that he thinks, in fairness to the various people involved, something
~
,....
.
I
1? t?ceca ?;.
,;(~,/.
I ~-k,.
/'e::Y~/~
F/i?P4hY,
~~ ~//$
H,,/ a""'A>7
/i!a"sh a.
U/es#m~h.
. Gl'V?pe ##5_
.s~-~iv.
R~cc.,;;;>
(?p;;dr. ~
I
.
l/lhl'7H4'11
'7?epo,.t-
;Pqhee 2)tpI:
1/('11'7.1 $'1-
7?,.ct'''h~
p/e!/(!]es In
q. fM $Ide-
IV~/ks :
j71'P05ec<<fiQ/1,
C/'/e-/.t?~
717/ice
.
'Pt?//ce:l)ep.
If/rdor~cle
~
497
of the background of the retention tank.should be remembered and explained; that this was an attempt to control
the increase in run-off which would be due to the building of Mr. Rocca's development - it was an attempt backing
any other means of controlling run-off - and what Mr. Rocca has said at this meeting of Council, and Council will
remember that we have a plan before us now which involves .the construction of storage dams which have hundreds of
thousands of times the capacity of this one small retention tank that Mr. Rocca is going to construct - and it is
always a question as to where the best use of resources can be made - he thinks that the Council and Mrs. Wayn'es
group would certainly agree that if a better solution comes up before money has been expended, that money should
not be expended for an inferior solution if a better solution, giving better flood protection, can be found for
the same expenditure. Mrs. Wayne agreed that Mr. Barfoot has a point, and stated that her main point before
Council at this meeting is this: that she visited Westmorland Grove Heights development, and had she not done so,
she honestly and truly feels - and she is sure that the Council must agree by now - that neither Mr. Pat Rocca
nor herself would be at this meeting of Council, no holding tank would be in, and no $50,000.00 would be offered
to be spent in any other way, as well. Councillor Higgins noted that that is a presumption on Mrs. Wayne's part -
he felt that a debate between Mrs. Wayne and Council in this matter is unworthy of this Council and Mrs. Wayne
and is uncalled for - what has been stated at this meeting regarding the contract (for the holding tank) et
cetera, is public knowledge, he noted. Councillor Higgins explained that what he was speaking of was Mrs.
Wayne's presumption that if she had not done something, it would never have happened. Mrs. Wayne advised that
she asked Mr. Barfoot to do what they (she and Mr. Vicars) did. Councillor Hodges advised that, as far as he is
concerned as a Council member, the agreement that the City made with Mr. Rocca in this matter, to get the buildings
in his development constructed, stays, as long as he is a member of this Council - that is his own words, and Mr.
Rocca's words, and he (Councillor Hodges) intends to keep his.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the retention facility in this Rocca development is one, or more than one,
holding tank. She received the reply that it is one holding tank. She stated that she understands that the City
collects a building permit fee and she understood that inspection was supposed to take place. She asked if there
has been any inspection of this development site at all, because if there has been, how did the project get so
far without the holding tank - she would have thought that would have been the first thing to have gone in. In
reply, Mr. MacKinnon supplied the following information: first of all, there are two inspections that are going
on on this site - one form is the building inspection for just the building services - the second types of
inspection that are going on are for the services on site, and that would be services relative to the sub-division
agreement - those services are carried out by the Engineering Department through Mr. Griffin and they have been
dealing with Mr. Rocca's engineers consistently over the last number of months on these services; the question as
to why the tank has not gone in - there are a number of things that have not gone in yet, and they will all go in
their particular staging or phasing - they do not have to go in at a particular time - something has to be second
or third - the tank was not designed in the scheme to go in first; there has been discussions not only with the
City but with the Department of the Environment concerning the effectiveness of a tank on the site. Mr. Mac-
Kinnon stated that he can appreciate that the decision by Mr. Rocca to put the tank on the site and its accept-
ance by Council was firm - however, the Department of the Environment were concerned that the tank would not be
as effective as the control of the storm water at the adjacent Mystery Lake and/or the lakes above it, and that
part of it is merely amplifying what Mr. Barfoot has already said; early in the design scheme - and this was
prior to the Proctor & Redfern Report - Mr. Rocca did have a discussion with Mr. MacKinnon indicating that he
would prefer to place his money where he felt it would have a much bigger impact - however, at that point in
time, the City was not in a position to require that he contribute money to a development of a dam at Mystery
Lake - so, at that time, the only scheme that was acceptable was the construction of a retention tank; at this
particular point in time, the Engineering Department and the Department of the Environment feel that it would be
better served to place the money in the storage areas either at Mystery Lake or Kelly Lake - however, this has
only been a point of discussion, and the retention tank has not been taken out of the scheme by Mr. Rocca or by
the City's engineers or by the Department of the Environment who are involved with storm water control. Coun-
cillor MacGowan asked: have we ever insisted upon a storage tank in any other development? Mr. MacKinnon made
negative reply. . Councillor MacGowan asked Mr. MacKinnon: do you feel that this is logical, though, that the
buildings should go up, and then the storage tank should go in - is that the natural sequence - is that not like
building the house first and then the foundation, afterwards? Mr. MacKinnon made negative reply, stating that he
does not think that the metaphor is quite accurate. He stated that he thinks that in all of our sub-divisions
the services mostly have always gone in after the development - the only thing that has been coincident with the
development has been water and sewerage - however, streets, curbing, landscaping, trees, et cetera, have all gone
in well after the development. Councillor MacGowan felt that the retention tank is more along the line of water
and sewerage. Mr. MacKinnon replied in the negative, advising that a necessary part of the development of it is
the sanitary sewerage and the water - however, storm control is something that can go in after the development _
he is not saying that it is necessarily correct, but it is something that can go in afterwards; at this point in
time, for example, we are now starting to enter the dry part of the season and the emergency, he supposes, is not
as important, and we are attempting to provide much more storage volume in Mystery Lake than we have before as
well as proceeding on other lines of attack, for providing more storage in the upper areas.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the 1975 annual report of the Police Department, that
was laid on the table on May 3lst last, be removed from the table at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the 1975 annual report of the Police Department be received
and filed.
Councillor Pye commended Chief Ferguson on the excellence of the above named report, and stated that,
at the same time, he received five reports within the last two weeks from elderly people wno narrowly escaped
serious injury on the sidewalks and in the area of King Square from flying bicycles - so, therefore, his praise
of the said report is tempered in this regard. He asked Chief Ferguson why no action has been taken in that
regard throughout the year, and he noted that the said report shows no indication of law enforcement in regard to
bicycles, and he asked why this is so. In reply, Chief Ferguson stated that the Department has put extra people
out, now that summer is here and people are using bicycles in the King Square area and all through the city on
the sidewalks, and the Department will be prosecuting those who are committing the offences. He stated that the
report that he is getting is that the young people, who are the peoply that usually are using the bicycles, are
driving extremely carefully - and he added that he personally has not had any complaints. from any citizen during
the past three months about bicycle infractions - no-one has reported it to him, and it has not been brought to
his attention - but he will certainly look into it, immediately, and if bicycle riders are violating the Depart-
ment will ensure that they are warned or prosecuted, whichever it feels is proper. Councillor Pye advised that it
would be greatly appreciated if the Chief would instruct his men to pay particular attention to this particular
fact because it is hazardous - the Chief may not be getting the reports, but Councillor Pye is getting them.
Councillor MacGowan discussed with the Chief the question of children who drive bicycles being made aware,
probably through the schools, of which side of the street they are supposed to drive on, in the interests of
their safety and the safety of motorists on streets and highways. Councillor M. Vincent asked if any thought has
been given, taking into consideration the situation regarding traffic at busy times in this city, and also in an
emergency, that it might be difficult to get a conventional Police vehicle to the emergency - to the use of
motorcycles, and if they would be of any benefit to the Police Department. Chief Ferguson replied that the
498
~
;Z>t?~'C'e 2J~.
171#e>rcyc/es
/~/h;J?~
f7r'~"'01,,"p?e
/Jf,n#Jq
re 'pI?rt-
Fltre .2J~..,..
~I/~K F/I"e
:l)~ h1eet/J?f
:Be// oR/OlI"n?
s!fd~n, (,c.;1/se
_ k"NS
1?v~ICI/o'? C~
t::Jij7//-_/ ~
!Yelf/ h';te .JC-".
7fOCCOl Cbnd-,../t
Hhdnc/a/
S#a-le/7'1en~$
~ 'pl"bc,ssi;,.
e?,"-'',PH/eh-t-
(ce>~'pu~el'>)
/YI,~A&
"e'ppI"r
Department has looked at such possibility, but the Saint John weather and. the hills here are a problem for
the use of such a vehicle. He added that it can be looked at again with the Council Protection Committee
and himself. Referring to the said 1975 report which deals with the in-service training programme,
Councillor M. Vincent asked: how many have we who have gone through in-service training in the City of
Saint John in 1975, and is the in-service programme still continuing? Chief Ferguson replied that the
said programme is still continuing and not only that, but for maybe a day or two days, we call groups in'
and go over the City by-laws, the Motor Vehicle Act, and the Liquor Act, et cetera, to keep up with the'
various changes, particularly the Criminal Code - the Criminal Code is being revamped and it is quite.
difficult to keep up with it - but the Department is having in-service training all the time; he would say
that between 40 and 50, other than.CPIC training, went through in-service training in 1975. Councillor
Hodges recalled that the City of Saint John Police Department used to have motorcycles of different kinds,
and he asked if the Chief of Police considers a motorcycle to be a dangerous instrument. Chief Ferguson,
made affirmative reply. Councillor Hodges asked why, then, would consideration be given to using motorcycles
in the Police Department. Chief Ferguson replied that he has great concern about motorcycles and the
Police Department member operating one, and that unless really a situation developed that we really needed
it, he personally does not think that situation is present. Councillor Hodges noted that motorcycles are
employed by the Police Departments of Montreal and Toronto, but he understands that many of the men
operating them get hurt because cars run them down. He stated that he would not be a supporter of motor~
cycles. Councillor Hodges made reference to the fact that one case is referred to at the end of the said
annual report, and stated that he does not believe this particular case should have been so exposed in the
report, taking into consideration the feelings of the family of the person who was convicted and sent to
prison, and the fact that the reason the man was sent to prison, in his personal view, was not justifiable.
Councillor Parfitt recalled that the Kates, Peat, Marwick & Co. Organizational Report was very critical of
the basic training programme, discipline, et cetera, of the Police Department, and made some recommendations
because at that time it indicated that the then Chief of Police was retiring. She asked if Chief Ferguson
would say there has been progress made along this line, according to the recommendations of the said
Organizational Report. She added that she believes so. Chief Ferguson replied that we have the best
training programme, in-service and outside, of any Police Department, he would say, east of Ontario, and.
possibly including Ontario - and that he thinks the facts speak for themselves - the members not only have
been training - one or two do not want to go, but this is also true in every avenue - one just returned
from the training in Prince Edward Island and he led the class - a Detective who took training in New York
led the class - he thinks this speaks extremely well, and we have an excellent training programme.
Councillor Parfitt commented that it was a very good annual report.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report for April of the Fire Department, be
received and filed.
Councillor Green expressed the view that the exchange meeting that was held between the Fire
Chief and members of the Saint John Fire Department, as referred to in the above report, with officers of
the Halifax Fire Department, for an exchange of ideas common to the two Fire Departments, and that will be
carried out again next year, is an excellent programme. Councillor Gould, referring to the said report
and its reference to the number of false alarms from bell alarms, expressed the view that it may be time;
for the Department to get rid of the bell alarm. boxes. Councillor M. .Vincent pointed out that the Pro- !
tection Committee was asked to study the bell alarm system and that the Committee will be reporting back.
on the matter, and he stated that he felt it was inadvisable to discuss the subject, at this time.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for en-
gineering services, in regard to the following named capital projects:-
1. Fire Station, Carmarthen and Leinster Streets
(a) Rocca Construction Limited
Construction of the Fire Station
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated June 2, 1976
.
I
I
.
I
$ 578,579.00
63,692.00 .
9,553.80
Nil
1,
$ 54,138.20
(b) Rocca Construction Limited
Construction of Fire Station
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated June 2, 1976
$ 578,579.00
178,554.00 I
26,782.80
54,138.20
2,
$ 97,633.00
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the months of March and
April, be received and filed.
The Mayor noted that he does not see a complete report in the above named Statements on what the
City pays on rent for the computer. He added that $2,320.00 was the amount when the City first applied
for this equipment at the Council meeting of October 28th, 1974, and he asked if there is a total compiled
in that regard. Mr. Barfoot replied that we will try to report out on that matter next week, if it is
permissible. The Mayor agreed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the report for April of the Division of Technical and
Inspection Services, including Plumbing, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
I
.
~
,..-
/l5'pha/~
. S&e'p~6')?
~~a.
Ara.
'-'""^'
I //. fi'. J) P~
L'P.
/Jd.;h?p.s
.f'et?s rt!?
F/J7&iJ.I7c; a/
I R~Jrt- /7'/';
.
I
C/'y ~r.
{'p/llt>1. ,c; hGll1e
/976".
h'nOincia/
1?e'ppI"T
(edl"d1C~s)
.
SJ. Ct!f
/-k/I kP4
r/n; {}/J,,//rJ. ~
C/-t'f lid/!
air ~1Q;;ly
l-te.s:t-
re.su./~$
I
/1/,., 9.~h:t.
~es-E/n .ff
C/-r ;n/el'VC1h
.
~
49~
given for payment of the following invoice from Stephen Construction Company Limited for the supplying of asphalt
to the Engineering and Works Department during the period May 17th to 31st, 1976:-
Binder
3/8 Seal
S. Seal
Liquid
5. 56 tons
2,628.18 tons
78.99 tons
1.11 tons
$ 61. 66
32,642.00
1,031. 61
88.80
$33,824.07
$11. 09
12.42
130.6
80.00
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Com-
missioner of Finance, advising that the City auditors, H. R. Doane & Company, have recently filed with the
Department of Municipal Affairs the financial report required by regulation for the year 1975 and expect to have
their audit report thereon ready for filing with the City of Saint John in about a month's time, and that in the
meantime, however, they have submitted an interim billing for work expended to date, and further advising that as
the. said auditors' audit work commenced in mid 1975 it is reasonable for the City to make a progress payment
before the final report is completed, and that it is, accordingly, recommended that the said billing be paid,
namely the interim billing in the amount of $12,000.00 on account for services on the 1975 audit -- be received
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor MacGowan asked what the complete fee would be for the above named audit work. Mr. Park
advised that the above named interim billing is not the complete fee; he does not know how much the complete fee
will be until the work is completed. In reply to Councillor MacGowan's question as to how much the auditors' fee
was for 1974, he stated that it was $19,000.00. Councillor Kipping discussed with Mr. Park his own suggestion
that the City should have an internal audit, and raised the question of an estimate of cost of such a practice.
Councillor Kipping explained that his thinking is that H. R. Doane & Company would do an internal audit - that
is, he means to have that firm, or some other auditing firm, do an audit in the City, but not the above noted
kind of an audit - it would be an audit in which they test the procedures and the systems. Mr. Park observed
that the said auditors do that as part of their routine and the resulting report is what will be coming to
Council in about a month's time - in making the submission, these auditors give to Council a long, detailed
report on the finances of the City and any other observations they feel justified in making as a result of their
examination. Councillor Kipping felt that perhaps the Council can discuss this subject further at another time,
but that he feels the Council should probably ask for observations along certain lines in the nature of an
internal audit but done by an external firm - and that he believes that periodically every large organization,
and particularly a government organization like the City, should do this. In reply to Councillor Kipping's query
regarding an estimate of cost of such an audit, Mr. Park pointed out that it would entirely depend upon the scope
of it and it is something that would have to be discussed as to scope before engaging anybody. He added that the
Council should not overlook the fact that in the course of examining the records of the City and reporting upon
the financial operations for the year, they do cover the internal organization from the point of view of finances
in the course of this examination. Councillor Kipping commented that they do not cover the handling procedures
and that kind of thing. Mr. Park stated that he feels they do - he thinks perhaps there are degrees, but it
would be wrong to say that they do not examine them. Councillor Kipping stated that, in his opinion, the degree
is not sufficient to test the internal workings of the financial procedures and administrative procedures. He
stated that he will make a submission on this subject in the future.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submitting a report from
the Commissioner of Finance which contains extracts from the 1975 City of Saint John financial report, which
financial report will be filed in full within about a month's time with the Common Council and which report from
the Commissioner of Finance illustrates the sound financial management exercised by Council and staff, part-
icularly in the latter quarter of 1975 when faced with wage settlements in excess of the amount budgeted - and
noting that the deficit in the General Fund of $223,237.00, less than 1% of the gross budget, is much smaller
than the forecast of $500,000.00 to $900,000.00, which could have been the result in the absence of firm man-
agement control -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Gouncillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, in regard to the letter
from Saint John City Hall Employees' Union, Local 486 to Common Council's meeting of May lOth, 1976 which com-
mented on the quality of the air in the City Hall building and suggested that an air test be done, submitting a
copy of results of such a typical test done on May 17th, 1976 at 10.00 a.m. which shows that all areas checked
out normal, and advising that from time to time, mechanical difficulties are experienced with the air conditioning
equipment and when such equipment is down for repairs, the quality of the air suffers a slight deterioration, and
that the owners of the building are very cognizant of this and on recent occasions have worked around the clock
in order to get the equipment back working with the least possible delay -- and recommending that the said
submitted report be received and filed and a copy of same be sent to Local 486 -- be received and filed and the
recommendation adopted.
During ensuing discussion, Mr. Barfoot advised that the City staff will be continuing to discuss with
the owners of the City Hall building the matter of having spare equipment on hand for the areas of equipment that
break down frequently in the building, to ensure that the periods of breakdown are extremely limited. Councillor
MacGowan stated that she wonders if we could ask the building owners to make regular checkups at odd intervals
over a period of two or three months, just to make sure of the quality of air in the building. She recalled that
later on the same day that the check was made (May 17th, 1976) the equipment broke down and the air quality in
the building was very uncomfortable. She noted that the eighth floor of the building, and a great many floors in
the building, were not tested on May 17th, according to the test results report, and stated that she thinks all
floors should be tested, at odd intervals. She asked if that could be a recommendation, and that Council get a
further report, because she does not know how some of the staff who work all day long on figures or at a desk
stand the air quality in this building, and she added that they leave the building in a very groggy condition as
a result of such conditions. She stated that she personally has experienced the same air conditions in this
building. Mr. Barfoot stated that he will accept Councillor MacGowan's recommendation in this matter. Coun-
cillor Green asked if the City Manager would check with the manager of this City Hall building and find out if it
is possible to have on hand a stand-by piece of equipment or a piece of equipment that, once it has broken down,
may be some time before it is replaced. He stated that he agrees with the observations made by Councillor
MacGowan regarding the difficult working conditions .for the staff due to air quality and that it is difficult to
get the work output from the staff because they are not feeling well. He asked that the City Manager take note
of his request and follow it up. Councillor Kipping noted that May 17th was a Monday, and he suggested that air
quality tests on Monday, after a week-end in which the air is cleared out and perhaps not used by hundreds of
people as it would be through the week, is not the best day to take a test. He suggested that later in the week
would be a more relevant time to take tests of air in this building. Councillor Gould, at the opening of the
500
U4 iercr S6'lVt5'J
2?~-M.w
tV~~~
n.;;d-es
Re-..zpn/n5
lfel7/JebeeCls; s
/feal-t::j /-6-d.
G!'-I'>J;!i~ e
2Iy-~w
aforegoing discussion period, had noted that the said C1V1C Union had requested that air quality tests be
taken two times during the day, both at 10.00 a.m. and at 4.00 p.m., and yet the test was only taken at ,
10.00 a.m. on May 17th last. Mr. Barfoot's reply to that observation was that he felt that the results qf
this test proved no problem developing and the time when you are going to get a poor test is when the :
equipment is down, so probably if we wait until the equipment is down to call the men in to take a test we
are going to get the necessary results.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Gould voting "nay".
In connection with the Water and Sewerage By-Law amendment third reading at this time, Mr.
Barfoot advised that the following revisions in the draft of this by-law amendment are necessary:- in
Schedule "A", the left-hand column heading should read "Net Flat Rates"; in Schedule "B", the left-hand
column heading should read "Net Metered Rates", The Council members noted that this revision will be
contained in the final draft of the said amendment.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
especting Water and Sewerage", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Coinmon Seal affixed
thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Higgins, Gould, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Hodges and Kipping voting "yea" and the Mayor and.Councillors M. Vincent, Pye and Green voting "nay".
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting Water and Sewerage", was read in it,s
entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-'
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning a parcel of land
on the south side of Boar's Head Road, approximately 800 feet east of its intersection with Woodward
Avenue and to the rear of the H. A. Seaman residence, from "R-IB" One-Family Residential district to "R-2"
One- and Two-Family Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law.to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments;
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution. '
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a.By-Law to
Provide for the Collection of Garbage in The City of Saint John", be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Provide for the Collection of Garbage in The
City of Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Prohibiting the Throwing or Depositing of Litter on Streets in The City of Saint John", be read a third
/ '7) / time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
/.. /Uer -Oy-niil.
.7Ja7,.y/ .E~
G-o/d'en t;;;.ol/e
~d:
~':/7?' ~ ~
e 1?d ;-
a~Q5.~tIi'l7ce~,
t;!ref?I7, //p~e.s;
7jfe
qs"~ ~'%..J7e
rrlen ~~:-Il
Vf/,;,{t!/" d~e
td~,f,H'esb:,;1]b.
CroJ'e lIis.SuJ.d',' ,
~ If't?cec!t I
1?~ r;rl.,u,? ~
I
~
.!
~
I
I
.
I
The by-law entitled,"A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Prohibiting the Throwing or Depositing of Litter
on Streets in The City of Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above re-
solution. .
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that with regard to the presentation made by Mr. Daryl E.
Watson on behalf of residents of the Golden Grove Road to have this Road upgraded, properly drained and
resurfaced, the Mayor be empowered to appoint a committee of Council to meet with a committee of the said,
Golden Grove Road residents and City staff, to see what can be done.
Councillor M. Vincent noted that a comment had been made during the above named presentation of'
the Golden Grove Road people that some of the patching and some of the paving had been done on this Road '
within the last week, and he asked, if, in fact, that was done since there was a request made for the
Council to tour some areas of the city - that is, was it just done within the last four or five days. Mr.
Barfoot replied that it is obvious that some patching has been done on that street as it has been done on
other streets in the city since the asphalt plant has been in full operation - certainly, there has been,
patching done on Golden Grove Road within the last week. He added that there are two patch crews on that,
Road today. Councillor M. Vincent asked if any patching was done on that Road prior to the last week.
Making affirmative reply, Mr. Barfoot stated that a patch crew was out there, three weeks ago; he added
that such patching work is just general maintenance and does not come out of the amount allotted in the
capital budget; the big areas on this Road that have been done are part of the general maintenance pro-
gramme.
The Mayor at this time appointed Councillors M. Vincent,
referred to in the above resolution. They consented to so act.
Green, Hodges and Pye as the committee,
i
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that with regard to the presentation made at this ;
meeting by Mrs. Elsie Wayne, Chairman of the Glen Falls Flood Committee, regarding the fact that, as yet,;
no drainage holding tank has been built at the Westmorland Grove development project of The Rocca Group ,
Limited, which on-site storage was a provision requirement in the approval by Common Council of re-zoning;
to permit the said development on August 5th, 1975, the Common Council reaffirm the agreement the Council'
,
made with Itr. P. Rocca of the said company when the Council approved the said re-zoning.
I
I
.
~
,....
.
...F"h/e~
C;e.., ,ccil//s
RQf/A! a",
UV~
~ 01;;)-.
Wdp;Po
I G?rol/t? ~s
SHb- a/v.
'J? ~O<X'~
'R~~
,,(r-L
--
I
.
I
PNV; Co.d.
s.J::u.~
brief!' poe $.T
dS/.",rKSlf,.;,w
C'el?ire ~ N.
<+-et!t7hl)h7/ C
,P,.o.ft"" ss ;;,
. SoT
OPh7.m. JlYJo.
I
L o.2JE, ~v.
ehdfJter,:J)~.
el/l7/e ~r;/'I
t:h11Qd/1 w/-t/'
/B;1"N/H,~
I d/.w///-E/es
1Y/;I7,EtL~
A'ockw..D4'
5t7h&>O/
JJe,o~./it_-
~/oh
st!!~()Q/ ~.
/Vo,~p
.
.....
50J
Councillor Higgins stated that he would like to see the above motion in effect, but if there is any
change that it be a decision made in consultation that may be for the greater good something might be served - as
far as he is concerned, the original arrangement goes forward but if there is a change - if the Department of the
Environment comes in, and the beginning of a long-range project and it is beneficial to everybody, and they
agree, then he thinks a change should be investigated in such case - but not without consultation with that group
(the Glen Falls.Flood Committee). Councillor Kipping stated that, from conversation with Mrs. Wayne since the
Council talked before, he believes that she and her group would not be averse to having a meeting with the City
staff and with the Rocca Group to decide, indeed, whether there is a better use that that $50,000.00 can be put
o - and he felt that the above motion should be a different motion, in such case. The Mayor replied that that
is exactly what the motion contains - that if any better method is apparent, they would go into consultation
about it. Councillor Higgins explained that the above motion is that the Council reaffirm the agreement it made
with 14r. Rocca. He noted that if there is any change, it is to be done with consultation. Councillor Kipping
noted that the motion does not contain any provision for a meeting between Rocca Group, City staff and Mrs.
Wayne's group in order to work out whether, indeed, as the City Manager himself suggested - and Councillor
Kipping agrees with it - there might not be a better way to use that $50,000.00. He noted that when this matter
first came up, he thinks that we all knew, or we should have known, that holding tanks were not a good long-term
solution to the problem - they were better than nothing, and that is the only reason that he voted to let the re-
zoning go through - and he did vote in favour of it at.the time only because the promise was made by The Rocca
Group that the holding tanks would be put in, but we all know that holding tanks is a very expensive and a quite
ineffective way of controlling that kind of a problem. Councillor Higgins pointed out that that is merely
presumption. Councillor Kipping stated that that is an engineering fact - the City Manager has said just tonight
that there may be a better way to spend that $50,000.00 ~ and all he (Councillor Kipping) is saying is that he
would prefer to have seen a motion which allowed for some discussion, some dialogue, between the three groups
concerned so that that possibility could be explored. He noted that the Council does not need to reaffirm
anything because it has it in writing now from The Rocca that they are going to do it - but Mr. Rocca himself
said to the Council that maybe there is a better way of doing it and that is why they delayed building the tanks.
Councillors Higgins and Hodges stated that they do not do business that way. Councillor Higgins stated that, in
his view, the Council made a deal and it keeps the deal - he does not want any loose ends that somebody could
say, they might come back to Council but that Council gave them an idea that it might have a better way of
handling it. He stated that his intent is to reaffirm the contract that was made by Council, and he thinks it
was made abundantly clear at this meeting. He added that if there is any other change, he is sure that Mrs.
Wayne is going to come in, and if Mr. Rocca says there is going to be a change, he is going to come before the
Council - then, that is the time for discussion, but right now, his intent is that Mr. Rocca fulfill his contract
as he agreed with this Council. Councillor Kipping replied that his idea is simply that - let us not tie it
down, indeed - let us not leave any loose ends - the idea is, let us throw it open for a better way, if there is
one - he added that we still have the agreement with Rocca - we have his letter saying he is going to do it the
way we wanted him to do it in the first place - there is no problem about that - the problem is whether the
$50,000.00 is going to be spent in the best way or in a wasteful way. He stated that his personal opinion is
that the holding tanks are wasteful - he would rather see them than not see them, but he would rather see a
better way, and he thinks there is a better way and if the three groups together, they can find it. Councillor M.
Vincent spoke in support of the motion. Councillor Pye noted that the above motion closes the door on his
opportunity to make doubly sure that Rocca Construction lives up to its obligations. He stated that he does not
understand why Councillor Higgins would move the above motion, knowing that the Glen Falls people are at least
entitled to that protection. The Mayor explained that the above motion has the same intent as the motion that
Councillor Pye had intended to put - that is, we are confirming exactly what is in the agreement, and they are
asking that the agreement be fulfilled. Councillor Kipping stated that he will not vote against the motion, but
he thinks the motion is unnecessary, as he had already pointed out. Councillor Gould also made the point that
the motion is not needed, because it is already in the agreement.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Pye voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the Common Council send a letter to the Provincial Government
in support of the presentation made by the Saint John Board of Trade on June 2nd, 1976 to the Premier and members
of the Provincial Cabinet of the Province of New Brunswick regarding economic progress in the City of Saint John.,
and that a copy of the Council's letter to the Provincial Government in this regard be forwarded to the said
Board of Trade.
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
reports
YOur Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, May 31st, 1976, when there were present
Mayor Flewwelling, and.Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and M.
Vincent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendation, namely:-
1. That the Common Council go on record as endorsing the provincial learning disabilities diagnostic
clinic for children that has been instituted through the efforts of the Provincial Chapter, Imperial Order
Daughters of the Empire, and that a letter of support of the Chapter's request for permission to use the Rockwood
Park School for such clinic be sent to the Minister of Education, the Department of Education, and the Board of
Trustees of School District Number 20.
7th June, 1976,
Saint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
(sgd.) E. A. Flewwelling,
C h air man.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recommendation
contained therein adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising
that G. B. Contractors Limited recently obtained a lot in the Spruce Lake Industrial Park on which it plans to
erect an $80,000.00 building for its fabrication shop, and, according to its letter, it is still waiting for
additional information from Atlantic Contractors Limited before applying for a building permit, and, in the
meantime, the said G. B. Contractors Limited is seeking a temporary permit to use a 10 foot by 30 foot "con-
502
~
"P/an'? /114-/9.
Ct7n?h7'
tfJQ~//e. ~oo/e
{(In/eel
(;..l3. Ctmr"="1d.
,<~a.
s'rC'pn$6>ud-.
/lSSI?C'. Ine.
:l3tA.//d'//;ff.
pel'mi-l- ~ees
:Po $ -r t?-h/ c
tf/e$ t- S/d"e
St(b-~OS-t-
o..,c;:/'ce
(See <:fJn;en.lt-
hJon--t- "* )
*
P~sr /fJ.~-e~1"
(}eJ?~ 1".;1 /
k/s/e ~Y}1e
t9kl1 /dJ//.s ;C~
COh?.In.
;:/Plltb~,
C/en ~a//S
/lk1'1'sh (j.,eek
COJ}-trp/
J>,.,y, (;()vi;:
0;f~ ~r,
struction trailer" on the site until such time as the building is ready; and further advising that an
inspection of the site by the Building and Technical Services Branch reveals that three mobile units are:
located on the property; and further advising that the so-called construction trailer would be used as a'
field office, and the other two mobile units are for equipment storage, and, in addition, some Eachinery'
is located there in open storage, and the site has been levelled; and.recommending that G. B. Contractor~
imited be given approval for the placement of the mobile "construction trailer" or "office" for a period
not exceeding one year -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted. '
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor. Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Construction Assoc-
iation Inc. advising that the organization is firmly opposed to the unwarranted increase in the cost of
building permits in the City of Saint. John as of April 9th, 1976, and asking what service they may expect
for these fees, and stating that, from their standpoint, it would appear that the construction buyers ar~
being asked to underwrite an ever increasing bureaucracy as the City in this year of so-called restraint'
imposes a further nuisance tax on the construction industry; and advising that at $4.00 per thousand the I
cost of building permits is approaching the cost of one hundred per cent bonding and while this may be of
little concern on government work, we must surely have an obligation to the private sector which does not
have the bottomless barrel of public funds from which to draw; and advising that the said organization ,
respectfully requests and strongly urges that the said increase in cost of building permits in the City of
Saint John be rescinded -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from ~tr. J. E. Scullion, Manager, Customer
Services, New Brunswick-Prince Edward Island District, Atlantic .Postal Region of the Canada postal system,
in reply to Common Council reslution of February 9th, 1976 by which the Council forwarded letters to Mr.
Michael Landers, Member of Parliament and to the Saint John Post Master, with a copy of the letter that
was sent to the said Post Master being forwarded to the Postmaster General of Canada, to see if a sub~Post
Office can be established in West Saint John -- advising that for the past several months the Saint John'
Post Master has endeavoured to obtain a sub-Post Office to serve the said area, without any success, and.
that two people with small businesses did apply, but withdrew their application because of the lack of
adequate remuneration as far as they were concerned, and further advising that, since then, it has be~n aP
impossibility to obtain any individual interested in carrying on the activities of a sub-Post Office, and
the matter remains open but appears hopeless at the moment - and assuring that every endeavour will be
I
made and possible investigation to supply such a service in this particular area -- be received and file~.
Councillor Hodges pointed out that the nearest sub-Post Office for the people in West Saint .John
to use is that on Church Avenue, which is inconvenient for the residents in the lower part of the area,
formerly called Carleton, and he advocated that the Postal authorities establish a building owned by the
Federal Government in the said area, and operate a sub-Post Office in same, for the convenience of these
taxpayer s .
Moved in amendment by Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges ,
RESOLVED that the above named letter be received and filed and the'
Common Council suggest to the Postmaster General that the Postal services officials insert an advertisement
in the newspaper saying they are looking for someone to operate the said sub-Post Office, and failing I
response, that the Common Council request that they open a post office of some type in the said area of
West Saint John, even if they have to rent or build premises for same.
Councillor Green spoke regarding the above named matter, pointing out that the people in the
said area of West Saint John are entitled to a sub-post office.
Question being taken, the amendment to the motion was carried.
During discussion of the above named matter, Councillor Kipping made the point that if the
Council is going to get any action out of the Post Office, it should let the postal authorities know
perhaps in pretty strong terms that the Council thinks there should be a sub-post office in that area of
West Saint John, and that they perhaps should look again at their policy and that it would be worth
looking into to see if the fee they pay to operators of sub-post offices in this party of the city is
consistent with the fee paid elsewhere in Saint John City and in other cities and in other regions; he
added that if their policy is not working here, then they have got to look at a new policy in order to
provide the service. He felt that perhaps the .amendment to the above motion should be more strongly
worded. The Mayor made reply that the amendment to the motion is strong because it makes the point that
we want a sub-post office in that area of West Saint John, regardless of how they establish it there, and.
suggests the various way it can be achieved.
Read a letter from Mrs. Elsie Wayne, Chairman of the Glen Falls Flood Committee, asking for the,
following information:- a report of the meeting of May 11th, 1976 at which the City officials met with. the
Provincial Environment officials in Fredericton, N. B. with regard to the flooding problems in Glen Falls,
Rothesay Avenue area; has the meeting taken place, and if not, why not, that the officials at the said May
11th meeting are understood to have within a two-week period after May 11th; a copy of the minutes of the:
tri-level meeting held in Saint John on May 3rd, 1976; an up-to-date report of just how things are pro-
gressing as to implementing and obtaining the funds to implement, corrective measures in the said area.
The letter states that Mrs. Wayne is sure that the Council will agree that some concrete facts should be '
forthcoming to the residents of Glen Falls by this time as to what is being done, for them by the City to '
obtain the 4.4 million dollars required to do the job to correct their flooding problems. Attached to the
letter from Mrs. Wayne was a copy of a letter from Mr. Cardy, Director of Water Resources Branch, Freder-I
icton (Department of the Environment), addressed to Mrs. Wayne advising that the meeting on May 11th with:
City officials, at their request, was held to determine the steps that must be taken to reduce flooding in
the Marsh Creek area, and they also discussed the Consultant's reports and identified some unanswered :
questions which they are jointly working on answering; and further advising that another meeting will be :
held on June 1st to discuss the flood plain management requirements that will need to be established, and
they anticipate that the City may want further meetings before announcing any comprehensive programme in !
the area. Mrs. Wayne's letter asks if Mr. Barfoot has received any report of the said June 1st meeting ,
and states that she trusts Mr. Barfoot does anticipate more meetings with regard to this problem.
Mr. Barfoot replied that the meetings were held at ~trs. Wayne's letter suggests, and this is a
continuing series of meetings between officials of the Province and of the City in an attempt to come up ,
with the details of the plan - the last meeting was held on June lst were they discussed land use control~
and local drainage problems - there will be another meeting, very shortly. With regard to the request for
a copy of the tri-level meeting minutes of May 3rd last, the Common Clerk replied that those minutes are i
not finished yet. Councillor Hodges pointed out that the Council itself does not have the information
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
"'O~3
b, .
.
I
I
.
(fie;, ~//s
+/f?pL/J?,ff
P/"f?Y. Cord:
/J1~,.sh C.
C?P~I'>f?/
C/'I-.~ ~r.
I t?k~ ~/h
~od d:>Avh1.
{bqq. C?,.een
. {Y,:t!l/ll~r.
PUh7.f.>S pe
-I'l'.?p;( il?5
I S'f?/~Y'~-
Sf?K/'1dS L#
/tg"h/otl"vlew
$/fb-L/I/.
7>~.tP1. /J~w's.
C e>17?>>1.
l7Jp;,.;l/d ./,
Cedh'J7an
1{,,/RI',t /lei/I'>-
fN'flye
r/7flp;le .7Q/1fe
~I;;;'J,.4~ns-
{!/7h7h1,
./e.:1n
. tl/i/f,'amSP'J'1
r-c . V..V-B_J
^ hl// I't?hhl';,r."iii
E,{uc Q/-f-i"n
,((J?phs-t-
%.r/~/ {;!.,{.
tC>h7pd-t7;,tYs
( reerN.rtl.1 nq$4-
..... 1"u~.P/h5s1
requested by the Glen Falls Flood Committee, .and in that case, it cannot go before the public until the Council
receives the information. Mrs. Wayne asked for an indication of how long it will take before we get some firm
agreement with the Province - how many meetings and how many months will this go on before the City Manager
finally.feels there have been enough meetings and Mr. Dube .can now approach the Federal Government. Mr. Barfoot
replied that he would anticipate, within the next two months, that we would be to a point where the agreement
could be discussed with the other levels of government. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he would like to ask
the following question, so as to not have this group that has appeared here so many times keep coming back
looking for information: is it likely that anything concrete will be established before next year? Mr. Barfoot
replied that he would like to keep the Council informed of the progress of these meetings when there is something
definite to report. He advised that we are going through technical problems at the moment with the other levels
of government; as to when this might be concluded, it is very difficult to say at the moment, but as the Council
well realizes from the previous experiences in negotiations with senior levels of government, it normally is a
pretty long-winded process before any work actually appears on the ground. In reply to Councillor Parfitt's
query as to whether there would be any delay occasioned at the two senior levels of government by one level
waiting on the.other to see what each will do in this matter, Mr. Barfoot advised that he thinks the outline of
the process were spelled out at the May 3rd meeting as to what had to be actually achieved in the way of an
agreement, and it was not, by any means, a simple process. Councillor MacGowan noted that Mr. Cardy's letter says
that the City may want further meetings before announcing any comprehensive programme, and she asked: when he
speaks of the City, does he refer to staff, or the Councillors and City staff? Mr. Barfoot replied that the
staff are meeting, but it is to Council that the staff is reporting and it would be the City which makes any
decision. Councillor MacGowan asked if there is any reason why a member of Council should not attend those
meetings, because, then, the Council members are better informed. Mr. Barfoot replied there is no reason. The
Mayor noted that Council members can attend such meetings. Councillor MacGowan asked that the Council members be
notified of the next meeting, so they can attend. Councillor Kipping felt that what ~trs. Wayne is asking is: can
the tri-level government system be speeded up a bit in this matter? He suggested that, with the summer vacation
period coming up, meetings will not take place during that period of July and August if it is not pressed. He
stated that he thinks that the matter is so serious whereby we are coming on to another rainy season in the fall,
that if the matter is not pressed we are going to be into next year, whether we like it or not, before even the
decisions as to what to do are made, let alone getting anything done. He stated that he thinks what Mrs. Wayne's
group is saying to the Council, and what the Council must say to the City Manager is simply that the matter
should be pressed with all greatest dispatch. He stated that he believes that the initiative has to come from
the City end - we down here are the ones most concerned - Provincial and Federal are much more remote and are not
all that concerned - if we do not push it, it is not going to get pushed; his personal opinion is that the City
should be pushing it, very hard. He stated that he would suggest a meeting a week; he stated he would suggest to
the City Manager that he ask the other levels of government if they would agree to a meeting a week for a certain
period of time and that the delegates, if possible at all, appoint alternates to attend these meetings in the
event of delegates being on holiday, so that the meetings do not have to stop. Councillor Gould cautioned that a
system of alternates for these meetings could only create confusion, and stated that he would not favour such a
system. Councillor Higgins pointed out that there is a tri-level meeting coming up before the end of June and it
is at that meeting that this particular matter should be discussed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the Common Council ask the City Manager that, following
the next tri-level meeting which is to be held prior to the end of June, the Common Council be provided with an
up-to-date report on what has taken place and where the matter stands with regard to the Marsh Creek flooding
problems control, and that the Council then forward a copy of such report to the Glen Falls Flood Committee,
after Council's perusal of such report.
Councillor Higgins stated that he thinks it is excellent to have an up-to-date report, and what have
you, but he does not think, and he does not think that Mrs. Wayne would go along with it, either, that the actual
minutes of a meeting involving tri-level agreement on finance, and what have you, is necessarily public infor-
mation as such until it is signed. He stated that he thinks what Mrs. Wayne wants is a progress report on how
things are going, and the same report the Council gets should be turned over to the said Committee; but minutes
are private business, and should remain so. Councillor Green, on this line of thought asked: has the City
Manager explored the possibilities of obtaining on a loan basis some good-sized pumps - or would the Emergency
Measures Organization have some that may be available, because no matter what gets under way he feels that the
residents of Glen Falls are going to have a flood - that we cannot be of any assistance to them, maybe on a small
scale - but he is still sold on the idea that even as an emergency measure, the pumps be available to boost some
of the water out of there at the high tides. He stated that he feels the City Manager should explore that
possibility, if he has not done so already and that he should look around - or even if there are pumps that may
be rented on a short-term or a short-notice basis, and if it is possible he feels we should have some of that
information, as well. Mr. Barfoot replied that he will follow up this suggestion. He added that we have already
got some additional information on the pumps required for that installation, and we will be following this
further. In reply to Councillor M. Vincent's question, Mr. Barfoot stated that he intends to schedule a meeting
prior to going on his vacation this month.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the letter from Shelter Resources Ltd. making application
to change the area reserved for townhouses in the planned development at Harbourview Sub-division, Ocean Drive,
Saint John East, to detached zero lot line and duplex houses in accordance with a plan to be approved by the
Planning Advisory Committee, be turned over to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Donald L. Cullinan on behalf of his
client, Mr. Ronald Hargrove, requesting that Mr. Hargrove be granted an extension of permission relating to the
location of his mobile home on Lot 72-3 (Mitchell Carr property) situate at Lorneville, Saint John, N. B., be
referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Jean Williamson of St. Andrews, N. B.,
requesting permission on behalf of two groups of teachers who are taking a University of New Brunswick course in
Environmental Education in Saint John this summer, which will involve as part of the course activities pertaining
to local history, to conduct a study on July 6th and July 8th next of the Loyalist Cemetery in the centre of the
city to make recordings from epitaphs and rubbings from tombstones be received and filed and the requested
permission granted.
504
Mol'lfh ~11/t I'h~
JpqrA,,~ttf /l.s5P~.
.z;,d/:aJ?~P;Yh
{Q.iil~oht-
($/eaJ7-.e,P (t5~;d-s,
bCi'ffe$)
hj6l'ff':>r
Hl1eeql pS
/Y~'/. //61Pbt?K".Y
-:JiL.
A'P~.rnd~'
bt?g,.Jp,,~ /1$$
~.p:.;a ~~~
~r;:;c. S'9'n.i
~1'7~1Y'..,t- u;"t?/"/f;
..:J}.er!T:
7r~m(..o/-
C'P.h7 h7
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
<;ecQnqed bY' COlJIlcillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from The North End Neighbourhood Assoc-'
iation, advising that the present time, the entire waterfront area from Robertson's Square to Spar Cove is
cluttered with derelict boats and barges, and that in addition to being visually unpleasant, these vessels
present a serious hazard to safety, and strongly urging that the Council initiate action on this matter at
once, and that, as a first step, it is suggested that a meeting be arranged immediately between the City'
Manager, representatives of the Common Council, the said Association, and the owner of the property, be
received and filed and a meeting be arranged immediately, as. requested with the said owners or owner.
The Mayor stated that as Mayor he was going to attempt to meet with the owner to see if he could
not get something stated in that way, to improve the above named area. Councillor Gould asked if any
progress is being made on determining who is responsible for those barges and derelict boats. He noted
that twice over the past week-end the Fire Department was called to this particular area (once, this '
morning, and once, over the week-end) to fires, and he stated that the situation is serious because, if
the wind was blowing in the wrong-direction in a fire, the fire would go from those boats to several
garages which are very close to these boats, he felt -and he noted that the owner of the garages, with
good reason, i~ concerned if the Council is not fulfilling its obligation and finding out who is res-
ponsible and getting the area cleaned up. Noting that there is a fence alongside the said area, Coun-
cillor Hodges stated that the two gates in this fence, when he was there the other day, were wide open.
He recalled that the purpose in this fence being erected in recent years was to protect the public from
going into the St. John River there, and that the gates were supposed to be kept locked. Mr. Barfoot
stated that the City was involved with the National Harbours Board in the erection of the fence, some
years back, and that he will have to check with the National Harbours Board on the issue of the gates.
Councillor Gould asked if a report will be forthcoming with regard to the responsibility in connection
with the said barges and derelict boats. Mr. Barfoot replied that this matter has been looked into in
this,last week with the National Harbours Board and the various legal remedies which may be available to
the City and, basically, a policy of meeting with the owner of the tugboats and the other hulks concerned,
he thinks, is the first step which should be taken; a report in this regard will be forthcoming as soon as
a meeting can be arranged. Councillor Gould asked if the City has ever held meetings in the past with the
gentleman who owns the boats in question - or with the owner of the barges. Mr. Barfoot replied that, td
his knowledge, such meetings were not held. Councillor Gould commented that these derelict vessels have'
been there four years that he is aware of, and probably many years before that.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from The North End Neighbourhood Assoc~
iation, listing a number of neighbourhood problems that are coming to light through the Association's
current participation in the Cities Neighbourhood Improvement Programme, such problems being related to
traffic problems and traffic signs, and submitting requests pertaining to same, be referred to the Eng-
ineering and Works Department and to the Traffic and Safety Committee for a report and recommendation.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Co n_Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the fourteenth
day of June, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Pye, Parfitt,
and A. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis,
Building Inspector, C. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks,
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, and E. Ferguson, Chief
of Police.
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Kenneth Stackhouse, pastor of
the West Saint John Church of the Nazarene.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on May
31st last, be confirmed.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
.
JJ.I/.;#:e/A'
~'rm;;U7
.:/)(i1170Il'Ql~
. 7?enials
C..M(.ftt:ws
o 96.2) ~-h(.
I C','lff ~~
s..T HSff-
Co""""" -
SalhL Cc>ve
1?~ I9nl'lex
. f/rt7f't'rl;!f
(!hUflCh o.f
-Me 1fI,;,'3.d
~
le~de;,s ,.,
at'MP//-t-/ ()
~/I-f!p Y'
k'Jrj? ress/Ph
C7P 7JlJr/elo
ment-In
I :N~,7n
~ 'I-y s::.;;. .
rit>e M';/I'''sha '
Ord".er
.
eAI4PCh of!
i-lJe#eil~
I
I
h"'e~
Order
.
~
505
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges.
~ESOLYE.D thl),t m~mJ.tes of the Ji).eei;ini'? of Co.mmon Counc;.g~ h,%\q Q11, ,J!)J.!l,,,- ]\11..
last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be granted for
payment of the following named invoices:-
. r
D. Hatfield Ltd.
D. Hatfield Ltd.
Norman Donovan Rentals
Chitticks (1962) Ltd.
dated May 18,
dated May 18,
dated June 1,
dated May 31,
$ 3,038.86
$ 16,809.30
$ 7,200.00
$ 9,915.97
1976
1976
1976
1976
Read a letter from the City Manager, dated June lIth, 1976 which states that Council at its meeting of
May 17th last referred the recommendation from the Saint John Housing Commission that the proposal of the Church
of the Nazarene for development of the former Provincial Hospital Annex property on Sand Cove Road be recommended
to Council, and that the matter of the sale or the lease of the land be referred to the Land Committee, to the
Land Committee and to City staff for an appraisal and a report, and that he understands that the Land Committee
is having an appraisal undertaken; further stating that at the May 25th last Council meeting tenders received for
the demolition of the Provincial Hospital Annex were considered and the recommendation of the Building Inspector
in this regard, which was to accept tender number 2 as submitted by Chitticks (1962) Ltd., in the amount of
$5,400.00, for the demolition of the entire building down to the foundation, and on the recommendation of the
City Manager the matter was tabled pending receipt of the reports requested at the meeting of May 17th from the
Land Committee and City staff. The letter advised that since that time, a further fire has taken place in the
building, causing more damage to what remains of the structure and increasing the hazard, and that on June 10th
the Common Clerk received the submitted Order from the office of the Fire Marshal, ordering that the.building-.be
prought 'up"tobstandards"or- demolished wi th"the work to be ,'-ompleted.'.onror"bel'o,e' July o'30th';,-1976;. 'In 'view - of
this::Order.'-and.'of- the:-BuiIding-.Inspectod s.recommendati6n;. the City cMimager:recomme,c,ds that.'.the -report on -tenders
for--demolition of the building be lifted from the table, and the tender for demolition be awarded as previously
recommended by the Building Inspector, and once demolition is authorized, Expressions of Interest could then be
called again for _ the development of the site . withOut the complication..of-the. dilapidated-.and fire."prone .building.
::J -~,:..;-;
--,_.,:,.
-- ;/.
. ;The . Mayor ,noted that Reverend Kenneth Stackhouse of..-the .Church ..of thE( Nazarene. would like to speak on
this subject, which was discussed at. a meeting of the Housing Commission-this date, who strongly recommend that
we hold off any action until we can make some decision as they requested that the westerly end be retained.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that Reverend Stackhouse be heard at this time.
r Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to ask the City Solicitor for a legal oplnlon as he
does not think that the Provincial Office of the Fire Marshal has the right to issue that Order on the City of
Saint John, under the City's Royal Charter. Mr. Rodgers replied that an opinion of this nature certainly goes
beyond this one Order - it covers the general application of the Provincial Fire Act itself to the City of Saint
John, and if the question is does the Fire Prevention Act of the Province apply to the City of Saint John then he
could have an opinion for the next meeting on this question.
Reverend Stackhouse stated that the proposal of the Church of the Nazarene, which has been recommended
by the Housing Commission, was to use the west wing of the Annex property for a church sanctuary, Sunday school
classrooms, youth recreation area and co~~unity day care service. Regarding the condition of the west wing of
this property, which is 147 feet long, he stated that this wing is still structurally sound and is still untouched
by fire; the foundation of the building is three feet thick; the walls are bricks; the floor is terrazo. He
stated that regarding the fire hazard, he realizes the Fire Marshal is concerned with the safety hazard that
exists on the Annex property, and so is the Church, however, the safety hazard can be rectified without the
demolition of the west wing. He stated that he believes that for Council to make a motion that would result in
the demolition of the west wing of the Annex property would be both irresponsible and insensitive to the needs
of the community. Furthermore, he stated that as a citizen of the co~munity, he believes that there is such a
need as that of a group which will be ministering to day care, to young people, and also, they are interested in
senior citizens. He stated he believes that the last fire at this property did some damage to the roof of the
centre section and whether or not there is any possibility of saving the centre structure he is not sure _ the
church is presently having. engineers looking this over for them. He stated he would like for Council to recon-
sider this Annex property and if there is any way possible of saving the west wing he believes we should do it.
He stated that he believes that to publicly recognize the needs of the community yet hinder the development of a
property which would meet these needs is somewhat absurd.
Councillor Parfitt stated it is so refreshing to have a proposal such as the one from the Church of the
Nazarene and she noted the experience of the Church of the Nazarene in this type of development. Reverend
Stackhouse noted that the Church of the Nazarene has been involved in community interest and believes, not at the
sacrifice of the gospel, faith without works is dead, and they are interested in the community.
Councillor Hodges asked if the Church to have a watchman on the site until the Council makes a decision
one way or the other. Reverend Stackhouse replied that they have made all possible effort to have a trailer on
that property up until now, and since that last fire he has been personally watching that building himself every
night.
Mr. Rodgers brought to the attention of the Council members that whether the Order from the Fire
Marshal applies or not, the Order says that the building be brought up to an acceptable standard or demolished by
July 31st, 1976. Councillor A. Vincent remarked that there is no way physically possible to bring that wing even
up to standard in that length of time, and he asked if there is any way the Legal Department could meet with the
Attorney.General.'s:'Department asking for a reasonable extension of time. Mr. Rodgers replied that first he will
look to see whether the Order is applicable, and if it is applicable then an extension to this time period can be
discussed.
Mr. Barfoot advised that if Council is considering leaving this matter tabled, it would seem to,him
that there should be some action taken to allow the Church, as the party recommended by the Housing Commission,
to watch over this property, because the City is in the position of being liable for the safety of the building
at the moment. In reply to a query from the Mayor, Reverend Stackhouse stated that in the Church's proposal they
had. asked for permission to place a house trailer on the property, although that would be in the future. He
stated that what he is interested in now; is that the Council has made no motion to say that the City has agreed
to sell or lease the property to the Church, and if the Church was to put a watchman on the property at their
508
~
CJhldrch 0;: the
/V.il~01rehe
SiI~d ave Jf~
/lhl1eX 'pI't>/e,.r!f
,,4uzd' a/JIh?
Ca'p/~d/ 2J~
1J1/1,1io/t?v///e.
S~e ~hl
'P/_h~
/J.:JJ.L .t&(.
/YJ,,;u:fpr
/V~/ee of 4!Pba
:]3pn,,{ -Ls~ue
~..:~'<':"::.:
expense, he wonders if a motion could be passed that the City could make an agreement such as this and
negotiate at a future time. It was noted that until the requested report is received from the Land Com-
mittee, the. Council is not in.a position to pass a resolution with respect to this development proposal.
Councillor MacGowan asked if the Council could give the Church permission to have a watchman on the
property, pending receipt of the said report from the Land Committee. The Mayor asked the City Solicitor
if it is possible for Council to pass a resolution that allows the Church to put a watchman and trailer on
the site with no responsibility to the City. Mr. Rodgers replied that he cannot give an opinion as to
what the City would be getting into in passing such a resolution, and as Council is presently waiting for
reports and recommendations, it is very difficult to become involved with a party that you might not want
to d~al with at all after you receive a recommendation from the Land Committee and, in the meantime, the
City owns the property and he believes everyone's eyes are wide open as to the condition of the property,
He further stated that as we own the property, if we are interested in protecting the property, then the
City should have someone there to watch it.
In reply to a query from Councillor A. Vincent, the Mayor confirmed that the Annex property has
been deeded to the City. Councillor A. Vincent asked that Councillor MacGowan, a member of the Housing
Commission, tell Council that we have no water on the property, as the Government did not give us the
right-of-way. He stated he was very disturbed at the negotiations that took place. Councillor MacGowan
stated that it was her opinion that the City has a commitment for a right-of-way. Mr. Rodgers stated that
he cannot recall the correspondence in this regard, so he cannot say what rights we have or don't have
with respect to this property right now. Councillor A. Vincent reiterated that the City did not negotiate
the legal right-of-way for water to this property and he would like Mr. Rodgers to look into this. The
Mayor stated that Councillor A. Vincent is right as Mr. Barfoot has stated this too, that we don't have
this right-of-way. Mr. Barfoot advised he is not quite sure what Councillor A. Vincent is referring to,
however, there is a watermain that runs through the farm land, which goes from the Fairville Boulevard
through to Sand Cove Road and services the Dr. Wm. Roberts Hospital, and that the watermain is physically
there. Councillor A. Vincent stated he is asking the Legal Department for a written report on whether the
City legally has obtained.the right-of-way for the next Council meeting. Councillor Higgins stated he
feels that until the requested report is received from the Land Committee, the City, as owners of the
property, should protect that property. Mr. Barfoot stated that the cost for a watchman for the property
would be $500.00 to $800.00 per week. Councillor Hodges noted that this would be a charge against the
property. Councillor Higgins stated that. the Council could ask the City Solicitor to draw up a motion that
we could recover our costs when we sell it, and he further stated that Council, by not taking this item .
.off the table, is ignoring an Order from the Fire Marshal. He stated he would ask that the City Solicitqr
in addition to his decision on the legality of the Order, that he bring in a motion that the City could '
recovers its costs for any supervision of.the site and that for a period of one week the City provide a
watchman for the property, pending receipt of the Land Committee's report.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter of the former Provincial Hospital Annex
property on Sand Cove Road remain on the table for one week during which time the City will take the
necessary action to prevent further.vandalism and trespassing on the property, and the report from the
Land Committee will be received.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engin_
eering services, in regard to the following named capital project:-
1.
Millidgeville Sewage Treatment Plant
A. D. I. Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 2,
dated April 30, 1976
$ 4,588.22
$ 1,431.07
Councillor A. Vincent asked when the plans for the Millidgeville Sewage Treatment Plant will be
available to the public. Mr. Barfoot replied that this project is in the very preliminary stages of
planning, and he explained the work to date of the engineers for this project. Councillor A. Vincent
stated he feels that a City representative should be able to see what we are paying the engineers for.
During further discussion of the engineering services to date on this project, Mr. MacKinnon outlined th~
project and stated that staff can provide Council with only those figures which the engineers now have,
however, in their present state they would not mean that much, although there is a basis for having paid.
them for their engineering design work as they proceed in giving staff the design of the project. In
reply to a query from Councillor Parfitt, Mr. MacKinnon stated that this project was not included in the:
water and sewer rate increase recently adopted by Council, as by the time the project is actually designed
and any construction is implemented, it will probably be in the 1978 period when construction is actually
started. Mr. MacKinnon stated that a report can be submitted for Council's information concerning the
Millidgeville Sewage Treatment Plant. General discussion on the matter of engineering services for this
project ensued.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
His Worship the Mayor gave the following Notice of Motion:
"I do hereby give Notice that I will at a meeting of the Common Council held after the expir-
ation of. thirty days from this day, move or cause. to be moved the following resolution, namely:-
'RESOLVED that occasion having arisen in the public interest of the following public civic works
and needed Civic Improvements, that is to say:
FOR GENERAL PURPOSES:
General Government - $26,970.00
Protective Services - $636,900.00
Transportation Services -
Cedar Point Mobile Home Park $11,812.00; Lansdowne Avenue $91,164.00; Rockland Road $36,799.00; Wellesley
Avenue $19,668.00; Rothesay Avenue Garage $70,634.00; Millidge Avenue $19,058.00; Golden Grove Road
$3,763.00; Loch Lomond Road $23,857.00; Lakeview Drive $3,966.00; Latimer Lake sidewalk $29,555.00;
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
501
.lVtIi-/ee
/J1t71/0)?
73 pnd
.I$.sue
I
I
.
I
.
J3Q~6t
7 >s~e
I
l1?e-^I>J7/hff
;gu..//~/I'1~
Sp.;1ee
TnVi!' ~b')'&J
,(-c.a.
. 1?e-;Uln/Hff
/It~ard
/(oKhIrp M
Ilnt:fePst:Jn
:z;,SU;~/1Ce
,(d,
~
Westmorland Road $14,446.00; Ellerdale Street $5,579.00; Lakewood Avenue $5,294.00; Pauline Street $7,553.00;
Grandview Avenue sidewalk $48,698.00; Churchland Road $51,220.00; McAllister Drive $69,981.00; Mt. Pleasant
Avenue $60,832.00; McCavour Drive $10,944.00; St. John Street $26,575.00; Main Street West $12,382.00; Chesley
Street $6,587.00; Water Street $151,012.00
-- $781,379.00
Urban Renewal, land acquisition and tourist building - $483,051.00
Housing - refunding of 1956 bond issue - $73,000.00
Recreation and Parks -
Arenas $300,083.00; Golf Course $35,553:00; Sh~ock Park $10,468.00; Lancaster Memorial Field $62,674.00;
Rockwood Park $13,757.00; Community centres and playgrounds $19,618.00; Swimming pool $10,078.00; Boat dock
$9,748.00; Park roads and landscaping $36,721.00
-- $498,700.00
Total General Purposes - $2,500,000.00
FOR SELF-SUPPORTING UTILITIES:
Water construction and system development -
Loch Lomond Road watermain $40,237.00; Lakewood Heights watermain $3,071.00; Summit Avenue watermain $26,488.00;
Grandview Avenue watermain $19,024.00; Silver Falls Park watermain $11,310.00; McAllister Drive watermain
$102,051.00; Hickey Road watermain $10,585.00; Rodney Street watermain $36,200.00; Rothesay Avenue watermain
$19,789.00; Thornbrough Street watermain $11,667.00; Forest Hills pumping stations $25,762.00; Latimer Lake
chlorine plant $57,915.00; Land purchased $128,544.00; Subdivision services $120,357.00
-- $613,000.00
Water system - refunding of 1956 bond issue - $427,000.00
Sewer construction and system development -
Woodward Avenue $197,892.00; Visart Street $119,058.00; Lakeview Drive $16,301.00; Greendale $157,263.00; Ann
Street $13,897.00; Summit Avenue $39,999.00; Lakewood Drive $116,546.00; Crescent Avenue $23,020.00; Garnett
Road $35,579.00; Myles Drive $39,003.00; Fairville Boulevard $18,224.00; Marsh Creek $280,035.00; Allison and
Francis Streets 457,322.00; Lansdowne Avenue $54;372.00; Pauline Street $52,851.00; Westbrook Avenue $12,102.00;
Rodney Street $26,310.00; Mount Pleasant Avenue, East $50,000.00; Subdivision services $150,226.00
-- $1,460,000.00
Power Commission: Substations and extension to distribution system - $1,000,000.00
Total Self-Supporting Utilities - $3,500,000.00
A total for all purposes - $6,000,000.00
THEREFORE RESOLVED that Debentures issue under provlslons of the Acts of Assembly 52, Victoria, Chapter 27,
Section 29, and Amendments Thereto, to the amount of $6,000,000.00. ,II
In reply to a query from Councillor Parfitt, Mr. Park advised that it is not necessary at this stage
to determine what the interest should be as the City has the next thirty days to watch the market conditions and
then come to a decision as to what the desirable rate should be, and at the present time, the City does not also
have to commit itself to the term of the issue, as this can also be determined in thirty days. Mr. Park
advised that in general this expenditure has been accumulated to the end of 1975 with a few exceptions in which
a small amount of capital projects included in the 1976 capital budget, have been used for the purpose of
rounding off to the kind of sum, namely, six million dollars, which it is normal be make up a bond issue for,
rather than having a lot of odd amounts.
Several questions were posed by various Council members regarding sections of the above Notice of
Motion with respect to the amounts for the following projects: Water Street, Subdivision services, Fairville
Boulevard, Chesley Street, Mt. Pleasant Avenue and McAllister Drive. Mr. Park stated these amounts have been
expended but when and precisely for what he would have to go to the records and produce a detailed report which
can be submitted to the next meeting of Council. Councillor Hodges asked when the work on Fairville Boulevard
will be completed. ~'. Barfoot replied that he believes this project is completed and that there never has been
any provision for landscaping and curbing of Fairville Boulevard - this was estimated two years ago at a cost of
one million dollars to completely install curbing and putting all the ditches into storm sewers, but there were
no funds available at that time and there are no funds available in this year's budget. Councillor A. Vincent
asked what service charges have we paid on these amounts and Mr. Park advised that the City does not bond for
interest - the City has always carried the interest out of operating expenses. The Mayor asked if there is an
amount included in the above Notice of Motion for the sewerage for the land bank. Mr. Barfoot replied that as
yet the City has not paid its share of this particular project. He explained that the services, which were
installed by the New Brunswick Housing Corporation, have not all been accepted by the City. The Mayor stated it
would be easier if the information Council is now asking for was submitted with the Notice of Motion. Mr. Park
stated that in. general this kind of information is given when projects.are submitted for approval in the capital
budget. It was agreed that the requested information would be supplied for the next meeting of Council.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the westerly side
of Linton Road behind 1141, 1149 and 1157 Manawagonish Road, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential district
to "I-3" Light Industrial Park district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
hereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that third reading of the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend
The zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the former
church building at 77 Coburg Street and the lot at its rear next to 28 garden Street and across the street from
21, 23 and 25 Garden Street, from "RM-l" Multiple Family district to "B-2" General Business district, be laid. on
the table until a fuller Council is present.
508
t'U,mM. C'~n?~h/
-P/.;lhh. ~ J)(/Ve/o~-
men~
/J1Hhk/~/ ?.4h
:EJ.!:/-~..;;j W
MYp,( ffi~~
~~,
I9n,t,,,~.:zh!>
,(-{d.
7?-r-~ b n/hff
C/-t,ff Sc,fi:::-/-eol"
71_~h :T~en
J)n}/,M- .zeL
7? e- ;;( On /179
..r:://ee~ ,~<<~e
C'IIy .5:?~'e/-tor
/l~"'l"'Y?h?ed- !,e?
,.~- ~t)'7/ h!l
~Olhttl.sc-a'p/ "'f
Consideration was given to the letter. from Mr. M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and,
Development, dated June 9th, 1976, with reference to the above proposed re-zoning which the Planning
Advisory Committee recommended to Council at its June 7th be refused, submitting background on voting
against Planning Advisory Committee recommendations and on re-zoning at this location. The letter advises
that the proposed insurance office development, or more precisely its scale here, is a good example of a
root cause for potential neighbourhood deterioration; that if Council is to permit the proposed insurance,
office it would be necessary to first amend the Municipal Plan to classify this island of land for bus-
iness and secondly, amend the Zoning By-Law accordingly. The letter notes the requirements under the
Community Planning Act for Council to override a Planning Advisory Committee recommendation and advises
that the Committee, by recommending against the re-zoning, is against amending the Municipal Development
Plan, and concludes that if Council wishes to allow the proposed insurance business at the above location.,
Council should request the City Solicitor's advice on the points contained in the letter and proceed on
the basis of that advice.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above letter be referred to the City Solicitor for a
legal opinion on the points raised with respect to the proposed re-zoning under discussion.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Ralph J. Stephen, solicitor for
Dr. V. M. Zed, objecting to the proposed re-zoning of 77 Coburg Street as requested by Hilyard Holdings
Ltd. for the reasons as stated, and asking that Council table third reading of the re-zoning application
and re-examine some of the problems as listed by his client, be laid on the table until the proposed re-
zoning is again considered by Council.
On motion af Cauncillor MacGawan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning an area of land on
the northwesterly corner of Sandy Point Road and MacLaren Boulevard, with a frontage of about 275 feet on
Sandy Point Road and about 170 feet on MacLaren Boulevard, from "RM-l" Multiple Residential district to
"B-1" Local Business district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
thereto:
AND FURTHER that the development proposal of Mrs, Eileen Fudge in this regard be pursuant to
Section 39 of the Community Planning Act.
The by-law entitled "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the Legal Department be asked to
agreement with respect to the above r~-zoning includes the landscaping as shown on the
,
ensure that the
submitt'ed plan.
",
.
I
I
.
I
Seconded by Councillor Kipping .:
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, advfsing that at
"'__L C' /. i7for the May 31st Council meeting he was asked to advise the Council as to whether or not it is pos'sible for
(,~~~O,/~ the Council to limit the number of liquor outlets in the City of Saint John, and advising of the sections
~/'~/lf'J?~/.I~4(~ of the Provincial Liquor Control Act pertaining to this matter, and that inasmuch as the Crown is not
Q~~~t'~ bound by the Community Planning Act, the Municipality cannot prohibit or regulate this matter through
/, /> ..-1,. I zoning or otherwise, and that he would respectfully suggest that the Commission would, however, co-operate
~{~~U~~O~ 0 with the municipality in respect to the location of such stores, be received and filed: .
;y,B. nc~
/ /? ~--/ AND FURTHER that a letter be forwarded to the Provincial Liquor Commission, the Depa.rtment of
^,'9Upr (..p~~r...
t?o~~. Justice and the local M.L.A. 's, stating that whereas alcohol is recognized as creating a serious problem,
jV .~ ~ -t/~ in our Province in general, and in our City in particular, the Common Council views with concern the
~~.. ~5 increasing number of liquor outlets in our City and therefore would petition the Commission to reassess
, ..
/11.,1.17. S their policy regarding the establishment of licensed beverage rooms.
C'/6~ ~Nc/z.t'Q
.Jl;;;n sP~Y/'''f
H w~I-~~
et!a.
?rt7t/. {}ov/;.
tA/-Rkr /I a-
'/e(lJIt'renr /,e
~"/p&~ S 211-0$-
.L-6('. &'0$. ,col"t!'$~
7'fv,iee#-f oJ? ..<-6d.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Councillor Parfitt stated it is her understanding that if an application for a liquor estab~
lishment is turned down at the local level, application can still be made to the Provincial Pl~nning Board
for approval, and she understands that this has happened with regard to an application for an establish- I
ent on Sydney Street.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Hodges and A. Vincent voting
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor advising that at
he May 31st Council meeting he was requested to give an opinion on the question of whether ar not it is
ossible for a municipality to ban spraying in the community by the Provincial Government, and. that it is
is opinion that a municipality cannot prohibit or regulate the matter af protecting the forests from
fire, insects and diseases through" the enactment of by-laws or the adoption of resolutions, however, the'
unicipality may pursue the matter to establish that the Provincial Government is complying with all '
statutes and regulations covering the. subject matter, and further advising that he is not qualified to say
hether the chemical involved in the budworm spraying operation constitutes pollution under the Water Act
nd such a determination could only be made after the adducement of much technical advice and that it is
ossible that the case of Bridges Bros. Ltd. vs. Forest Protection Limited, presently before the Courts,
ight shed some light on this question. when judgment is rendered, which he believes will be within the
ear future, be received and filed.
During discussion of the above letter from the City Solicitor, Mr. Rodgers agreed to supply
ouncil with copies of the judgment in the case referred to in the abave letter, when such judi>;ment has
een rendered.
I
.
~
,....
509
.
e/zY.JO~e. .
C!l!?unc//
f'e$o/u-6/on
olh7t?n~t!?~
70 Qu een Si
/J1.;;/p&?/y n
Z~
Ikffd/
r2Kp'h:5es
I ,/o!iJnd L71!?H1l
~S~h7!-
. KK.P'"I!??!,,~OJ-
.e-/t:>n
S'pl"uee ~,f,
1A/2Wr /Ihe
/l1-r,.,JIt /1,
S-t-evens
J)ept;,.V~$
/lA!!a/Jts
.~ec'''. ~~,!f'
Ci1hC1iPC.i!il
/0;:J 51? Ph!! nt-
..Grpt'D~,./'.;d-#n
filr-u.ee ..<ake
w."i-er fine
~~1j~r
I (}u/-/'O,./
~J1ah .(tit.
Cf?r!;er
wiun/nff'
We~~/ey"'"
.4l,/)~tfI!pK/he
/lves.
Sf!ndee 36".
,Pu'"'P /s/c1~
1'eW//~nme~
.jZ',(ghn, /;d'v/s_
C!PhlP1.
/l!e"!-p;,..(.
Fudffe
//1/?b//e
At7me
I
1(, Stevel7stij
I /fl.;1c~il1&'/'7Y
,/ -t-L.
/1'1t?Plle JOb;
( t:>!+'tce)
. /I$'$~n-t-to
, .Su64i'v.~
. T L:: SeCt?n:fc
r?:oeb&
cSetb-d/v..
~
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGcwan
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, advising that Common
Council resolution of May 17th, 1976 approved the purchase of property located at 70 Queen Street from Madelyn
Zed with the City preparing the legal transfer documents at its own expense, and that the policy of the Legal
Department is to prepare the necessary legal documents when the City is selling land and this policy,is based on
the fact that it is improper to do otherwise and also to avoid placing the City in the untenable position of
representing both parties in transactions involving land, and that, in view of the foregoing, and since it was
understood that the vendor would receive a certain price for the land, the resolution should be amended to
provide that the City shall be responsible for legal expenses incurred by the vendor in finalizing the trans-
action, be received and filed and the said Council resolution of May 17th, 1976 with respect to the purchase of
property at 70 Queen Street from Madelyn Zed, be amended as suggested by the City Solicitor.
Councillor Parfitt noted that a taxi company is using City-owned vacant land at 115-119 Queen Street
for parking and repair of its vehicles. Mr. Barfoot stated that he would investigate this matter.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee advising that in July 1971 a
50-.foot easement for the construction of the Spruce Lake water line was expropriated from Mr. Alfred A. Stevens
of Armstrong Road West, title to the property being held by the Department of Veterans'Affairs, and that in April
1975 Mr. Stevens accepted the City's appraised offer of $750.00 and expropriation proceedings were cancelled and
construction is now completed, and recommending that $750.00 be paid for a 50-foot easement containing 8,573.5
square feet across property identified as Parcel 12 on the submitted map and owned by Alfred A. Stevens, for the.
construction of the Spruce Lake water line, and further advising that since the Department of Veterans Affairs
still hold title to the property, the payment will be made to The Receiver General of Canada and credited to Mr.
Stevens account -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee advising that in July 1971 a
50-foot easement for the construction of the Spruce Lake water line was expropriated from Mr. Joseph A. Richard
of Armstrong Road West, title to the property being held by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and that on
January 15th, 1974 Mr. Richard took title to the property and in October 1975 he agreed to accept the City's
appraised offer of $400.00 and expropriation proceedings were cancelled and construction is now completed, and
recommending that the City pay Mr. Joseph Alyre Richard of Armstrong Road West the sum of $400.00 for a 50-foot
easement containing 5,589.5 square feet, as indicated on the submitted map as Parcel 10 for the construction of
the Spruce Lake water line -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee advising that the
matter of the City reimbursing Gulf Oil Canada Limited for the City's share of the cost for the realignment of
the pump island at the Gulf service station located at the corner of Wellesley Avenue and Lansdowne Avenue, was
laid on the table by Council at its May lOth, 1976 meeting for reconsideration by the Land Committee with regard
to the sidewalk at this location; advising that the Land Committee met with Mr. Ummat of the Engineering and
Works Department on June 7th, 1976 and the submitted plan from the Engineering Department shows that the land
taken provides sufficient space for the sidewalk and that the Works Department will be completing work on the
sidewalk in the near future, be received and filed and the City of Saint John reimburse Gulf Oil Canada Limited
$2,000.00 as the City's share of the cost for the realignment of the pump island at the Gulf service station
located at the corner of Wellesley Avenue and Lansdowne Avenue.
On motion of Councillqr Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGcwan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising
that at its meeting of August 25th, 1975 Council authorized the placement of a mobile home by Mr. Merton L. Fudge
on the lower end of Latimer Lake Road for a period of one year, and that Mrs. Fudge is now applying for the
permanent placement of the mobile home on this property which is located 1200 feet east of the Hickey Road, and
that the mobile home is occupied by Mrs. Fudge's daughter and when the application was made last year, it was
with the intention that they build two one-family dwellings this year, the proposed one for ~tr. and Mrs. Fudge
and the second one for their daughter, which would replace the mobile home which was permitted on a temporary
basis by Common Council, however, the applicants now states that they are unable to build a second conventional
home this year and have now applied for permanent placement of the formerly permitted temporary mobile home; and
advising that the Planning Advisory Committee has examined the proposal and has thought it possible to approve
also the erection of the now proposed conventional home on the 21-acre lot at this location, and recommending
that the temporary placement for the mobile home be granted for another year subject to the requirements of the
City's Building Inspector as to permits, etc., be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with respect to
the application from R. Stevenson Machinery Ltd. for the temporary placement of a mobile office trailer on
property at 1199 Fairville Boulevard, advising that the company has stated that it is at present examining a
number of proposals for permanent office and services facilities and that it is an absolute necessity that the
company be moved into its permanent office facilities by early fall, and recommending that R. Stevenson Machinery
Limited be given approval for the placement of a mobile office trailer until December 31st, 1976, be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with respect to
the T. E. Secord & R. Debly Subdivision which lies immediately north of the northerly end of Asied Street in
Lakewood and adjoins the Greenwood Subdivision, advising that at its August 27th, 1974 meeting the Committee
approved a proposal to create three lots on a new 400 foot section of Asied Street and Council's assent to the
plan was recommended and assent was obtained at Council's September 9th, 1974 meeting, and at that time it was
suggested that Mr. Secord and Mr. Debly could exchange portions of land, and by combining them, each obtain a
useful building lot; further advising that the present proposal now incoporates this land exchange and results in
two more lots at this particular location and also includes an extra lot to the north, and recommending that the
Common Council assent to the subdivision plan for this proposed subdivision, as shown on the submitted plan which
510
Shal'PJ"/ /lVI?
/Js/eL Sc-.
J.:7h?t?.) F /1~o.
/J1Pb//e ~Oh7e
'P/C1~n. /lR'V/S.
C! t?h7hr.
G?",:/I'rc-
/V.nl ~~-/A
OJ'7c'#PS~hi1 /I
o.f!- Cal7.?i~a
ah?M. Whck
LEG A L
~e-~oniJ7~
SOJ7/t5'1" Orna-
menf.;1! .z;.pJ7
/.. +tL.
P/i3J7I7,I9t?!ns.
(!nQP7.
shows the extensions of two streets, Sharon Avenue and Asied Street, and accept the sum of $792.00 in li~u
of land for public purposes for this subdivision -- be received and filed and the recommendations adopted.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the application from Mr. James E.
Kurt Ganz, to locate a mobile home on property owned by '1r. Ganz located on the Golden
referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation,
Achorn!, per Mr.
Grove Road, be
"
"
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the National Youth Orchestra Assoc- ,
iation of Canada advising that the Association is approaching municipal governments across Canada for
financial assistance to help offset the training costs involved in their programme, and advising that they
would appreciate receiving details as to how they may acquaint the City with their services and funding
format, be received and filed and the required forms for application for funds be forwarded tb the said
Association.
A Committee of the Whole session was then held, following which the Committee arose 'and the
Mayor resumed the Chair, in legal session of Common Council.
Mr. Barfoot reported that Mr. Lino Celeste was approached and asked to be the City's appointee
to the Board of Arbitration with regard to Article 6(4) of the 1975-1976 Working Agreement between the
City of Saint John and the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E., but that
Mr. Celeste declined and that Dr. Leonard Stephen was therefore approached and he has agreed to act as the
City's appointee to the' said Board of Arbitration.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
~
.
1
I
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the City's appointee to the above named Board of ...
Arbitration be Dr. Leonard Stephen.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Pye and A. Vincent voting "nay".
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-
first day of June, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Com-
missioner of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services, and E. W. Ferguson,
Chief of Police
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding the proposed re-zoning for
Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd. of the company's plant site on Simms Street, Saint John West, to permit an
expansion of a non-conforming use and various miscellaneous improvements, and that no written ,objections ,
were received in this regard. No person was present to speak either for or against this proposed re-
zoning.
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising that the Committee recollmends for
,
this re-zoning and that although the Committee is generally against the principle of introducing non-
residential uses into residential areas, the building, in this particular case, is non-confor~ing, and the
use'is already there and can continue, and what is being requested is, in the Committee's view, an im-
provement in the state of the building and the cleaning up of the yard. The letter further recommends
that the said re-zoning be pursuant to a resolution under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act tying,
the development to plans filed with the Common Clerk and to a related agreement between the City and
Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd., all to be filed in the Registry Office; and also recommends that Schedule 2A
1
.
I
-I
.
~
,...-
'511
.
/J1"'~;e.;yQ/ /
'P/dn -:t}!f-
I
I
l?e- Zon/hff
S~~;er
Orl1.Plmed-
-' I'>pJ7 /.rL.
.
7(e-~(Jn/hg
j/lanh,lldv/s.
amI" .
.sP~/t?'"
I O,.I1,;/meMOl
.LJ9pn .{-t-d.
.
rre- .;zOJ?/h
of the Municipal Development Plan be amended by withdrawing the property in question rrom its current Low Density
Residential classification and placing it in a Light Industrial classirication, and advises that until the matter
or the necessary amendment to the Municipal Development Plan is cleared or completed, there should not be a third
reading or final reading on the enactment of the re-zoning itself.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the necessary advertising be proceeded with for amending
Schedule 2A or the Municipal Development Plan by withdrawing the property occupied by Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd.
rrom its current Low Density Residential classirication and placing it in a Light Industrial classification.
On motion or Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City or Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns rezoning the Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd. plant
site on Simms Street, West, rrom "R-2" One- and Two-Family district to "I-I" Light Industrial district, be read a
first time.
Councillor A. Vincent, having been advised that the applicant paid ror the cost or advertising the
proposed re-zoning, asked who is to pay for the cost of advertising the proposed amendment to the Municipal
Development Plan in this matter, and the Common Clerk noted that the recommendation for such amendment has been
made by the Planning Advisory Committee and that such cost would be borne by the City. Councillor A. Vincent
expressed the view that this arrangement was not fair and that in future the Council should stipulate that the
applicant pay for the advertising costs even if the Planning Advisory Committee recommends same, because of the
restricted budget of the City and becasue everybody should be treated equally. The Mayor noted that this was a
point well taken. Councillor Green raised the question as to whether the applicant should not pay ror the cost
of advertising the amendment to the Municipal Development Plan, because the applicant would be receiving the
benefit of such amendment. The Common Clerk noted that if it had been known when the applicant made application
for the re-zoning that the Municipal Development Plan would require amending, then the two amendments could have
been inserted under the same advertisement.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and Green voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee be received and filed and, as recommended therein, the above named proposed re-zoning of the Sonier
Ornamental Iron Ltd. plant site on Simms Street, West, be pursuant to a resolution under Section 39 of the
Community Planning Act tying the development to plans filed with the Common Clerk and to a related agreement
between the City and Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd., all to be filed in the Registry Office.
The Common Clerk advised that with regard to the proposed re-zoning for Sea Side Co-Op Ltd. of the
property known as 25 Summer Street and 96 Stanley Street (former Atlantic Neon Signs Ltd. premises) to allow the
premises to be used as a retail co-operative food store on the ground floor with offices and storage for A. N.
Insulation Ltd. which occupies part of this building presently, the necessary advertising was completed, and the
following correspondence has been received:- (a) letters objecting to the proposal, from Mrs. Anne Trenholm, 88
Stanley Street, Mrs. James McBrine, 2 Wright Street, and Mr. Roy H. Jennings, 6 Wright Street; (b) letter from
Social Services Council of Greater Saint John, expressing concern over the problems being encountered by the Sea
Side Co-Op. Ltd. in getting established in a suitable location in the city, and in the site under discussion, and
recommending that the Common Council approve a suitable site for this organization in the immediate future so
that this project, funded by the Federal Government and approved by local agencies, can get started performing
the service for which it was initiated; (c) letter from the Planning Advisory Committee recommending that the
said application for re-zoning be refused, and outlining the Committee's reasons for making this recommendation,
and advising that it was agreed that staff might suggest appropriately zoned areas in which the Co-Op. could
search for a suitable building and further advising that representatives of the Co-Op. have been to see planning
staff and are reportedly looking at other locations in which they could possibly locate as a matter of right; (d)
letter from Sea Side Co-Op. Ltd. in support of the re-zoning application.
It was noted that no person was present to speak against the said proposed re-zoning.
Mrs. Leona Speight, city project manager for Sea Side Co-Op. Ltd., advised that a petition was given to
~~ ~/~e the Planning Advisory Committee signed by over thirty residents of the area, in favour of the said proposed re-
zoning. Mr. Zides pointed out that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory Committee mentions this
~&>-~.~-t-A? petition which was signed by 32 residents of the area saying they did not object to the location of the store.
I
I
.
.....
The following information was given by Mrs. Speight regarding this project, in reply to questions put
by Council members:- this year, they received a grant from the Government of $66,666.00, and she does not know
the exact amount that has been expended to date on the project, they have eight staff members; it was their
intention to have 1,000 families members in this co-operative but because of the location in question approximately
500 families would be serviced in that location from all areas of the city - the reason for the reduction in
number of families to be serviced is because of the size of the space they had to accept and because of the lack
of space in the store to handle a larger number than 500 families to be serviced (she explained that the Co-Op.
will employ a system of transportation for these families, to bring them to the store and to deliver them and
their purchases to their homes) - the visits of these families to the store, et cetera, will be scheduled - they
will not be able to stock any more than would be necessary to service 500 families in the store - their stock
will consist of basic items, no more than two sizes in anyone given item and geared for low income; those to be
serviced at this store must be on fixed incomes or show means to prove they are in the low income bracket, and
this service is also confined to senior .citizens or people who are pensioners on fixed incomes, and such, and
welfare cases - anyone on welfare is eligible to be serviced at this store, although they do have a preferred
group, which is single parents - they will be giving preference to single parents; with regard to the question of
whether there will be parking along Winter Street, they have never found any less than five to nine parking
spaces on Summer Street alone (whiCh street will not be used in this project) and out of 1,140 families surveyed
only 23 had cars; they will actually be operating out the door on Stanley Street - although it could be from both
streets - but the store entrance will strictly be on Stanley Street and it is their intention to pick up their
members and bring them to the store and deliver them with their groceries; with regard to the objection to this
re-zoning that has come from a store owner on Stanley Street, the Co-Op. sess its proposed operation as com-
petition for that store only for those who are on fixed income in the area - it has not been determined yet how
many fixed income people are in that area - it is not felt that the closed membership business of this Co-Op. is
going to interfere that greatly in view of the fact that these 500 family units would be taken from all sections
-1'~
b -
~
of the city; with regard to the playgrounds of Winter Street School, which school apparently is closed up,
and the possibility that such grounds could be utilized for parking purposes by the Co-Op., they did
discuss using that parking lot if they found that parking ever became a problem, but closer to! the proposed
store, across on Winter Street, there is quite a large area of uneven ground and they are sure! it could be
turned into a parking lot - they have not investigated as yet who owns the said open ground; they intend
to deliver, on order, anywhere in the city; they are looking at other locations at the moment but anything
they have found, to date, is either too costly, rent-wise, or too costly to renovate, and the ~ents would
be more than the rent they are already paying, which present rent is over-spending their budget for
this year - the rent they are paying is $900.00 a month for that building which totals 3,200 s~uare feet
of space (2,000 for the store, 400 for the cat-walk and 800 for the office space); they investigated as a
possible location the New Brunswick Liquor Control Commission warehouse off City Road and they: were told
that it would cost $3.75 per square foot and that it was not available right now - they (the Chmmission)
would rather let it just sit there until they found a use for it; with regard to the 23 families with cars
out of the 1,140 families that were surveyed, they can screen and eliminate all those cars if they had
to - they are only accepting 25 family units in this present location, providing they get this: proposed
re-zoning - they would have their own vehicles to service the families; they were funded $66,666.00 for
this year and for the next two years, providing they get a store in operation, they could receive a
maximum of $200,000.00 per year; this store would provide mainly food, right now - there may be other
items provided, later - there will be other things accompanying this store in the second and third years
to make the store viable at the end of three years (using some sample orders that were sent to, them by
their membership, they estimate that each family unit will use between $30.00 and $45.00 per ~eek of the
store's stock - two reports by experts in this field have shown that this project is viable within three
years; with regard to problems that would be created if they have to relocate from this prese~t site, even
if it takes a month to relocate and besides the fact that they do not have any money for additional rent,
it will likely mean that they will not get the store in operation before their first year of funding comes
up for review on October 15th - their lease on this property states that they cannot sub-let ('so this
precludes them from finding another tenant for this property and thus relieving them of having to pay that
rent in addition to rent for another property, if they were able to find another property to relocate to);
they are not ready to start up the store in the present location immediately, because they had to delay
renovations that need to be made to convert it into a store, until the question of re-zoning of the
property was settled; the 32 families they contacted, as mentioned at the commencement of this: presentation,
reside on Stanley and Wright Streets, and they were not against this re-zoning -- in fact, out of all the.
homes contacted that day there were only three who did not sign the Co-Op. 's form and two of those had
very valid reasons for not doing so; the operation of the store would be scheduled over a six-day week;
the funds from the Government for this project will cease as of October 15th unless they have ~n operational
store by that date; they have been searching since April for another suitable location without' success,
thus far; they were aware of the zoning restrictions before they rented and signed a lease, and because
the building had been used for 146 years as a commercial site and because there was a store across the
street and there had been nine stores on Winter Street and three on Stanley Street, they could'. not foresee
any reason why they would not be able to have this building re-zoned - however, at the time of. renting and
signing the lease, they were aware that the dairy building was improperly zoned, and they still went ahead
and took the lease and risked this rental money of $900.00 and a four or five month contract. I
Councillor A. Vincent asked Mr. MacKinnon: is it not true that when that one building is in use
!
that the City must flush out Stanley Street seven or eight times a year - is that not the past record of ,
having a real problem there with raw sewage. Mr. MacKinnon replied that he cannot answer the question as,
he is not familiar with that property. Councillor A. Vincent then asked that Mr. Barfoot answer the
question, adding that he wants to get at the matter of the sewer on Stanley Street, and asked:: do we not
have a real sanitary problem on that street and did we not use the flusher there eight times l~st year.
I~. Barfoot replied that he could not answer that question, in detail.
.
I
I
.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until next
week until the Council is informed of the details regarding the sewage system in front of the building in
question on Stanley Street.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Parfitt, A. Vincent and Kipping and
the Mayor voting "yea" and Councillors Davis, Pye, Green, Hodges, M. Vincent and Gould voting ,"nay".
On motion of Councillor Davis
.
?,4hh. t9A!"P/S.
1?e- 20h/n~
Se:,;> S;'deZ;~.
/7!~.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Planning Advisory Committee
that the application of Sea Side Co-Op. Ltd. for the re-zoning of the property known as 25 Summer Street
and 96 Stanley Street from "RM-l" Multiple Residential district to "B-2" General Business district clas-
sification be refused, be adopted.
Councillor Gould asked if it is also the understanding of Council that City staff will make an
attempt to help Sea Side Co-Op, Ltd. find another location. The Mayor replied in the affirmative. I
Councillor Green spoke in support of trying to help this group, which has shown initiative in trying to
help itself and the low income citizens. Councillor Kipping stated it was his understanding from Mrs.
Speight's presentation that relocation of this project would mean the end of it - that they cannot go any
longer because it will bring them beyond the end of the first year (October 15th) and their grants will be
cut off. Mrs. Speight replied that they need time to prove that the store is in operation - their first
year comes up for review October 15th - they are locked into a rent there for three months which puts them
to the end of September - if the re-zoning is denied it will likely mean the end of the project. She was
asked by the Mayor if they could start the store in operation in a week in another location, if one could
be found within the next week or two with the assistance of Council, and she replied that they could if I
they have the rent money, which they are over-spent in, already. Councillor Kipping expressed the view
that a tabling motion iti this matter would be best, if the Council is really, genuinely thinking of
helping these people. Councillor Pye asked if there is an existing sewerage system on Stanley Street, is
there any reason why it cannot be corrected very promptly, and if that is not the main objection to the
establishment of that project in that particular area. Mr. Barfoot replied that he is not f~iliar with
any sewer problem on the main except one of occasional floodings through heavy rain, and that .he does not
think the sewer problem has been cited as one of the reasons against re-zoning. Councillor Pye pointed
out that that is one of the reasons quoted by those who wrote in opposition to the establishmept of the
project in that pargicular spot - one of their main objections was sewage - there was a traffic angle, as
well, he recalled. He felt that if the sewage problem can be corrected it is logical to assume that that
would be their largest obstacle to overcome. Mr. Barfoot stated that he believes the sewerage problem ...
referred to in the said letter of objection is a faulty private lateral connection to an adjacent pro-
perty, which has given trouble in the past, that he is aware of. Councillor A. Vincent explaiped that his
reason for wanting the matter to be tabled for a week is because there may be space in the City-owned :
former armoury building on. City Road through a present tenant (A. C. Nielsen Co. of Canada Ltd.) vacating
~
,....
513
.
I
I
.
~-ZPh/n.1'
Se.,;> Si";te
c.-t'~ ..(-h(.
/ll/'S. Jlh~e
7i-el7ho/m
/17,.S. ZhldS
/J'Je..LJ ,.;~
J?p!f.1I. JeJ'lh/:
~'.;// S'e,v.'/o'
ONJ7ci/
I ~~h.4dns-
COP/Pr.
s: Il. ~o~
19/~hder
.7JeS/ffJ?
.$..7.114:' Cbl/e
If/. /llJne)(
?r~;w'y
I
I
.S:T~f"
C'tMNh.
lit....
space and moving out to Millidgeville, so he understands, and his thought was that this Co-Op. group could have
such space for less rent than it is paying for the Stanley Street building. Councillor Davis, Chairman of the
Land Committee, advised that the said Nielsen company is expanding, but he is not sure that the company is
vacating the said City Road premises.
Speaking to the above motion, Councillor Davis explained that this is a situation where no-one wants
to do any harm to a very good organization - it is a situation where we have suddenly become aware of a pre-
dicament of an organization that wants to establish in a spot that is contrary to our Plan and contrary to our
zoning - it puts us in the predicament of appearing to be perhaps against an organization, but that certainly is
not the case - there is not one Council members who wants to do harm to this organization - it is just that the
organization has become involved in a lease in a situation that is not very good, no matter how you look at it,
and the Council has to look at it for a much longer term than the immediate. He noted that if there is an
immediate loss to the organization perhaps that can be made up by finding another premises with a lower rent and
that loss can be made up quickly. He stated that he does not think it is right to consider the loss due to a
bad action in this argument because you will only get into it, deeper. He stated that he feels the rent in
question is very high - he does not see how it can last two or three years, but, then, we have not done any
figuring. He stated that it is a very good scheme, and he added that the rezoning application has been very
carefully examined by the Planning Advisory Committee and has been turned down. He stated that he wanted it
made clear that no-one on this Council wants to hurt this organization and that no-one on this Council will
refuse to help this organization. He pointed out that the Council is not being an obstructionist, but is trying
to be a protectionist body for a district. He stated that that whole Winter Street area is going to change _
the throughway is going through there, the Stanley Street bridge is going to disappear, there will be only one
way to get there, and that is not such a healthy situation when you have to bus the people yourselves. He
explained that the foregoing remarks are the reasons why he made the above motion - because he thinks in the
long run it would be best not to go in there, and to find another place somewhere perhaps more central and more
accessible. He stressed that the Council must protect the City, its Plan and its zoning unless it is a minor
matter. He commented that the building in question was an ice cream factory several years ago and that factory
turned out a lot more sewage than this proposed grocery store will.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Davis, Gould, A. Vincent, M. Vincent and
Parfitt and the Mayor voting "yea" and Councillors Pye, Kipping, Green and Hodges voting "nay". The Mayor
commented that each Council member will go out and work hard and try to find a spot to help this organization
get settled in a location that is a viable place.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above mentioned letters from Mrs. Trenholm, Mrs.
McBrine, Mr. Jennings, Social Services Council of Greater Saint John, Planning Advisory Committee, and Sea Side
Co-Op. Ltd., be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Common Council be provided with a report in two weeks'
time on the progress that the City staff has made within that time in finding another location for the co-
operative store of Sea Side Co-Op. Ltd.
In reply to the Council's query, Mrs. Speight advised that this group's original intention was to get
between 6,000 and 8,000 square feet of space, and that they would be prepared to pay a rent per square foot what
they have to, providing it is within the limits of their budget; the group in Moncton pays around $2.00 per
square foot rent, and the group in Fredericton pays around $3.50 per square foot in rent.
Mr. S. A. Robertson, on behalf of Alexander Design, presented a brief at this time, copies of which
had already been provided for the Council members, with regard to disposition of the former Provincial Hospital
Annex property on Sand Cove Road. During this presentation, Mr. Robertson advised that subsequent to submission
to the Saint John Housing Commission of a proposal in response to the Commission's call for Expressions of
Interest, he had personally on April 29th requested security of the Annex buildings, and that this was shortly
after he had been given the go-ahead or the encouragement to continue with design (as noted in his written
brief). He stated that now, the Council members have the opportunity to bring to a close the whole situation
regarding the property in question. The Mayor asked: when /tr. Robertson met on April 30th with Mr. Disher, who
is one member of the Saint John Housing Commission, did Mr. Disher represent the said Commission complete? Mr.
Robertson replied that that was his entire understanding - Mr. Disher was chairman of the sub-committee to deal
with the subject property. Councillor Gould asked if a sub-chairman has the right to get somebody to proceed
with a.design before that is brought to Council for approval. Mr. Rodgers replied that he has not seen any
terms of reference of any sub-committees of the Commission. He stated that his first reaction to it would be
that the sub-committee would have to recommend, certainly, back to the Housing Commission what it felt should be
adopted by the Commission. Councillor Gould asked Mr. Robertson: were you of the understanding that Mr. Disher
had that right? Mr. Robertson's reply: presumably so - he had called me twice beforehand and we were finally
able to have a meeting that we could all attend, and it was my understanding as well as an associate of mine in
the building industry - both he and I have been in business quite a while as has Mr. Disher - I cannot really
foresee that there should be such a great misunderstanding - all three of us are in the building trade. Coun-
cillor Gould stated that he was not debating that - what he is looking at is if Mr. Robertson understood that
Mr. Disher had authority to say "go ahead with the design" or not. Mr. Robertson clarified this discussion by
pointing out that the design is preliminary design that was being talked about. He stated that what was so
strange about the whole thing is that even though he were to go ahead with preliminary design in the end it
would come before the Council anyway, or the Planning Department. Councillor Gould noted that he was now
referring to Mr. Robertson's brief which says, in summation, "considerable expense on my part now rests on the
City of Saint John". Mr. Robertson replied that that is an alternative, though, and that, obviously, if this
project goes into other hands then we are talking a different sort of thing. Councillor Gould asked if, in Mr.
Robertson's business, it would not be a normal thing to do to seek a contract for that part of the design, or
something, or, is that not normal; he added that Mr. Robertson in his brief refers to a time period of April
29th to June 15th in this regard. Mr. Robertson replied that it goes without saying that we are not talking
about 24 hours a day, 7 days a week - but, yes, you do, when you are competing for contracts, but the competition
in question ended on March 31st which was the deadline for proposals, he believes, although they did extend that
a week further sometime later because they only got two interested replies, which, again, is not normal.
Councillor Gould observed that it is not normal to have a contract for that part of it, and Mr. Robertson
agreed.
Councillor Davis noted that Mr. Robertson was present to protest a decision by the Saint John Housing
Commission. Mr. Robertson made affirmative reply, and agreed that it was his only purpose for being present at
this Council meeting, and that he had never appeared before this Council about this subject at any time. Mr.
Robe~tson advised that he has never appeared before all the members of the Housing Commission. Councillor Davis
asked Mr. Robertson: you have never presented anything to any members of the Housing Commission except to Mr.
Disher? Making negative reply, Mr. Robertson pointed out that his brief states that he sent a letter to the
514
~
Chairman of the Commission, Mr. J. D. MacCallum, as well as copies of the drawings. Councillor Davis
added: but the only one Mr. Robertson has ever spoken to is Mr. Disher and the only one who ever encour-
aged Mr. Robertson is ]~. Disher, so Mr. Robertson's protest concerns Mr. Disher's action, andiMr. Robert-
son wants the Council to act on that -- is that correct? is that why Mr. Robertson is here? In reply,
Mr. Robertson stated that he does not know, and he asked: if the Housing Commission appointed ~ sub-
committee, which it obviously had, then now he is led to believe that this sub-committee has no power.
Councillor Davis stated that it .does not matter when it had power or not - Mr. Robertson says he was
misled by this sub-committee and he is appealing to this Council to correct that - right? Mr.:Robertson
replied: yes, I could do that. Councillor Davis thereupon noted that that is really all Mr.. Robertson is
here for, and explaining his case to Council. Mr. Robertson made affirmative reply. Councillpr Davis
felt that as long as we are clear on that point: that Mr. Robertson was protesting the action of the
chairman of the sub-committee of the Housing Commission. ~IT. Robertson replied that he does not know if
we could simplify it to that extent.
l1/ex ~1'2~'"
':JJe.5i~ J1
Councillor Green asked if Mr. Robertson was advised by the chairman of a sub-committee that his
proposal was accepted. Mr. Robertson replied in the affirmative, adding that he is quite positive of
that. . Councillor Green noted that the brief, in this regard, says "Approximately four weeks later, I was
contacted by the chairman of the project sub-committee and at a subsequent meeting was advised.:. that my
proposal was the most acceptable and further, I was encouraged to continue with preliminary de~ign work.",
and he asked if the said chairman of the sub-committee tell Mr. Robertson that his proposal was actually
accepted. Mr. Robertson made affirmative reply, and stated that at that point he himself also. said that
it would take at least three weeks to prepare preliminary drawings for the Council. Councillor Green
asked if, at that meeting, any elected members of the Council, of whom there are two on the said Housing
COlrrmission, were present. Mr. Robertson made negative reply, adding that just Mr. Disher was present.
5. J: 1Is5- amm
Councillor M. Vincent asked if Mr. Robertson had ever met with the Housing Commission, or only
with Mr. Disher. Mr. Robertson replied that he met only with Mr. Disher, and that he at no time met with
the Housing Commission, at all, at a sort of pre-arranged meeting between himself and the Commission.
Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Robertson: when you met with Mr. Disher or had communications with him,
did he give you the impression that he was representing the Housing Commission, or was he speaking as a
member of the Commission, only? Mr. Robertson replied that Mr. Disher was speaking as chairman of the
sub-committee with reference to the Sand Cove Road property. Councillor M. Vincent noted that in his
brief, Mr. Robertson mentioned that he had discussions with several of the Council members. He asked: did
any of the Council members Mr. Robertson had discussions with give him the attitude or impression that he
was at this meeting passing on to Council as whole, that he had the sole proposal and that it should
proceed, et cetera? Making negative reply, Mr. Robertson advised that when he spoke with the Councillors,
mentioned in the brief, as well as, he believes, the head of almost every department in City Hall...
Councillor M. Vincent interjected, by asking the names of the Council members with whom Mr. Robertson
spoke. Mr. Robertson replied that he spoke with Councillor Cave and with the Mayor, and with the Common
Clerk. The Mayor noted that in speaking with him, Mr. Robertson asked him what he should do and he told
Mr. Robertson to go and see the committee. Mr. ,Robertson replied that he believes the Mayor did so - he
has been told to see most committees. !
.
I
I
.
Councillor A. Vincent, a member of the Saint John Housing Commission, confirmed that he had
never seen Mr. Robertson at a meeting of the Commission. He noted that there had been problems with the
deed for the Annex property, and he asked the date that this property became vested in the City of Saint I
John. Mr. Robertson gave a date: August 29th, 1975. Councillor A. Vincent replied that he wanted the
City Solicitor's answer in this regard. Mr. Rodgers replied that he will have to check the records to
determine the said date on which that transaction was finalized. Councillor A. Vincent asked if, in the
City Solicitor's opinion, it was after April 30th, 1976. Mr. Rodgers replied that he does not,. know - he
will have to check the date. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that the Commission had problems ih trying to
acquire this property and that there were other interests, and so on. He stated that he does not think
that Mr. John Disher misled Mr. Robertson by any means or by any stretch of the imagination th~t he had
the complete authority to go out and tell Mr. Robertson to go ahead. Mr. Robertson replied that that is
an opinion. Councillor A. Vincent added that it is an opinion of the Housing Commission member, too.
.Mr. Malcolm R. Baxter, President of the New Brunswick Protestant Orphans' Home, at this time
~~p~ ~ presented a brief regarding the 3.04 acres of land on Sand Cove Road, known as the Annex property, advis-
~~~,. ing that this organization submitted a proposal in response to the Saint John Housing Commission's call
for Expressions of Interest, and that the proposal requested the opportunity to meet with the~ommission
~d9,J9~zCes~"'t' to elaborate on the organization's letter of proposal and this courtesy was never extended to them. The .
O ,/ - ' ~,.e brief advises that the 3.04 acres. of land is important to them in their planning for a new programme of
~"p~I1.s- child care because they currently have 29 acres of land adjacent to this site under option with the New
C'_ J /? ~-' Brunswick Housing Corporation and they entered into this option on the Corporation's encouragement that
v.;JhA. c..t:>ye 7TR... they would not have a problem in obtaining the 3.04 acres - these 3.04 acres are crucial to the land they
/? .-4 have under option as they are already serviced with water and sewerage and the land under option is not
",~~t?A( ~~~'~jf serviced, and the estimates for servicing that land are very costly - also, a good portion of the 29 acres
is swamp land and would be of little or no use without incurring prohibitive costs. The brief :states that'
it is hoped to receive within the next few weeks the report of Woods, Gordon & Companyof Ottat,a who have:
been conducting negotiations with the Provincial Department of Social Services of New Brunswick on behalf
of the organization, and that such report has a very direct and important bearing on the size :~d type of: I
programme that they hope to develop on the Sand Cove Road site. The brief notes that it is because of
changes in the policy of the Provincial Government in connection with child care that this organization is ,
looking upon.a new programme to meet today's needs, and that they trust that the Common Council will give
this organization the opportunity to elaborate on their plans and the reasons the Annex property is very
important to their new programme. Mr. Baxter advised that this organization for a great many years has
been doing work for the children of this province and are hoping to continue this work. He noted that
attached to the brief is a copy of the proposal that this organization made to the Housing Commission. He
stated that this organization is very interested in continuing the work with children and they are led to
believe there is a need in this community for work with emotionally disturbed children. He noted that the I
said. 3.04 acres is adjacent to the Dr. William F. Roberts Hospital which would fit the type of: programme
very well in which they are interested, and they feel they have the qualifications and experti~e to carry
out such a programme. He added that they do not require any City funding, whatsoever - they have their '
own funds to conduct this project, and they are willing to pay a fair price for the land. He noted that
the majority of the said 29 acres is very swampy and that it would be practically prohibitive in cost to
develop, and the reason they require the 3.04 acres is to acquire servicing for the land they now have
under option (the 29 acres), and the 3.04 acres is perhaps the best portion of the land.
Councillor M. Vincent noted from the organization's brief that they had submitted pr~posals 'to
the Saint John Housing Commission and had asked for the opportunity perhaps to go further with them, and
the brief mentions that the organization had not received a reply, and he asked if the organization, at .
this time, has received any reply from the said Commission. Mr. Baxter replied that the original letter
to the Commission was sent by the Past President of the Orphans' Home and he did not receive apy ac-
knowledgement to the proposal. He added that he believes that the first the Past President realized that
the letter of proposal had been received by the Commission was when he read it in the press me~ia. He
stated that he himself wrote since that time to the Chairman of the Housing Commission and to the Commiss,ion
....1
,....
.5t5
.
I
I
.
I
;t:~ 7J.des-
.6mr
OrflhOlhs'
Sal11L awe
n>Jt. /J /?h6'X
'I'>PjJed-y
I
I
.
~
asking for reconsideration and he did receive a reply that they were not in a position to change their earlier
recommendation.
Councillor Davis asked if maybe 12 acres of the 29 acres that the Home has under option are usable.
Mr. Baxter replied that a lot of that land is not usable, but he does not know how many acres of it are usable.
Councillor Davis asked Mr. Baxter: with that acreage, and with the 3 acres we are now discussing, is there not
some way that the Orphans' Home and the Church of the Nazarene can make a switch and both use it? Mr. Baxter in
reply, stated that he thinks his group is open-minded on this to look at alternatives. He pointed out that in
their proposal that they made they suggested that they might be willing to trade land of equivalent value with
the City. He noted that the Home is chiefly interested in the frontage on the Road, and in servicing it, and he
added that with the type of programme they are going into they have to be very conscious of what the surroundings
are - there are certain types of things that might go into that area that would not fit in with their programme,
or with the Dr. William F. Roberts Hospital, let us say -- as an extreme example, maybe, a tavern, let us say
his point being that the Orphans' Home is conscious of what other developments might be made on land adjacent to
the land under discussion. Councillor Davis noted that the eastern part of the Annex structure is just about
gone, and stated that he was wondering if a trade-off could not be made to give some road frontage to the Orphan-
age in exchange for a deeper lot in the area where the Housing Commission feels the Church of the Nazarene should
build. In reply to Councillor Davis' query, Mr. Baxter advised that his group has lay-out plans for their
proposal, but they were never granted the opportunity to appear before the Housing Commission to present such
plans. He modified that statement slightly, by advising that prior to the land coming up for calls for proposals
back in December a couple of members of their Board met with the Housing Commission, but they were never asked to
appear after the call for proposals and after they made a written proposal to the Commission. Councillor Davis
noted that the City Solicitor was out of the Council Chamber at this time, and he suggested that we wait until he
has returned to the meeting because we be becoming involved in something that is not quite legal; if selection of
a project is made with scanty information, we might be having a problem, here.
Councillor A. Vincent made the point that the Orphans' Home only has a option ori the 29 acres and does
not. have the deed to that land as yet. He added that the Minister responsible for New Brunswick Housing tells us
one thing, and that the Orphans' Home Board is holding up a little over there on the Rocca development over
there, and they are saying he is in back here - all of which he (Councillor A. Vincent) finds very confusing; he
urged that the facts of the matter be presented, and he noted that the Saint John Housing Commission at this
meeting is being criticized, for no reason. He pointed out that we cannot sit down with the New Brunswick
Protestant Orphanage, who do not own the other part of the land - he added that he is not too sure that the deed
has been signed that the City owns the 3.04 acres in question - and he further added that this land is not going
to be any good to us because it has no water services. He felt that the Council needs some legal opinions. Mr.
Baxter stated that his group was not criticizing the Housing Commission in any way - they are only saying that
they asked to have a chance to appear, and were not granted the opportunity. Councillor A. Vincent stated that
if he is a member of that Commission for a few more days, the said Orphanage Board will have a fair hearing, and
he then asked: can we legally sit down and negotiate with the Protestant Orphanage for land that it does not own
and for land that the City does not own? He added that it does not make sense to him. He suggested that the
Protestant Orphanage, the Housing Commission and the New Brunswick Housing Corporation get together, forthwith,
and clear this matter up, once and for all - he felt that is the key of the issue. The Mayor advised that the
City does own the land - the deed has been granted to the City - and the City staff says that there is water.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to be shown by the City staff that there is water, because they
are telling him there is not water;
Councillor Kipping asked if security has been provided on the Annex property - and if so, when. Making
affirmative reply, Mr. Barfoot advised that an arrangement was finalized on Wednesday afternoon of last week and
he believes it went into effect that evening. Councillor Kipping noted that the Council at the same time (at the
last Council meeting) was waiting for a report from the Land Committee, and he asked what was requested in that
report and have we received it. The Mayor replied that the Land Committee met this morning and discussed the
matter as they had to do; and he asked Councillor Davis, Chairman of that Committee, to report that they did
agree on the price for this property. Councillor Davis advised that the mandate given to the Land Committee was
to determine the asking price, which the Committee has now done. Councillor Kipping in asking if the matter is
still open so that either of the three proposals to develop this property can still be considered, explained that
his reason in asking that question is that the Council already has a recommendation from the Saint John Housing
Commission that it go to the Church of the Nazarene, and that is why it is difficult for him to understand why
Alexander Design is in here tonight and why the Protestant Orphans' Home representatives are in here tonight,
when, really, the recommendation is before Council and is just within a fraction of being awarded. The Mayor
replied that these two groups are before Council at this time because they requested the Common Clerk that they
be able to come before Council. Councillor Kipping observed that in so doing, in asking for another hearing,
they have gone over the heads of the Saint John Housing Commission - and not without good reason, he added,
judging by the way that the matter has been handled, so far, in his opinion:
In reply to Councillor Parfitt's question as to how many group homes the Orphanage proposal envisages,
Mr. Baxter stated that their proposal is for emotionally disturbed children and it is very hard for the Board to
ascertain at this time how many group homes or village cottages they would erect because they are conducting
negotiations with the Department of Social Services through a consulting firm from Ottawa and the consultants'
report has not been received as yet - it really depends on the need - the more children, the larger the project
would be within their ability to accommodate them.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that it appears to him that perhaps the Council has to set a policy as to
how it is going to dispose of this matter, along the lines of what Councillor Kipping has raised - we have to go
back perhaps and see if, in fact, we have established it is on a "first come, first served" basis or was it a
fact that the other proposals came in after a deadline, or just how Council is going to handle it, now that there
are perhaps two or three proposals in. He added that he thinks the matter might require a little bit of legal
in-put, also -- therefore, he.does not feel that the Council can do too much more than have a bit of legal in-put
and then set a policy.
The Mayor asked how many orphans are in the institution, now. Mr. Baxter replied that they are phasing
out the institution as it is known right now - the land where the present home has been has been purchased by the
New Brunswick Housing Corporation and the requirements for child care have changed now and orphans as we have
known them in the past are being taken care of by foster homes - this is the current policy of our Provincial
Government. The Mayor asked how many they are sure of having if they get land and move in on those 29 acres. Mr.
Baxter replied that this is why they are waiting for the report from the consulting firm that is working with
Social Services - they really do not know how many children they will get, but they expect to know within the
next few weeks. He added that they are led to believe that there is a considerable need in this regard.
Councillor Hodges asked if the three proposals were submitted within the deadline for receiving pro-
posals by the Housing Commission, which was March 31st. The Mayor replied that he does not know. Councillor
Hodges noted that the Housing Commission had a deadline and the three proposals were not in, he understands, from
Councillor Vincent that there was a second proposal asked on the same projects. He stated that it would appear
that the Council should make a thorough check to determine that these people did come within the time limit that
was set up by the Housing Commission. He suggested that perhaps it would be wise to lay the matter on the table
516
~
and get the information from the Chairman of the Commission and after that the Council can take action.
Councillor Parfitt noted that the Council authorized security for one week for the Annex property .
in the meantime at a cost of $600.00 approximately a week, and she asked what the Council's policy is
going to be while it works this matter out - how many weeks, and who is going to be responsible to keep
this property. Councillor Kipping commented that the City is responsible, certainly. '
Reverend K. Stackhouse, pastor of the Church of the Nazarene, was present and advised that the
City Manager mentioned that security had been arranged for the property. He stated that, however, the
security that was arranged was the Church of the Nazarene - the City Manager's office did state that it
would pay the Church for watching the property - however, he (Reverend Stackhouse) was asked later by
someone in the City if the Church would consider watching the property without perhaps charging for it - I
however, he would like to mention that the Church is not in the security business. The Mayor advised that
the City Manager did arrange with the Corps of Commissionaires and then they came back on late Tuesday and
said they could not get anybody, and then when Mr. Stackhouse informeQ us that nobody had been, there we
checked with the Corps of Commissionaires so then he (Mr. Barfoot) contacted Mr. Stackhouse knowing that
Mr. Stackhouse had people prepared to go there, and !{r. Barfoot stated that he would pay them the same
price. Mr. Stackhouse confirmed this information as being correct. The Mayor stated that he supplied .
this information to make it clear that the City Manager did arrange to make the payment, and that the City
did hire the Church people. Councillor Kipping stated that he thinks it is the responsibility. of Council
ehN/'oh pf'! 1fhe to order that the City provide proper security for that property. He added that, actually, when you look I
~ 6?' at it, we should have been providing proper security for that property for the ten months that we have
aZ.;/r 'he owned it and it would not have been vandalized to the extent that it is at this time. He stated that this
~~)1;t ~~~ ~~ is the most disgraceful exhibition of vandalism that he has ever seen, to have that allowed to go on - the
fact is that the vandals have been carting it away by the truckload on Sundays, holidays, weekdays and
/lhht!X flrO~NY nights.
Mr. Stackhouse stated that he wished to state, in defence of the Housing Commission and Mr. John
Disher, that the Church representatives met with Mr. Disher he believes it was with Mr. Donald Buck, also,
and they made it very clear, at least to him (Mr. Stackhouse) that whatever preparation and whatever costs
they went to as far as planning before this came through Council would be at the Church's own expense.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
.
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that
~(lPb/JFl-mehr he will be away from the City on vacation from June 25th to July 25th next, and requesting that the
I~L..-; /""" UJ Council's approval be given for the appointment of Mr. R. Park as Acting City Manager during that period
~~~)1~ vi ~"/~~ of his absence be received and filed and the request granted.
:;; 1{, 7?;(rk ' .
Councillor A. Vincent sought assurance that the City Manager's absence will not affect various
matters involving Federal funds that are pending, or that are coming to an end and that the City will not
miss a lot of such Federal funds. Mr. Barfoot replied that these matters are all in hand and everything
is proceeding well at the moment, and that arrangements have been made for the various projects to con-
tinue in his absence. Councillor Kipping asked what meetings are scheduled in the matter of tpe Glen
Falls flooding problem, and if there are meetings scheduled, and if arrangements are made for knowledge- I
able City representation at any meetings that may be scheduled during the City Manager's absence. Making,
affirmative reply, Mr. Barfoot stated that Mr. MacKinnon has attended with him all meetings regarding the,
Glen Falls flooding problem and Mr. MacKinnon will be available during the said period. In reply to the
query regarding whether there is a meeting scheduled for the said period, Mr. Barfoot advised that there
was a meeting today and further work will be coming from that meeting which Mr. MacKinnon is well aware
of, so arrangements have been made for pursuing the matter by the City's initiative and this will not
suffer.
."
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay" and com-
menting that it is the wrong time for the City Manager to be going on vacation.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
7ehhrolcct!!'.n/.e.d RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, the bid of Arbing ..
// L /. ~V-. Equipment Ltd., which was the only bid received, for supplying one only Model 440 International all twine
~~ ~~I'6?)' hay baler, at a cost of $4,165.00 plus tax, and the bid of the said company, which was the lower of two
11"~//.r~ ~~~.' - bids received for supplying one Howard rotavator, Model K60, at a cost of $2,336.00, plus tax,. be ac-
m~r Xbt. cepted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
$te~bma/?~CO
-C/o/? CP. A't-d.
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as
for payment of the invoice from Stephen Construction
of $57,198.73.
recommended by the City Manager, authori tOy be grante'd
Company Limited, dated June 16th, 1976, in the amount
I
I
J)ISf?PSOl/ 0-1'
Uhf<( 5 eL dI..JP)~
Councillor A. Vincent, during discussion broached by the Mayor on dumping of unused asphalt from
City jobs, asked: when there is a load of asphalt in the spreader at 11.45 a.m. (in the spreader stopped
on Crown Street) and that spreader does not start up again until 1.00 p.m. (after the lunchtime of the
crew), why do we not dump that asphalt rather than use it, knowing that it is going to be bad asphalt, as
it has cooled off and has begun to harden, and that the job therefore would probably have to be done again
within a year or so. He advised that an asphalt expert gave him that opinion, and that he would like to
know whether that expert was wrong, or if that is the City's practice. Mr. Barfoot replied that it sounds
like a very unusual practice (regarding the incident referred to by Councillor A. Vincent) and that he
will have/to check into that issue. The Mayor noted that we will get a report back in this regard.
I
On motion of'Councillor Green
1 e~u:tAr d::r'e.
~/J7f'II7f1
l?el/er5111'l...~'f'.5
7PtU'/.sI-'2:J u: rea
C'1#1I /Ia// fFl'h
-/'/001"
m,/j //re~.1
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter from the City Manager,
awards be made for painting the Reversing Falls Tourist Bureau, the fifth floor of City Hall, .and Number .4
Fire Station, as recommended on the submitted bid summary.
On motion of Councillor Green
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould I
RESOLVED that the report for March of the Works Branch of the
...4
,...-
517
t?/PhlfA /q
. h!j?P/' 'ff-
I
,((1(') ~A>PII
7?~.
(l1;r port-
f"(1;Jd)
I
.
I
.
I
I
1'17h ap'~
. ~;.~S
.o//5ftt"~
st()PI<1 4.
~
Engineering and Works Department be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent asked for an explanation on what the intentions are with reference to the road to
the Saint John airport, that is, the Loch Lomond Road - what kind of a budget is there for that road, and whether
the reference in the above named March report to this Road is for capital or maintenance programme work. Mr.
MacKinnon replied that the said reference (item 722 is that portion of the capital programme, and it is that
portion of the said Road between the Bayside Drive intersection up to MacDonald Street - that work is pretty yell
all done now. Councillor A. Vincent asked if any further work is to be done this year on the Loch Lamond Road,
his point being that this Road is a very heavily travelled artery and it must be one of the worst streets in the
city, and that any visitors to the city who travel over that road coming in from the airport would not be en-
couraged to remain in the city because of the bad condition of this Road - and that this Road has to be improved.
He asked if there is any way that the City staff could take a look at this situation, and maybe we can meet with
the Provincial Government and obtain some assistance, somewhere, and do a major job on that airport road. Mr.
MacKinnon replied that the approval by the Provincial Government of funding for the year 1976 was reported
earlier to Council in the sum of $300,000.00 and this sum is to go to Provincial highways within the city and the
Provincial Department has indicated that they want that full sum placed on the Loch Lomond Road for the year
1976, and that he himself has not. met yet with the Provincial Engineering Department but one of the City en=
gineers has done so and they have already discussed that portion of the Road between MacDonald Street and Cham-
plain Drive and/or Hickey Road, and it depends, again, on the extent of the widening and resurfacing and how far
the $300,000.00 would go. Councillor A. Vincent stated that his information is that one of the Members from East
Saint John wanted it spent from the Loch Lomond Road intersection by the Fish and Game out towards St. Martins,
and he asked if that is where the said sum is going to be spent, on that hill. He stated that he thinks, because
this Road is built up with housing on both sides of the road by developers that there is a great deal of housing
being built out there, and that we should continue on with our master plan rather than go by and start again. He
asked for a report on this Question, from either Mr. MacKinnon, or City staff, afterwards, as to whether that is
the plan or not. He stated that he thinks we should try very hard to have that money spent from Kane's Corner
out, rather than leap-frog the work on this Road. The Mayor asked that the said report also show the priority of
what streets, et cetera. Councillor Davis noted that the above named report shows that $1,573.00 is the cost to
date regarding Loch Lomond Road work out of the proposed appropriation of $97,000.00 and he asked if the said
$97,000.00 has been spent since March, because there is another capital project job regarding Loch Lomond Road,
described as going from St. Anne Street to Nursing Home, widen and resurface, $166,800.00, so he assumes that
this will finish the job to the Nursing Home where the new intersection is going to be. Mr. MacKinnon pointed
out that this report with reference to capital construction is only for the period from January up until March,
and the reference therein to Job 722 regarding Loch Lomond Road would be the cost spent in March whereas costs to
date, January to March, would be a total of $1,573.00 - the project as listed in the capital programme and listed
in the Council correspondence for this meeting, as information, would be a job shown as a capital project going
from St. Anne Street out past the Nursing Home, and that would be the same area that would be included under the
Provincial appropriation of monies. Councillor Davis stated that he feels Council should be aware of the fact
that the major airport expansion that we are trying to get in this city, and which mayor may not be approved,
hinges a great deal on the improvement of the Road to the airport, and, unfortunately, that Road is a City
street - it is all within the City limits, so it places us in Quite a serious predicament. He added that the
alignment has been more or less approved of and we are talking to the Province all the time, but everybody is
short of funds lately. He stated that he thinks that much of the airport work will hinge on that improvement,
and we will have to make some commitment and we will have to get commitments from the Provincial Government. He
stated that the other thing is regarding the taking of containers directly from this port out to the airport and
loading them on aircraft, which has begun, and it is not very easy to transport a container on that roadway
because you would never get by it, so, there are a lot of things that have to happen on that highway. Mr.
MacKinnon advised that the portion of the highway that we are looking at next improve on the Loch Lomond Road
would take us up to the proposed alignment of the new airport expressway from approximately McAllister Drive out
to the airport - we would have that portion of it resurfaced, hopefully, this summer. Councillor M. Vincent,
referring to the said March report, asked for information regarding the 814 tons of salt as it relates to the 629
yards of sand, and if there was any change in the ratio of the mix which resulted in these two amounts of these
materials for the month of March (the Civic employee~ had made a suggestion regarding the sand and salt mix, he
recalled). Mr. MacKinnon stated that our reply to the said suggestion from the Labour people specifically
indicated that we were doing what we considered apropos to the circumstances to control the ice and slush, et
cetera, and this is merely a reflection on the time rather than a change in procedures - during the month of
March there was changing conditions. Councillor M. Vincent asked why the cost of hired equipment for March 1976
was so much lower than for March 1975. !4r. MacKinnon replied that the costs are a reflection, really, on pos-
sibly either a capital programme or the snow removal programme at that particular time, and he would have to
think that at that particular time, although we had storms, they did not last very long, and there was a fair
amount of rain and slush and the hired equipment was not in as much evidence as it was for the same period of
time in 1975; also, there has been quite a bit more control and supervision over the hired equipment - and this
control and supervision has improved over what it was, before.
In reply to Councillor Parfitt's query as to the status of streets in the South End area in relation to
the capital works programme for 1976, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the streets that are arrived at for the re-
surfacing work are the result of a survey of all the city streets to see which streets require such work, and a
number of the streets in the South End area that Councillor Parfitt referred to (between Sydney Street and
Courtenay Bay in the area lying between Duke Street and King Square)were resurfaced in the last few years and as
a result they were not included in the list for 1976.
Consideration was given to the City Manager's letter of June 18th, 1976 which requests several small
changes in the 1976 Capital Budget as a result of developments since the Council approved the said Budget on May
17th, 1976. Councillor Hodges noted that the people on Shillington Road have been promised some relief (the said
letter from the City Manager recommends that the sewer work for Shillington Road for 1976 in the amount of
$13,000.00 be deleted from the said Capital Budget and added to the 1977 Capital Budget in the amount of
$13,000.00), and he asked if it is possible that the necessary funds for this work could be found rather than
delete this item from the 1976 programme. Mr. Barfoot recalled that this came in as a result of a petition this
spring from the people of Shillington Road and the Council gave it favourable consideration, but in the course of
approving the budget the sanitary sewer was included in 1976 and the water main was included in 1977, so rather
than digging up the street twice and because of the need to complete another project, he has suggested that the
sewer be postponed to 1977 and be done at the same time as the water main. Councillor Green noted that, in order
to bring the 1976 programme under way, the City Manager is planning to delete the new water main for Rodney
Street from the 1976 Capital Budget, and he asked if, by so doing, does the City Manager foresee any problems for
this year. Making negative reply, Mr. Barfoot advised that this was a priority of the Water Department to renew
that main but it is just a question of delaying one year on a water main of approximate age of 70 years so he
believes that the old main will stand up for another year.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as requested in the letter dated June 18th, 1976 from
the City Manager, approval be granted for the following changes in the 1976 Capital Budget that was adopted by
Common Council on May 17th, 1976 for the reasons given in the said letter:-
(I) Recreation and Cultural Services 1976 - Mispec Park storm damage - change the sum of $25,000.00 that was
anticipated to be fully recovered through Emergency Measures Organization to $16,000.00 contributions, and
.518
/97 aE'/~'
:8td~e-&-e~5~
~y~ief~.
ttl'tP/eI"Q701/ h
(1( ,.<n~1/,d%led)
,(PK4// Sr
.51f~pm .se~",.s
lSh//Qhj;~M 7?':{
~e,4~)
/~7'/ a"p/lf-?/
.l!kM"J?er C'~OI~
71,k~ ,*.
w~"<m.il/n
$,(//fr"f..t?'l '/fd',
St!lVer
~t!f I1/fr.
Indian -town
Wakff/"6hr
s.J. Tw?boei1T a.
A-I-~.
23oai-s
/y,,.t-,6,,, /J/e~-
b(NUIJp~ k.
mehr /!sspc.
khf:t!' .f"~s
,,(ef"f -turns :-
c;li,.Y -~
u. q'l4Jt~~.
t1
C'/ly ~d'. -$tli/e-
hSIf e;,-t"rcU7~
prQA'lpH-eL
/lJeL/..n
/9''/'1 ~if.../
71'R/17c -I SD!d?
C'()m_.
I4ffmal"Ket- .91
in-teJ1dao/e
$9,000.00, payable by the City;
~
(2) Water 1976 - add Haymarket Square from Forest Street to City Road (renew a section of 10-inch and 12- .
inch main), estimated cost $15,000.00;
- delete renewal of water main on Rodney Street, estimated cost $20,000.00;
(3) Storm Sewers 1976 - add Lowell Street (in connection with Community Arena improvements), estimated
cost $40,000.00;
- delete Shillington Road, estimated cost $13,000.00;
- change the estimated cost of the Greendale 36-inch storm sewer from $35,000.00 to
$15,000.00:
AND FURTHER that as recommended in the said letter from the City Manager, the
Capital Budget be changed, as follows:- add Rodney Street water main renewal, estimated
add Shillington Road sewer, estimated cost $13,000.00.
,
propos,"d 1977
cost $20,000.00;
,
I
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he thinks it is perhaps an improper precedent to start cutting
something out after the Council has approved something, and that to increase that capital budget the few
dollars that it is going to be increased is perhaps portraying a little more confidence in the Council to
do that rather than to now, after having approved the capital budget when we find things, which can happen
from time to time, that were by error omitted or otherwise that you have to start taking something out, . .
that it really does not portray a good attitude of Council. In reply to his question on how. the work of ' I
Greendale can now be done for $15,000.00 for the storm sewer, rather than the original estimat'" of $35,000.00,
Mr. MacKinnon advised that the figure was for a holdback on the completed Greendale system and'the es-
timate was made earlier in 1975 but by the time this figure had gotten through for approval by, Council our
estimate appeared fairly high - however, it appears now that the holdback figure is more in the vicinity
of $15,000.00. Councillor A. Vincent noted that the above report refers to the fact that the Province is
doing some relocation of watermains at Haymarket Square, and he asked for information in that regard. Mr.
MacKinnon advised that the water lines there are about 100 years old and are deteriorating. Councillor A.
Vincent stated that the point he was making was: why was that not in the capital budget, and the work in
question for renewal of a section of water mains from Forest Street to City Road at Haymarket Square
should have been known it had to be done prior to the writing of the City Manager's letter on June 18th.
Mr. MacKinnon replied that it was an error on his part - Mr. Sullivan had asked that this work. go on the
budget - as a great number of the projects are usually referred to them this one did not get to the
capital budget group that was dealing with it. He added that the sewer work for Shillington Road actually
,
got on in error for 1976 - it was actually intended that both of them (the water and sewer se~vices) be ,
included for 1977 and through some error the sewer got on the 1976 budget and the water main on the 1977
budget. In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's query regarding the $9,000.00 short of what we had set for
Mispec Park (storm damage costs) as to whether that was deemed to be improvements by the Provincial or
Federal Government, rather than granting the $25,000.00 - that is, the grant to us of $16,000.:00 rather
than the $25,000.00 - was it the Provincial or Federal Government that turned us down regarding the said i
$9,000.00 - Mr. Barfoot replied that the Emergency Measures Organization procedure is that the Federal '
Department of Public Works is involved also, and this was not approved. Mr. MacKinnon explained that it
is a difference between what you may require to be done and what the said senior Governments deem as a
return to previous storm conditions, and they felt that the $16,000.00 figure would get you to the pre-
storm condition.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green ,
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager in regard to the
waterfront area at Indiantown, advising that the Mayor and he met with representatives of the .Saint John,
Tugboat Co., Ltd., one of the owners concerned, this past week and expressed the concern of the City and'
the citizens about the appearance and safety hazards, and learned that the owners were fully ~ognizant of
these problems and attempt to maintain a careful watch on their boats to control vandalism prevalent in
the area and have been attempting to have the beached ship cut up for scrap, and only recently arranged
for this to be done, and it is anticipated that the work will be started very shortly; and f~ther ad-
vising that, however, with respect to the long-term outlook for the property, as the said owners say, this
waterfront has been used for shipping since the first settlement along the River and they anticipate that
there will always be ships berthed there - and, in conclusion, the owners expressed a wish to ,work in co-
operation with the North End Neighbourhood Improvement Association and this will be pursued f~rther -- be
received and filed.
Councillor Hodges commented that the fence gates are still wide open there, and he asked what
action is going to be taken in that regard, in the interests of public safety. The Mayor advlsed that tqe
above named owners told the City Manager and himself that they keep putting locks on the gates, but the
locks are continually broken. Councillor Gould made the point that there are proper locks that are not
that breakable easily, and he suggested that the said owners make the necessary expenditure for a good
lock and the proper chain to ensure that they will not be broken. \
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the joint letter from the City Manager and the Com-
missioner of Engineering and Works, recommending the adoption of the suggestion made by Mr. John Griffin,
Traffic Engineer, that left turns be allowed from City Road to Meadow Street and Clyde Street ,but that
left turns be prohibited from City Road into the Save-Easy entrance, and that a median be constructed as
part of the Capital Programme for 1977 for some distance past the Save-Easy entrance. in this regard, which
will also necessitate the removal of the hydro pole on the shoulder of the road, at a cost of'$9,500.00
which is to be borne by the City be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's request for information regarding what is taking place there
now, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the work that is being done there now is the construction of a median
which, as part of the Haymarket Square interchange, is as long as it is planning to be as far 'as the
rovincial Department is concerned - however, it is their opinion, and that of the City Department, that:
the median should be extended beyond the entrance to the Save-Easy store which would then prevent left- ,
hand turns going into the Save-Easy as you are coming down City Road ~ the report now before Council is '
actually dealing with the report that had come from the Traffic and Safety Committee which indicated there
be no left-hand turns going into Meadow Street and that the turn go in Clyde Street, and we were actually
saying that the left-hand turns should be allowed to enter Meadow Street and/or Clyde Street and to be
able to enter coming the other way from Rothesay Avenue, but that there be no left turns entering directly
into their driveway entrance handy to the Royal Bank. Councillor A. Vincent asked why the paving work
that is done in the city cannot be done at night, thus avoiding disrupting the whole city. He stated that
he cannot understand why the Council cannot tell the contractor that he must pave at night, a~d he added,
that the productivity would increase as a result, and that the cost of shift work is not that ,high. Mr.
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
'519
.
I
I
. SOJle f?-/'
.s u"p/~ s
C/t-:f er"-ip
h1eJ1~
I
1Io/flt.'s .fal.
2)u/>f ,P
. ~.;md.f///
C'oPl,rac1fe>r
7?psse/1
S_/e~ +-
Serv/ce
aL on
-t.;;lble
~ ~~I)}
I
I
.
.....
MacKinnon pointed out that there is more to the City Road-Haymarket Square project than just the paving itself
(regarding the repairing of the leak in one of the water mains recently) because both lanes had to be stopped in
order to dig up about a foot or so and relay the base gravel and then the binder, and this was done, and it can
be appreciated that construction work during the night hours is not as safe as the work being done in the day
time - although the traffic was held up the work was done fairly fast - the traffic was bad for three to four
days during the duration of the work. He recalled that over a year ago the Council was informed that there was
going to be one time, although we were going to plan on each phase of the construction of Haymarket Square, there
was going to be one part of it that there was going to be unavoidable problems with - he pointed out that this
has occurred and we have now gotten over it, and he thinks that to do it at night time we would have been looking
at other problems and there still would have been traffic snarl-ups because the roadway would not have been ready
in the day time. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to see the contractor try to do at least the
top coat of the paving at night. Councillor M. Vincent expressed the view that he cannot see any reason why a
lot of our paving, as it affects traffic as badly as it has, could not be done in the evening. Discussion ensued
at this time between Councillor M. Vincent and Mr. MacKinnon on the communication and co-operation that exists
between the Police Department and the Engineering and Works Department and between City departments in general
when there are overlapping areas of responsibility that can cause confusion in the city, and Mr. MacKinnon
explained that the Engineering Department that deals with all the engineering designs, has been in touch with the
Provincial Department constantly as well as with the contractor, and, that in addition, they have held a number
of meetings and have included Sergeant Morris of the Police Department and the said Departments have tried to
deal with the traffic problems. Councillor Hodges commented that the conditions of Clyde and Forest Streets are
quite bad. Mr. MacKinnon explained that that is the reason it was felt that allowing left turns to Meadow Street
would be more apropos because that section of Clyde Street 'is used for loading for the City Road former armouries
building and because of heavy construction as well as the back part of it on Forest Street - it has usually been
torn up or has the large tractor-trailers parked on it. Councillor Hodges expressed the view that night time
paving could be practiced in Saint John.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that over the course
of the years a great deal of surplus equipment of all varieties (from old boots through furniture to worn out
machinery) accumulates in various City departments and there is often no straightforward way of disposing of
these goods, and that, therefore, it is being proposed to raise some revenue, clear out a lot of clutter, and
also have a little fun, by holding a Giant Garage Sale during Loyalist Days, and noting that with the full
participation of all, this event could be very successful -- be received and filed and the recommendation ad-
opted.
The Mayor asked if the Council will be recelvlng'a list of the items that are to be offered in the
above named auction sale. Mr. Barfoot replied that each department is submitting a list of surplus articles to
the Purchasing Agent, and the master list can be circulated to the Common Council. During further ensuing
discussion, Mr. Barfoot advised that he would believe that the proceeds realized from this auction sale would go
into the City's general revenue, and that there may be some unused items in this sale because it is possible that
they would be part of the material that is to be cleared out and is surplus and is no longer required because of
a change possibly in uniforms or techniques. He added that he cannot really comment at this time as to what
material will be before the public at this sale because the lists have not been received, as yet. Councillor M.
Vincent stated that he thinks this is an excellent idea, but he wanted to know whether the City can use items
that have been paid for by tax payers' money and bought by the City and not used and relieved of by public
auction. Mr. Rodgers stated that in reply to the question of whether new and unused goods, chattels, items
purchased by the City with public funds can be disposed of through public auction, his opinion on it is that he
is not aware of any restrictions on the City. Councillor Kipping stated that if the City is thinking of taking
any of the furniture out of the old City Hall complex it should be very careful of what goes out of there because
some of it is treasured furniture that should not be lost.
On motion of CouncIlor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended in the joint letter from the City Manager
and the Commissioner of Engineering and Works, which advises that the City has the opportunity to acquire a
sanitary landfill compactor (Model K301 Buffalo-Bomag) for the Howe's Lake landfill site at 1975 prices of
$80,000.00 with monthly payments in 1976 of $1,000.00 per month, plus Provincial sales tax. and this proposal also
allows the City to purchase this machine at any time during the rental period, and which further advises that it
is considered that the said equipment is of great priority and that unless the City can operate the said landfill
site in a proper fashion, using equipment designed for the purpose, then the City will be forced to abandon the
site, find another location, which will be both expensive and remote, and when that site is established it will
be necessary to buy the proper equipment to operate that site, and that the cost of the recommended machinery
will be more than covered by the savings in gravel otherwise required for cover material and by the use of the
second bulldozer.to replace equipment which would otherwise be rented for construction -- the said Model K301
Buffalo-Bomag landfill compactor be acquired under the above named rental/purchase arrangement, from Rosser Sales
& Service.
The Mayor stated that he has been advised by people who know the above named equipment that it is
excellent piece of equipment, and that the only thing he would find wrong is that the track rollers had to be
changed on the average of three times a year - he added that construction companies tell him that they change a
track roller about every ten months which is 2,000 hours and in rough work - they suggested to him that perhaps
these are not lined up right, or someone putting in a figure that is not quite right, and the construction people
say that in no way do you change tracks that often working in soft ground like the said landfill site. Mr.
MacKinnon replied that the information the Mayor has is quite right regarding changing the rollers when working
on rough ground - he pointed out that the people the Mayor was talking with are construction people working in
construction material - it is a known fact that dozer or tractor equipment working on a sanitary landfill site
have an extremely high maintenance on their tracks and rollers - the material they are working in get up into the
tracks - the other City equipment does last a lot longer than the equipment at the City dump site whereas the
dump equipment has a high maintenance because of the work on the dump itself. Councillor Parfitt asked if the
said Buffalo-Bomag landfill compactor would last approximately seven years, which would be the period of time of
purchase, at the above named monthly rental and purchase figure. Mr. MacKinnon noted that this is a big piece of
equipment and stated that he would judge that its life expectancy would be something like ten to fifteen years,
for a piece of equipment of this size. He added that he would not think that the City is going to pay for it
over 80 months, and that the first figure of $1,000.00 a month is something that we have discussed with Rosser
Sales & Service to cover our problems on budget restrictions in 1976 and we would have to analyze it in 1977
and/or 1978 depending upon whether or not we wanted to pay the balance at that time. He added that normal
service to this compactor would be done by the City and any repair work over and above normal servicing would be
done as a warrantee on it of either nine months or a year. Councillor Davis noted that with regard to the
$80,000.00 price for this machine, it is impossible to have paid the same amount (rental) over seven years when
the vendor is charging 14% - so, the price would actually be $50,000.00 if the City bought it right now. Mr.
MacKinnon stated that if the City were to pay $2,000.00 a month rental for this machine the cost of the machine
was going to be in the vicinity of $105,000.00 if the City paid it over the life of the contract - however, the
520
~
~we; ~/re
rLufll,P /a~ut-H'1.
t!'O"'l'dC-tOr
e/-ttj Sp4i:;-/tor
If/UJ?/d;~/ "Pl:m
.1Jy- km'
J?e - z0I7/n1
11/&<#1"/ ~"J4h!J
./~,t.
J>"pceLteI'e I"e
<i1~el1"mt!!h-l-s
/Jf~J?/t::;~/ J{..~
~~- A07W /17
rek-t/oh 'If-o
ZOI7/~ a&h.f1eS
~;Ial'i~td
bul/d//?5
S,;JI1L Cbve iflL
/}/Jl1e)( 'pN;:>ep&,y
,c,ire ~/'~/ S
Ontt!!r
C'r'l:f Soh~i'or
(,/i~ Su&/tor
S I'''uce "'~d' wp,,"
!/I',....!f/I?:J I!~H~
~/d/'She'L
d;re.;l
P",V. tPOve-.
F(N'es~ P;rp~Q
,<-t~
price of the machine is $80,000.00 with interest payments if the City carried on over a period,of time.
Councillor Davis stated that he does not think the City should become involved in a 14% lease over seven
years, on this equipment. Mr. MacKinnon expressed his agreement with this viewpoint, and added that it
would be the Department's recommendation that either in 1977 or in 1978 the City purchase the balance
outright rather than continue to carry it with interest payments. On being advised by Mr. MacKinnon that:
other companies build the same type of machine, the Mayor suggested that the City could go to tender on
this matter, to either purchase or lease, for a lesser amount of money. Mr. MacKinnon replied that it is
possible to do that. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he is fully in favour of the City getting the
piece of equipment that it needs but he will not support it unless'it goes to public tender. During
explanatory remarks, Mr. MacKinnon pointed out that it happens that at this time this is the piece of
equipment that the City can afford rather than going out to a tender on the specifications. Councillor M.
.
Vincent stated that his point is that he thought the City had a policy and when we talk about the spending
of approximately $80,000.00 or perhaps more for a unit or units, he believes the only way it can be done
is through a public tender and he does not think we can single out any particular company although he
appreciates the specifications and the problems that would be involved, but he feels that that: type of
thing has to be obtained by the City through public tenders. Councillor Gould asked if the City has ever
asked previously for rental/purchase through public tenders. Mr. MacKinnon made negative reply. Coun-
cillor A. Vincent pointed out that the City got the sweeper through public tenders. In reply, Mr. Barfoot
stated that he thinks that in most cases where the City has got into rental/purchase agreements it is
after the City has rented a piece of equipment for a number of months and has found it a satisfactory
piece and wishes to continue its use and has applied the rental cost to the purchase price, and we have
got into a number of those agreements, but the City, in his recollection, has not gone to tender speci-
fically asking for a rental/purchase proposal. Councillor Green made the point that the City,: if it
entered into the arrangement as recommended regarding this landfill compactor, is not committed to pay for
this machine over the full 80 payments but can cancel the arrangement if it so wishes, or it can complete
the purchase at the start of anyone year and so notify the vendor. Councillor Gould asked if there is
any minimum rental time that the City is required to take part in this arrangement. Mr. MacKinnon made
negative reply, adding that the company would prefer to get $80,000.00.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table pending further
discussion for a week or two.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried with Councillor Gould voting "ray".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor submitting an
oplnlon regarding amending the Municipal Development Plan with regard to the proposed re-zoning of 77
Coburg Street and the lot at its rear next to 28 Garden Street for Hilyard Holdings Ltd., and also sub-
mitting an opinion regarding third reading of the amendment to the Zoning By-Law in connection'with the
said proposed re-zoning, be received and filed and that the action be tabled for one week until a full
Council is present.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the City Solicitor, in the above.noted letter, is saying that the
Municipal Plan By-Law should be changed before the Council has the third reading on the re-zoning. In
reply, Mr. Rodgers advised that he is not saying that - he is saying that under the Community Planning Act
the statute requires the Zoning By-Law to be brought in line with the Plan and where the Council has
commenced proceedings to amend the Zoning By-Law he does not believe it would be wise or good judgement to
start amending the Municipal Plan and the Council might not give third reading to the zoning, but it '
is important that the zoning not become valid until after the Municipal Plan is amended, therefore he is
saying that if the Council gives third reading to the zoning and it then starts the proceedings to amend
the Plan and goes through those proceedings and have it approved and filed in the Registry Office before
the filing of the Zoning By-Law amendment.
Consideration was given to the report from the City Solicitor, dated June 18th, 1976, in which he
gives an opinion regarding the validity of the Order served on the City by the Local Assistant to the Fire
Marshal, whereby the City was ordered to remove buildings and remedy conditions at City-owned property
known as the Provincial Hospital Annex located on Sand Cove Road - as it relates to the City of Saint John
and the creation of the City by Royal Charter. The report advises that the City of Saint John, being
created by Royal Charter is known as a common law corporation, and thus possessiong all the po~ers of a
natural person as opposed to a statutory corporation which possesses only those powers outlined in the
statute creating the corporation, and that, thus, while the City of Saint John may possess powers over and
above other municipalities, the corporation is still subject to the general law of the land an~ is not
immune from it; and further advises that the Provincial Fire Marshal or his Local Assistant by; virtue of
the Provincial Fire Prevention Act is authorized to serve Orders on owners or occupants of buildings found
to be, among other things, dangerous to the safety of persons, buildings or premises, and that in the
instant case; the City of Saint John is the owner of the land and building, and it is his opinion that the
Order is valid.
Councillor M. Vincent declared a conflict of interest in this matter and thereupon withdrew from
the Council table previous to consideration of the above report.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above named report from the City Solicitor be
received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
Councillor M. Vincent resumed his seat at the Council table.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated June 18th,
1976, in reply to the request made at the Council meeting of June 14th, 1976 at which meeting he submitted
an opinion with respect to the spruce budworm spraying in the Province of New Brunswick and the munici-
pality's authority to regulate and prohibit such operation, stating that a copy of the Judgmen~ given in
the matter of Bridges Brothers Limited v. Forest Protection Limited forms part of this letter, and further
advising that it appears, among other things, from the Judgment of the Supreme Court of New BrUnswick,
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
.~
,....
.
(}/t-y S(};);:'!t.
Aep/ fftf'S
/Y'.;JSPl? ~
t?o/lIt=>r
II/el'~t-~
:J)We,/oph;d.
I ,,(-t-~.
fh7pJ//e h
p-,</,.k)
I "P~IJH./ldv/s
Cpmp?
"?ClYP?te/ds i
lieu ff /'~
ht:: f?uJ-of?Pse
~n4
7dJ~/ :lIee-Sh.
/l(;,y,s hLe
. S~-,{/v,
//dl"'p/L
Ckr}
1/!k,.,Jet"
MI7t-S
sehl!'~~/e
/J1ar/rel-
{"o.mm.
Z3eH~ :BI'/
f!PJI/.;J,.;( $
O-f!'A ces
.
I
/IblMc4-
Sq-te& aAl
T~.,c,c/c
~- A.;;>Jt/
Pd/hoh,
/l /eXdl7,{/fil
Sr. reslkt.
Oper-l7l?
p,;;u.A-/nf
I
S J. /Is#.
anm.
(! 01715 uJt';;Z,{
w/-iJ; ~=ty
S-&OiI"c,c
. (bu)? A1,P)'#7
ct?h;,lwan/C,;/
-citm
~
-'J 1
b.......
Forest Protection Limited is an agent of the Crown and as such, is offered the same immunity as the Crown it-
self -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Solicitor, approval be granted for
payment of the invoices from Nason & Collier in the total amount of $9,464.26 for legal fees in regard to rep-
resenting the City in the City's action against Kierstead Developments Limited for operating a mobile home park
without a license and in an Appeal of the Decision regarding this case.
Referring to the above named invoices, Councillor Gould asked if it is not the common practice of
lawyers to give a detailed explanation of each of the items according to date, or do they just list the items and
then say that it is worth rough figures and that they will put a little dollar sign on it. In reply, Mr. Rodgers
stated that the practice regarding these particular invoices is the form and practice of invoices that the City
has received from other lawyers.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning Ad-
visory Committee, the Common Council accept the following sums of money in lieu of land for public purposes with
respect to the following sub-divisions - the figure in each case being based on the value of the proposed lots
estimated by the Property Management Branch of the Department of Community Planning and Development and upon the
percentage of the value payable to the City under the Subdivision By-Law according to the zone in which the land
is situated, with the monies to be deposited in the City's trust fund for the acquisition and development of land
for public purposes:-
(1) from Paul Beesley, Wayside Sub-division, L-77 - the sum of $2,040.00 (three lots are being'severed from the
Wayside Motel property on the south side of Manawagonish Road, and extending to the Canadian Pacific Railway
tracks; the sub-division would allow provision for a short cul-de-sac street access for the balance of the
property - Lot 76-4 - comprising about two and one-half acres if future sub-division is requred - pumping of
sewage would probably be required - Lot 76-4 contains the motel and accessory buildings; the appraised value of
the three lots .is given as $25,500.00 and at eight per cent of the market value the sum of $2,040.00 is payable
to the City in this regard);
(2) from Harold Clark, L-I03 - the sum of $472.00 (a one and one-half acre lot is being severed from the Harold
Clark property which contains approximately 20 acres and extends to the north of the intersection of Westfield
Road; it is bounded on the westerly side by the Canadian Pacific Railways' right-of-way; the said lot has its
frontage on Acamac Backland Road; an appraisal from the Property Management Branch places a value of $5,900.00 on
this lot, and this means that $472.00 is the amount payable).
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Market Committee, approval be
given for the following new schedule of rentals in the City Market:-
Benches - $12.00 a section
$ 6.00 a half-section
$ 4.00 a quarter-section
$ 2.00 holding charge on benches;
Stalls $ 3.50 per square foot (present rate is $2.80 per square foot);
Beatty Brite and Howard's - $ 8.50 per square foot for the coming year and open for review
next year;
Rental of offices
- $ 3.00 per square foot.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee advising
that, with reference to the proposed amendment to the Traffic By-Law (first and second readings of which have
peen given by Common Council on February 23rd, 1976) in compliance with the petition received by Common Council
on December 8th, 1975 from residents of Alexandra Street regarding over-night parking on this street, the Com-
mittee has learned through further investigation of the situation on Alexandra Street that the opinions and
requests contained in the said petition to Council do not represent the opinions or requests of the majority of
citizens residing on Alexandra Street, and the Committee, therefore, at its meeting held on June 15th last
resolved that its recommendation to Council for the said proposed amendment be withdrawn and the recommendations
contained in its letter of January 30th, 1976 to Council for the said proposed amendment be rescinded, be re-
ceived and filed and no further action be taken to proceed with the said proposed amendment to the Traffic By-
Law.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that with regard to the letter from the Saint John Housing
Commission advising that it is the experience of the Commission that recommendations of the Commission are often
referred to members. of staff for a report and it is the Commission's further experience that staff will make a
report without contacting or consulting with the Commission as to the basis or background of the recommendation,
and as a result reports of staff sometimes are not fully related to the original recommendation, and recommending
that the Common Council adopt a policy that when a recommendation is presented by a Commission, or Advisory Board
to Council, which Council refers to staff for a report, that such staff confer or consult with the Committee
before making its report to Council -- the matter be referred to staff for a report back to Council, as to
whether there is, or is not, any problem in their communications.
Councillor Kipping stated that he has been talking about problems of communication, for months, and he
felt that the above matter is just an indication that the problem certainly does exist, and that the Council's
policy in this regard is good administration (not what the Housing Commission's letter suggests as policy), and
he felt there is no need for any policy statement to tell staff to go ahead and consult with a committee before
they do something - he felt that should.be normal administrative procedure - he felt that if you have to instruct
staff to do that you have to start looking at your staff. He stated that if this is the situation, it is an
example of poor staff work, that has been talked about in recent weeks: basic management principles of planning,
organizing and controlling are all tied together by good communications, and these are being neglected - if this
C::;:').9
u~..~
~
Q,~. .1':)1//~f
71tDpt'$I;! -&O$k-
.;t',,~e: S~"k~
Ope'dz!-/DhOl /
t?l"p?/$/lf/Oh PT
(}I-&~ ~Qff. /l7cl
6~ s!-,7h:
bP~I'>L$, e~C".
$'
(See OI~,we ..Jt:)
$/cdec,.~ ~h~
mea<F /(' ~/t',ff
7?e-~on/I?"
P/J-'7n./ltK'P/$-.
CP/7?.-.
A..nd Cb/7?P,.
StJur-h ..f" nd
JJet/e/o'?/pen-t-
c;p~p
(J,;;r~4Iieh ,
E"OdA', fPeh~-
wOJ'1t:h s-t- s.
"sttJP M e/ ., JIt'!,
kl1o//"' -t,.~c
.s/~ns
correct - but, he felt, the Saint John Housing Commission can hardly point the finger after what the
Council went through earlier in this meeting, as far as administration is concerned. He stated that, in
his opinion, it is time for a re-assessment of the Kates, Peat, Marwick-Davis Report, and that; indications
like this that the whole complex City organization is not functioning well, even in a fundamental way,' are
serious enough, in his view, to warrant a fresh look not only at the staff operations but also.: at the
boards and commissions and the Council Committees which were set up following the Kates, Peat, Marwick-
Davis Report recommendations. He stated he feels it is time for a re-assessment of the whole ptructural
set-up and operational set-up of the City organization, and that it is over-time, and he thinks that ~he
Council has got to get at it. Councillor Davis stated that his view is that if a committee or.: a com-
mission is having a meeting and is reaching a decision he does not quite see how they can come' to a
decision without consulting the staff who are involved in that matter - he does not think it is a staff
problem - if the committee is sitting down and meeting on any particular matter and there is a,problem all
it has to do is ask for staff and staff will come, but the staff does not want to break into a meeting of
a committee or a comission - we have a problem here and our problem is not management and it i~ not
staff - it is not anything - we do not have any problems. He asked what problems are being looked for,
and added that the only problems we have are huge, and they are not in the building - the probiem is we
are not taking hold. Councillor Kipping had advised, earlier in this discussion, of a motion that he
wished to propose, namely:- That the Nominating Committee appoint a task force of citizens and: Councillors
for the purpose of recommending changes in the structural and operational organization of the City govern-
ment including all boards, commissions, committees and staff so as to improve the operating effectiveness
of these bodies and the over-all local government functioning". Councillor Davis, referring to such
proposed motion, stated that how Councillor Kipping, whom he respects very much, can fall into, the trap
set by this proposed resolution and get involved in a discussion of this nature, he does not know because.
this is an invitation to castigate staff - that is all it is - an invitation to turn on staff - and the
Councillor fell into that trap. He stated that he is not going to do that - he is going to say that the
staff is alright - if the Housing Commission or any committee wants Mr. MacKinnon, ~1r. Barfoot., Mr. Zides,
the Chief - anybody - at that meeting, they will be there but they have to be invited. Councillor Gould
made the point that, as he sees advisory boards, they are to advise the Common Council on any aspect that
they feel is pertinent to their specific area - that does not mean that Council has to agree -, it does not
mean that astaff has to agree - but if Council gets a report back from staff that differs from'the ad-
visory board then it is the Council's responsibility to decide which policy will be followed, and he does
not see necessarily if Council gets a report from a commission or an advisory board and it goes back to
staff for a report, that the Council has to call the advisory board in - the Council will give: them what
they gave the Council and that staff is in the same position Council was in - exactly what was. presented
to Council the commission will get, but he thinks it is quite possible to have an advisory committee which
makes recommendations and staff which make recommendations and the Council chooses the best of:' the two.
The Mayor stated that he was present at the Housing Commission and the problem as the Commission presented
it is that sometimes staff not knowing what their intent is would give an altogether different line of .
thought towards the item discussed and if the staff would make contact with members of the committee
making presentations then they would get the basis of why the presentations were made. Councillor Gould
suggested that maybe the presentation should be made more explicit and that would not be necessary.
Councillor M. Vincent noted that the above motion asks staff to tell Council whether or not staff contacts
the c~mmittees or commisions on matters that are brought before the Council by those bodies, ahd he added'
that if the Council gets two different answers then the way to resolve that is to put both parties together
asking them to say what the problem is and to resolve it and to proceed on. '
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Gould and Hodges votink "nay".
Councillor Kipping stated that he would like at this time to present the above name~proposed
motion.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the proposed motion that Councillor Kipping wishes to:
introduce be placed on the agenda at this time.
Councillor Kipping thereupon proposed the following motion, which was not seconded:-: That the
Nominating Committee appoint a task force of citizens and Councillors for the purpose of recommending
changes in the structural and operational organization of the City government including all boards,
commissions, committees and staff so as to improve the operating effectiveness and the over-all local
government functioning. Councillor Kipping explained that in making this motion, he is not blaming staff'
or the commission, but that the subject before the Council is really not who is at fault - the: subject is,
we have a problem, and what are we going to do about it.
'i'
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the application from Slattery Management &1 Realty for'
re-zoning of the northern part of Lot 4 of the sub-division of lots laid out by the late Hono~able Ward
Chipman, being 40 acres of property adjacent to the Technical School, be referred to the Planning Advisory
Committee for a report and recommendation, and, also, be referred to the Land Committee, and that the
necessary advertising be authorized regarding this proposed re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
. RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. A. E. Smith, Chairman of the Civic
Committee of the South End Development Corporation with regard to traffic on Broad Street, reports of
accidents and near accidents at the corner of Carmarthen and Broad Streets and Board and Wentworth Streets,
recommending that a four-way stop sign be placed at the corner of Carmarthen and Broad Streets~ and that a
"blind knoll" sign be placed on both sides of Broad and Wentworth Streets to alert drivers of the hill to
, .
Crown Street, be referred to the Commissioner of Engineering and Works for a report and recommendation.
Read a letter from the Glen Falls Flood Committee noting that a news report in the EVening
Times-Globe stated that Mr. Dube. had instructed the City of Saint John to go ahead with regardl to ac-
quiring the land needed to implement the 4.4 million dollar Proctor & Redfern corrective schem~ for the
Marsh Creek-Glen Falls area, and submitting a copy of the report received by Mrs. Elsie Wayne,: Committee
Chairman, from the Euro-Consult in the Netherlands, dated May 19th, 1976, for the Council's interest and
noting that this report has not been forwarded to the Provincial authorities and Mr. Barfoot or Mr.
~/tf.i h /!; F/e.6d MacKinnon can do as they see fit in that direction. Councillor Gould asked if meetings have b;en held, a~
1.7 07 ~ noted in the said letter. Mr. Barfoot replied that he is preparing a report which will bring Council up to
~(?~~. date with all the meetings held with the various authorities concerning the Marsh Creek, and this report
should be in the Council's hands for its next meeting.
f-70"L /11:l dlJ;d/'l)
Iflarsh n.eeK
k urO-CoJ7~NJlqJ1
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
62,:3
,
G'kh~//s
. F/pppt Cl?h.
!7PPA!/hq
C'Qqb/ /
111<iJ1'5h a
~UI'P-
CPd,5k#6'H.
I
I
.
11>e>dojlq}
1?etft' -Ie!?/?
l"ej7f/J't-
I
,c////n'i'.
"fJe~;PhS
in Ce,u-,,-tehd.
:Bay J;Jrep-
ti/1'tE'0/
.L /'>v/J7j'
i"ieMas
.GVe~ ,.cah6-
!7P/?;{ C'Oh7.h1.
I
.z;.v /nff
iIJtel'e5.cs
I
.
~
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M.Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter be received and filed until the
Council receives the above named report next week.
Councillor Davis asked if the said report could include a comment from Mr. Barfoot and Mr. MacKinnon on
the report from the Euro-Consult group that Mrs. Wayne received. Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply. Councillor
Kipping asked if Mr. Barfoot at this time could give an affirmative or negative reply to the question as to
whether meetings have been held to date with the interested parties concerned regarding the land required for the
holding ponds, without the Council waiting for a written report. He pointed out that a group from the Glen Falls
Flood Committee had been present all through this Council meeting, waiting for some indication of action in this
matter, and he asked if meetings have been held with those particular parties. 14r. Barfoot, as a brief and
preliminary report, stated that we have been in the process of carrying out studies of the land ownership of the
areas of the ponds and we have this fairly well completed and.prepared on plans, and we have had a meeting with
one of the large owners concerned in the Courtenay Bay causeway area at which this topic was introduced and we
expect to arrange another meeting on that same issue. Councillor Hodges stated that he hopes that the City
Manager will give Council a written report on this, and stated that he wants such written report to come to
Council first. The Mayor pointed out that Mr. Barfoot has already said that such report is to come to Council.
Councillor M. Vincent, referring to the Glen Falls Flood Committee letter, asked if Mr. Dube has forwarded
anything to the City in writing instructing the City to go ahead and gather lands. Mr. Barfoot replied that he
has received no correspondence from Mr. Dube. Councillor M. Vincent then asked Mr. Barfoot: to your knowledge,
then the article that appeared in the newspaper which suggested that Mr. Dube had instructed the City to go
ahead, is not correct? Mr. Barfoot noted that he would have to read the article, to see what it said - he
reiterated that he has had no correspondence from Mr. Dube.
Read a letter from the Glen Falls Flood Committee calling attention to the fact that several large
dozers have recently been spreading and pushing the already deposited fill material into the areas of the forebay
section of Courtenay Bay that up to just recently had had the possibility to contain some of the run-off waters
filtering through Marsh.bridge and the Canadian National Railways bridge coming from the Marsh Creek, which this
summer and the approaching fall-winter seasons, and, in addition, the large housing development on the hill just
above Glen Falls scheduled to use the same inadequate sewerage system (alternately, Marsh Creek) about to be
occupied, is a dire necessity especially during flooding periods in Marsh Creek and its environs, that is, Glen
Falls. The letter notes that the recommendation in the Proctor & Redfern Report for corrective measures regarding
the Marsh Creek flooding problems specifies the procurement of a certain portion of the Courtenay Bay forebay
from the Irving interests for use as a floodway, and poses the question that if this section of the forebay which
is already partially filled in, is permitted to be filled in more and more, every day, is not this action - if
permitted to continue - going to make the creation of a floodway there virtually impossible, and, in addition,
prohibitively expensive to obtain when the officials at City Hall here begin the negotiations with the Irving
Refineries for this piece of real estate resigned by God to contain the twice-daily tides of the Bay of Fundy and
included in man-named water of Saint John harbour formerly. The letter petitions the Council to instruct the
City Solicitor to immediately prepare, and effect, the required documents, forms or affidavits to place an
injunction against the deeded owner of this property to bring about immediate cessation to this activity, or the
placement of additional fill in this area until the officials of the civic, provincial and federal governments,
together committed to implementation of corrective measures in the Marsh Creek on behalf of these citizens, have
clarified the details, found the monies, and procured the portion of the Courtenay Bay forebay that is specified
in the said Report to create the floodway there, and to include whatever additional clauses the Council feels
necessary therein.
In reply to Councillor Kipping's request for an oral report at this time on what information he has on
this problem, Mr. Barfoot advised that there are bulldozers in Courtenay Bay spreading the existing fill out and
lowering the elevation somewhat and filling in a portion that was not previously filled, but to his knowledge, he
does not think any fresh fill is being hauled in - it is just a matter of spreading around what is already there;
he added that he believes this has been going on for two or three weeks. Councillor Kipping commented that in
view of the well-known problem here, the least that the owner could do would be to refrain from aggravating not
only the problem but also all those citizens and the three levels of government who desperately want and need to
have the problem solved.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Glen Falls Flood Committee be
received and filed.
Councillor Kipping stated that the more difficult the solutions become the more it costs the local,
provincial and national tax payer, and that corporations are also tax payers and that makes it all the more
difficult for him to understand why this particular owner would go ahead and aggravate the problem and the
people, and everything else that can be aggravated. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the City Manager has been in
touch with the Irving interests who own the land in question, to see what their intentions are with the_forebay
to see if they are going to fill it in or use it for their own purposes - he added that, after all, it is the
Irving interests' land - or to see if we are going to have some agreement with the Irving interests to see if
they are going to use up to the boundaries of the space we require. He asked where we stand in negotiations with
the Irving interests in relation to the said forebay. Mr. Barfoot replied that this was discussed very briefly
at one meeting with the representative of Irving Oil and he requested that the City give him a "teach-in" as it
were, on what is required and what are the alternatives - the date has not yet been set for that second meeting _
in other words, it is being looked into. Councillor Davis pointed out that the letter from Mrs. Wayne asks that
the Council very clearly state its position in this matter of the forebay area, and he stated that from what he
has heard at this meeting in this matter he does not think that the Council is in a position yet to make that
decision. He added that sooner or later this Council is going to have to make a decision on how hard it wants to
fight for this forebay area, and that he thinks that is the tone of the letter from Mrs. Wayne to Council at this
time - she wants the Council to talk about it and decide, one way or the other. Councillor Hodges pointed out
that it is necessary for the Council to have that forebay area in order to help control the flooding from the
Marsh Creek and that it is necessary for the City to make the approach to the Irving interests in order to get
such forebay land because there is the coming problem of the fall rains which rains always create flooding
conditions in that area. Councillor Kipping suggested that the action the Council might take in the matter is to
approach the Irvings and ask them for a gesture of co-operation in that they stop perhaps at this moment in-
creasing the cost of their land and he noted that they are spending money on that land now when maybe they
should not be, and, certainly, if they area spending money on that land and the City in the long run is going to
have to acquire it, it is going to cost the City money, so it is in the City's interests as well to request them
to stop or, indeed, to force them to stop if they do not choose to stop. The Mayor advised that this is what the
Council has put the faith in the committee that meets with them and they are taking into consideration all the
details they can, and he stated he would assure the Council and the group from Glen Falls that they are putting
this effort forward - Councillor Davis, Councillor M. Vincent, and certainly, staff, and he is sure that this is
the aim - to follow this because Council recommended that we accept this Report. In reply to Councillor Pye's
question regarding the obligations in the Irving interests agreement regarding the forebay, and whether the
-')4
b.... .
Sa>>4ft Cbl/e "'Rd'.
/J17/?ex ?N"pe~
Sot? ~f)kl't-son
/l/eY.;;.Iucer ~.
IV- :~:Jj,,~i~.st-ah~
OJ'7flh~.I7S/ //ome
ST #Sff' ah?h7.
(}QU.I7. #- 0';,d~
ffALe/'s to
AalrelU~~tf //ts
.naI1L",}Cle
;?t1Iy,gPt-lse~~d
el2oW.m6'~;..5'1 M
SeclLl'/'#q .!f~
$qh4ft CoVe? 1?~
/lnhex 'pr~
~
Irving interests have lived up to them, Mr. Barfoot noted that this matter was referred to in Council a
couple of weeks ago and the City Solicitor is examining this particular agreement in regard to' this .
question.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Kipping voting "nay", having stated
during the above discussion that he did not think this was the proper motion to be made regarding the said
matter. The Mayor noted that the forebay matter will be included in the report that the Councll wants
from the City Manager.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the three proposals to develop the former Provincial Hospital
Annex property on Sand Cove Road, which is. City-owned, were received by the deadline. Councillor Davis
pointed out that March 31st, 1976 was the deadline, according to the date on copies of the proposals that
were submitted to Council.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the briefs received at this meeting of Council from
Mr. S. A. Robertson, on behalf of Alexander Design, and from the New Brunswick Protestant Orphans' Home
relative to their proposals for development of the said Sand Cove Road Annex property be recei~ed and the
Saint John Housing Commission be asked for a report to Council for next week on all the circumstances and
the procedures in connection with this entire matter including what happened, how it happened and why it
happened.
I
I
The Common Clerk, at the request of the Mayor, reminded the Council members of the p~ragraph in
the letter dated May 17th, 1976 to Council from the Chairman of the Saint John Housing Commission (which
recommended the proposal of the Church of the Nazarene), which states as follows, "Early in February the
Commission had a public call for proposals which were to be received up until March 31st, 1976. At that I
time the Commission received three Expressions of Interest, (1) The New Brunswick Protestant Orphanage,
(2) Alexander Design, (3) The Church of the Nazarene.". Councillor Kipping stated that it has become
obvious from the presentations made at this Council meeting that there has been a gross misunderstanding
on the part of Alexander Design and some very severe gaps in communication with the New Brunswick Pro_ .
testant Orphans' Home. He explained that what he wants to support in the above motion, if this is the
intention, is an explanation, really, from the Housing Commission as to how these misunderstandings could
have, and did, indeed, happen.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that with regard to the tender call for the standpipe for Lakewood
Heights that was advertised recently in the local newspaper, he cannot find that tender advertisement in
the Commercial News. In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's question as to what other paper this tender call
was placed in, Mr. Barfoot stated that he would have to check on that. Councillor A. Vincent .recalled ;
that Mr. Barfoot had promised him that such tender calls would be advertised in the Commerciar News, which
is the contractors' newspaper.
The Mayor noted that the City will have to renew for another week the placing of a security
guard at the City-owned property on Sand Cove Road known as the Annex property. Councillor A. ~incent
suggested that members of the Fire Department be placed at this property for this purpose, as ,part of
their fire training programme.
On motion of Councillor Green
.Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the security guard be continued for one week on
the City-owned Sand Cove Road property, known as the Provincial Hospital Annex property.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~, nee'
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty- ,
eighth day of June, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
.,
Messrs. R. Park, Acting City Manager, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department,
H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, M. Zides, Commissioner of
Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector,
R. Thompson, Chief of Rehabilitation Services of the Community
Planning and Development Department, G. Baird, Commissioner of
Economic Development, C. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks,
E. Ferguson, Chief of Police, and P. Clark, Fire Chief
f
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...
52b
.
{1o.lJ7P/ ittee
a/IJP/ e
s.J.]);y~aIr"l
I ShipPl1/1dt~
CP. d"!I~dIr
e;(~I7$/PI1
I
,
~fPJ'1$
S~l11eHt-
(!OA>?~~
. FIe trev/ew
. Co",/re.~el1$;y.
C6b/Q/kl?li!/
'Plan ~
S"-yr'JI/OII1
g..,e t'if Y
*
I
.Jr.-
.
Cbh1P1/~
tf/hO/e
#J~S"
I
TehMPS
JJce~,(
h',.e St-J6iJ
Irur/'Jr:'t:f.e;
e9<<- i'p",!ed,
serl//ces
.s;I?7PH~$'
SW/h7P?~
,PfX)
. Sill'lps ()h
Cf?I7s&I'ucti{)
~tL
lr....
The meeting opened with a prayer which was offered by The Reverend R. B. Stockall, of Mission Church,
St. John the Baptist.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on June 14th
last, be confirmed.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that with regard to the item on the Committee of the Whole section of the
agenda of this meeting "6.30 p.m. - Mr. J. K. Irving and Mr. Andrew MacArthur, re Dry Dock expansion", he wished
to protest the fact that no background correspondence pertaining to this matter was given in the kit of cor-
respondence for this meeting. It was noted by the Acting City Manager that presumably background material would
be placed before the Council members at the Committee of the Whole meeting in this regard. Noting that he has
tried in the past to place items on the Committee of the Whole agenda and that the Common Clerk would not accept
it from him and has told him. that it is necessary to put in writing what the subject was to be, Councillor A.
Vincent stated that he would like to have a ruling on whether a Council member can place an item on the Committee
of the Whole agenda without that item being in written form. The Mayor replied that Councillor A. Vincent would
receive an answer to his query before the close of this evening.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on June 21st
.last, be confirmed.
The Mayor at this time read the following prepared statement:-
"I believe the time has come to review the Comprehensive Community Plan and the development of our city
for a five-year plan.
Developers and committees should be co-ordinated in their efforts to develop the city to meet the
plan - for example, building in an area that is over populated as to schools, traffic and city services - en-
courage the developing in areas that have school space and good traffic routes.
I therefor propose a motion to establish a citizens committee to carry out the developing of a five-
year plan in conjunction with the Comprehensive Community Plan."
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the motion that the Mayor has proposed be placed on the
agenda of this meeting.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that a citizens committee be established to carry out the
developing of a five-year plan for the City of Saint John in conjunction with the Comprehensive Community Plan.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for one week until the
motion that is being proposed regarding the establishment of a citizens committee to carry out the developing of
a five-year plan for the City in conjunction with the Comprehensive Community Plan is provided in writing for the
Council.
Question being taken, the motion to table was carried.
Councillor Kipping,'with reference to the above noted discussion by Councillor A. Vincent, noted that
it has been a procedure during his terms of office on the Common Council that the Council does not discuss
matters that have been placed in Committee of the Whole and does not name them and reveal what subjects they are.
He stated that if this kind of behaviour continues by this Council, or members of this Council, it will pretty
soon be that no citizens group, or no group of people, or a company, or an individual, will dare to request
anything of Common Council that they might like to discuss in private before having it revealed publicly - and
there are always good reasons for doing that - because right here is a'violation of a confidence - a confidence
that Mr. J. K. Irving and Mr. Andrew MacArthur asked to appear before Council and inform the Council of something
or get information from the Council, one or the other, and that confidence has now been broken, and it is a bad
thing, and it should not be allowed to continue, and he stated that he believes that Councillor A. Vincent should
be censured for this breach of confidence.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation in the report from
the City Manager, tenders be awarded for furniture, equipment and services required for the new fire station, as
recommended in the submitted bid summary.
Consideration was given to a letter from the City Manager, dated June 24th, 1976, recommending payment
of three construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services in relation to capital
projects. The third item of these progress payments is Progress Estimate Number 15 in the amount of $1,250.00 of
Simpson Construction Ltd. regarding the Simonds swimming pool, and Councillor A. Vincent asked what the City got
for that amount of money. Mr. Park advised that a minor defect was found in the pool when the work was sub-
stantially finished and this payment was held back to cover that defect - now that. the work has been fully
approved, this final balance of $1,250.00 is recommended for payment. Councillor A. Vincent stated that his
question is - why did we spend more money than the original contract price of $319,250.00, as the total work done
has now come to $333,389.29 - and he wants to know why we are now proposing to pay this contractor another
$1,250.00. He added that he understands that the pool is still leaking and that there is still another payment,
marked Estimate Number 16, somewhere in City Hall yet to be submitted and he wants to know if this is the final
payment. Mr. Park replied that the answer he gave related only to the $1,250.00 and was not an explanation at
this stage of the difference between the original contract and the final value of work done. He stated that his
recollection is that that information was given sometime ago, and he did not have that information with him at
~')6
u.....
~
S/MPh,(S
SW,mM~h5~o/
$/~ f6d>j GP//d.
-t-/t?)? ~-t-L
Ck'p;~1 'p/YJjeds
s/'.;jh?;<<1k 7?;J,.k
J? .2). J>~f/
HS$ 0(1.
h"e $t-~/pp
r".eu;)
l?t?t::C01 C'ohdruc-
..t-,P>7 ~-tL
S;P;Ph~S St;//J1-
lT1"n~ j?DO/
$/~f'~n {.k..:;t'~
~;t7n ,,1/,1:
/f7~ ,.~pff
h~r.1' or #"p,*".s
.7)e.rd.
[1~,s -t-e> be
pdl'L .?!i
suJ_1t/i/iders
.s/tt'~Jt/dl/lrs
E Mj7/Q!I"t!' /'
-e-1"D1/Yl~n.! Tlfr
/re~ r~/-I/e>l7s
..L nspl!'Cfi 017 0-1'
'p;fJil1ff -tbr
is /.;u'ti
this meeting. Councillor A. Vincent recalled that when he asked on payment of Estimate Number: 14 he was
told it was the final payment and that everything was well. He asked when do we stop paying or this
project, and he further asked that Mr. Park as Commissioner of Finance and Acting City Manager give hi,s I
word of honour that this is the final payment. He commented that he is not going to be dishon~st with th~
taxpayer. Councillor Higgins suggested that this particular progress estimate be tabled until Councillor
A. Vincent receives his information if there is a payment number 16 due, and he stated that if'it is not
due and the Acting City Manager has said so, he wishes that Councillor A. Vincent would retract his
innuendoes and statement. Councillor A. Vincent replied that he will do so if the Acting CitY,Manager
will give him in writing that there is not an outstanding dispute between Simpson Construction; Ltd. and
the swimming pool out there, because he (Councillor A. Vincent) knows there are.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that authority be granted for payment of
construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering services regarding
named capital projects, as recommended in the City Manager's letter dated June 24th, 1976:-
the following
the following,
1.
Athletic Facilities - Shamrock Park
R. D. Purdy Associates
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated May 31, 1976
$ 4,500.00
$ 17,550.00
2.
Fire Station - Carmarthen and Leinster Streets
Rocca Construction Ltd.
Construction of new Fire Station
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated May 31, 1976
.
I
I
$ 578,579.00
190,373.29
28,324.45
151,771. 20 .
3,
$ 10,277.64
On motion of.Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that with regard to the recommendation contained in
the City Manager's letter of June 24th, 1976 for payment of Progress Estimate Number 15, date&June 22nd,:
1976, from Simpson Construction Ltd. regarding construction of the Simonds swimming poool, thi~ item be '
laid on the table for one week until Councillor A. Vincent receives the detailed report he is feeking,
including whether or not this is the final payment on this project.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report for 1975 of the Engineering and .Works
Department, be received and filed.
Councillor Cave, on behalf of the Council, expressed congratulations to the Commissioner of
Engineering and Works for the above named fine report.
Councillor Davis noted that the above named report contains a tremendous amount of information
some of which could be condensed and become part of a kit for Councillors. He noted that this' report.
recommends that subdividers be required to complete all underground services - water, sewer an~ hydro, et'
cetera, as well as, asphalt - before houses can be sold, and he asked if that is a new recommendation, or
I
if it is urgent, or how would Mr. MacKinnon want to handle that, or the Acting City Manager. ~e added
that if that is important, he thinks we should get right on that. Then referring to the section of the
said report which quotes figures on street and sidewalk mileages, he asked if these figures are up to.
date: we have 328.38 miles of street and 146.39 miles of sidewalk - you divide the figure for .'sidewalk by
two, making 73.195 miles, so does this mean that .we have 250 miles of streets without sidewalks. Mr.
MacKinnon replied that the figure of 146.39 includes the total length of sidewalks, whether only on one
side of the street or on both sides - if it is on two sides, it is included in that figure of l46.39
miles. Councillor Davis stated that he thinks the details contained in this report should be brought down
. ,
to size, with permanent information in the report because it is a fantastic report. Quoting from another
section of this report (Water and Sewerage), Councillor Davis noted, "Another area not to be neglected is
that of human resources. We have many men holding key positions who are nearing retirement age. Pro-
grammes. should be established to identify these positions and appropriate action taken to train individuals
to replace them.", and stated he feels that is important enough to be lifted out of this report. He asked
if Mr. MacKinnon is coming in with that recommendation. Mr. MacKinnon replied that that is a c~mment in
the said report that was made during the writing of the report and he added that the Department is already
acting on that - since that comment was made in the report some of the retirements have already taken
place and we are already training - there is a training school for operators as well as training in the
Water and Sewerage Department for waste treatment operators, et cetera - so, the programme is ~lready
going on as a basis of training. He added that the report was merely making the point that we are ap-
parently going through a phase right at the moment when a number of retirements and/or employees leaving
are taking place and, as a result, we have gone through a training programme to look after thi's problem.
He stated that the entire report was done by staff except for the binding, and it is the intention of the
Department to duplicate both sides of the pages of the report to reduce the report's size in half, if not
more - he added that quite a bit of work was put into this report by the staff of the Enginee~ing and
Works Department. Councilor Cave made the suggestion that Mr. MacKinnon pick out from this report the
various suggestions and recommendations, with background information concerning same, so the Council can
consider them and follow through on them.
,
In compliance with Councillor A. Vincent's request, Mr. MacKinnon read the following paragraph,:
for the record, that is contained in the above named report (page 43):- "1975 was a busy year .for this
section seeing a lot of pipe go in the ground. Saint John has a large area to cover and as construction;
was going on allover our City this year, it was impossible for us to see all the pipes being installed.
Therefore, we depend fully on (I) Visual - periodic inspection of lines being installed (2) Visual in~
spection after lines laid and backfilled (3) and last of all our standard testing methods, Vis~al -
Infiltration and. Exfiltration which involve doing Low Pressure Air Testing.". Councillor A. Vincent
asked: could we not have a recommendation within a month from the Commissioner that we should :correct
that; his point being that if you are going to cover up pipes and there is no-one available t~ inspect
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
527
..
-Fl"7pfoes
c/~~/h5
/ssue
I
I
.
tJ/t'f ~r.
. s.:J: lis.!.
I ["",0,1/7/.
r;;7!!/~
/,:;;H Sf?J?
.
I
I
.
~
them he thinks that Mr. MacKinnon should recommend this to Council. He noted that 11r. MacKinnon has made the
point quite clear in this report, and he added that he thinks that we should have one or two other men - one
other man, a traveller inspector, to examine these p~ves ~f the~.~~ego~tig'to ~~ft out the~ p~es ~~thout
holding up the contractor, the owner or the development. The Mayor advised that Mr. MacKinnon had made an
explanation for him today regarding the issue of clothing for pants and shirts, but that he would ask that it be
explained publicly - his point being that the employees are well paid but now the Department comes out with an
issue of these articles for the employees. Mr. MacKinnon replied that under the contract various issues of
clothing have been negotiated over the past number of years; generally, the cover-aIls are the issue given to the
men - however, in those instances where the men are not wearing cover-aIls but wearing a different type of
uniform, then pants and shirts have been issued - the issue is only as required and usually requires the return
of the previous issue - it is something that has been negotiated for a long period of time and comes up for
renegotiation on every contract.
Read a report from the City Manager, dated June 24th, 1976, in reply to Common Council resolution of
June 21st, 1976 which referred the recommendation from the Saint John Housing Commission, "that Council adopt a
policy that when a recommendation is present by a Commission, or Advisory Board to Council, which Council refers
to staff for a report, that such staff confer or consult with the Committee before making its report to Council".
This report explains the procedure under which some of the Commissions and Committees (Which bodies are indep-
endent of staff and are composed in the main of citizens only, and which have generally an advisory role to
Council within their frames of reference, or may also have a minor administrative role) work with particular City
Departments in an advisory role on the various programmes of the Department and notes that in these cases there
is full communication between the City and the Committee or Commission, and there would very rarely be any need
for such a body to communicate directly with Council - and further notes that other Committees and Commissions
work on a more independent basis, and make frequent recommendations directly to Council concerning policy items,
and that when these recommendations come before Council there are several alternatives open to Council, as
spelled out in the report; and that if the recommendation needs further study, the Council will often refer the
matter to staff for a report and in such instance, in order for a full report to be made the staff concerned
should, as a matter of course, try and determine the background of the Committee or the Commission's recommend-
ation as part of the reporting investigation process for the report. The City Manager's report points out that,
however, the reports of staff do represent independent professional opinion, and they cannot always be expected
to agree with the recommendation from the Committee or Commission; and the report adds that there is a further
action which Council might consider more often when in doubt about the meaning or background of a recommendation
from a Committee or Commission, and that is, to refer it back to the recommending body for clarification, which
might help to overcome the problem to which the Housing Commission refers, that is misinterpretation of the
original recommendation. The report, in conclusion, noted that the ability of people to communicate with each
other is the basis for understanding, and staff is always ready to assist the Commissions, Committees and Ad-
visory Board, in order that the City might gain full advantage of the expertise of the citizens involved.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above named report from the City Manager be received and
filed.
Councillor MacGowan, a member of the Saint John Housing Commission, advised that the Commission was
asking that the staff, as a matter of course, in order for a full report to be made, try and determine the
background of the Committee or the Commission's recommendation as part of the reporting investigation process for
the report. She stated that she would like an additional motion to be made that the Council request the staff to
do this. General discussion ensued, during which Councillor M. Vincent recalled that the intent of the Council's
motion of June 21st last in asking for a report from staff which came as the result of the request from the
Housing Commission asking for some consultation by staff with Committees on matters that were related - when he
spoke on it to the City Manager - was to ask for a report as to whether this was being done in this particular
case. He stated that nowhere in this report did the City Manager come close to answering the questions that the
intended motion brought forward, so he thinks that the matter should be referred back by way of suggestion to the
City Manager for the type of response the Council should have. He stated that, by reading this report, he does
not know whether there is staff in-put in the reports by having the staff deal with the Commission or not -
nothing in that report tells him that, so, he is not satisfied with the report, at all. Councillor Gould,
referring to the paragraph in the said report which reads, "It should be emphasized, however, that staff
reports do represent independent professional opinion, and they cannot always be expected to agree with the
recommendation from the Committee or Commission.", stated that he feels that is the point that should be made:
the City Manager has presented both cases and he (Councillor Gould) does not think it is necessary to go back
each time, at all - he thinks it is a lot of wasted time. Councillor Kipping expressed the view that it was a
lot of wasted time for the Council ever to have referred this because, as he said at the last Council meeting,
when we start referring this kind of thing to staff, or start telling staff when they should get in touch with
other Boards, Commissions and maybe even other staff, then the Council has got to start taking a look at the
staff that does not already know that, if that, indeed is the case - and, in any case, the paragraph that was
just mentioned by Councillor Gould, was not the question, nor did the Saint John Housing Commission imply that
.they wanted agreement - they wanted clear communication, that is all, so that everybody understands what the
problem is before reporting back to a Board or Commission - and the Council should not have to tell staff to do
that - it is a silly thing, from start to finish, and it in no way recognizes what the real communications
problems in the City's set-up are. Mr. Park advised that the City Manager's report was written after the matter
of a week ago was discussed by Mr. Barfoot along with Department heads and the conclusion reached is that staff
are always ready to give information needed, to any Committee or Commission that requests any assistance and
staff fully expects to be called on from time to time when some knowledge relating to their own particular 'area
is being discussed by one of these independent Committees or Commissions. He added that the staff does not
understand how it could make a formal appearance before a Committee or Commission that has made a recommendation
to Council, in order to clarify something that it is going to be reporting on; the staff does note that the
paragraph on the second page of Mr. Barfoot's report, "There is a further action which Council might consider
more often when in doubt about the meaning or background of a recommendation from a Committee or Commission, and
that is, to refer it back to the recommending body for clarification. This might help to overcome the problem to
which the Housing Commission refers, that of misinterpretation of the original recommendation.", was written with
a considerable amount of consideration. Mr. Park added that there are occasions when a recommendation that comes
before Council is not completely clear and it is staff's belief that the proper action on this occasion is for
Council to have the matter clarified rather than have the matter referred to staff, because frequently it would
place the staff in a rather invidious position in relation to a Commission - a position staff should not be in
and a position a staff member would not want to be in. Councillor Cave stated that he has always been able to
get information when seeking it from staff, and that any member of this Council can get information they desire,
at any time, and he added that he has the greatest respect for Mr. Park an&Mr. Barfoot, or any member of our
staff, to give him reports when he asks for them, and that he cannot see why the Council is going through all
this discussion. Councillor MacGowan stated that as she understands it, it was lack of communication that the
Housing Commission is concerned about, and that the Commission wants some action in obtaining information on
matters (such as exactly what has happened) -- she stated that she does not think it is even a matter of clar-
ification most of the times in these matter, but it is communication that the Housing Commission is concerned
about. Councillor Hodges advised that he has many times been a member of Commissions and that he has never
found, all the time he has been here, the Commission not able to get information from the staff. He made the
.
i
"")8'
n....
~
point that there is a difference between the Commission and the Council - the Council makes decisions, and
the Commissions get advice, perhaps from the staff. He added that the Commission and the staff are two
independent groups - the staff works for the Council, not for the COmmissions - the staff are the em_
ployees of the Council and the information they want to give, they can give directly to the Council. He
felt that the problem is communication: that if people think that the staff should tell them what they
think the Council should adopt, then they are wrong - the Council does not appoint these Commi~sion for
that purpose - the idea of appointing these Commissions is for them to examine the problems an~ to come
back with some sort of a recommendation - and whether Council accepts the recommendation or not is the
Council's business. Councillor M. Vincent recalled that last week the request from the Housing Commission
was to have staff check with them before bringing a recommendation in to Council - the intent in referring
this back to staff was to determine if, in fact, the staff did this. He pointed out that Mr. Park has '
said that they do not do this and it would be difficult to do it. He noted that they have advised Council
of the request and if Council does not like it it is his suggestion that Council change the policy, but if
they like it, leave it as it is - it is as simple as that. Councillor Davis stated that this matter of
lines of communication is a valid matter - the only trouble is, you get so many lines of communications
they get all. snarled up - and he thinks that is a problem the Council has to protect the City's staff
from - they can be so involved in meeting with various bodies that the normal work of the staff is never
completed. He recalled that he expressed the opinion last time that when a Committee 'or Commission needs
information or is arriving at a decision they consult staff first before arriving at a decision - if the
Council is not satisfied with a recommendation, it turns the matter over to staff - if they are satisfied
with the recommendation, the Council passes it - why the Committee or Commission does not consult with
staff before making the recommendation is beyond him - and that is the true line of communication, he
pointed out., He commented that the system has to be kept simple, and that we are trying to make the
organization of this City's staff run smoothly. Referring to the letter from the Housing Commi~sion to the
Council meeting of June 21st last in this matter, Councillor MacGowan noted that it is a point of clarifi-
cation that the Commission is seeking, when it makes a recommendation and the recommendation is referred
to staff - then staff should have some in-put from the Commission of exactly what the Commission had in
mind otherwise staff comes back with a report that is not relevant.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor M. Vincent voting "nay",.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of. the City
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved
invoices for engineering services in connection with projects that have been undertaken under the Depart-
ment of Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
,(oO:Inc.;;jsterk 1-
,.( /-I"r.5t; i Dn
SIh?I'SPn CO~r.
~-#~
::J).1(.,E/z
.41//fP,.d, e{-e'.
ep//eC'lfprSe~
C/7*h ./7$:5",",
.L.T-~
lI.5Izen ChteA-
S~e fl:e;d--
h?e~ ~/.:;J~
~I"l'eff /lsspc.
~t-~
~zen (].ReA-
/~!/P'U?
Lancaster La~oon Lift Station
Simpson Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 4
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated May 31, 1976
.,
I
I
.
$ 589,600.00
200,520.00
20,145.75
102,301- 75
4, I
$ 78,072.50
$ 197 ,905.55
Progress Estimate Number 55,
dated June 11, 1976 $ 2,210.64
Plant
$ 37,972.43
Progress Estimate Number 37, .
dated May 31, 1976 $ 1,080.16
2.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment,
3.
Hazen Creek Sewa~e Treatment
Godfrey Associates Ltd.
Engineering-Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment,
Councillor A. Vincent, who had proposed a motion that was not seconded that only items 1 and 2 '
of the above noted progress payments be approved for payment at this time, stated that he would ask why we
paid, under the above named Hazen Creek Sewage Treatment Plant item, Progress Estimate Number ,36 under
false pretences. He stated that in the past Hazen Creek was always known as a lagoon, and he noted that
it is now coming in as a treatment plant. He asked: is it true that we are now adding another million
dollars on it? and Council is not aware of it? He stated that we have paid - and he has no fault to find
with the consultants - it was known as the Hazen lagoon Creek and it is now turned to a treatm'ent plant ,
that is going to cost us over two millions more than we are paying for - and we are just going to go like
that - boo, boo, boo? He asked that the Mayor supply him with the thirty-six previous progress payments
from Godfrey Associates Ltd. that all itemize Hazen Creek lagoon - and now it is a treatment plant. He
stated that it is a different "ball-game" and he wants the answer, and he wants it now. He st'ated that
when we start and hire a consultant for a Hazen Creek sewer lagoon and pay him thirty-six payments and
Council is not being notified - at least, he himself has not been notified - and number thirt~-seven comes
in as Hazen Creek Treatment Plant, knowing it is going to cost the taxpayer over another milli.on dollars,
he must speak out. The Mayor asked how Councillor A. Vincent knows it is going to cost anoth~r million .
dollars, if as he says, he has not been notified. Councillor A. Vincent replied that he atte~ded the same
meeting that the Mayor did. The Mayor pointed out that Councillor A. Vincent says that he did not know I
this. Councillor A. Vincent replied that they did not know it at this Council because the ~myor did not
bring it back, even though he promised them. The Mayor replied that he did not promise them anything; he
then called upon Mr. MacKinnon to speak on this matter. Councillor A. Vincent stated: well, }et us have'
him deny it; I have nothing to hide. Councillor Higgins added that he has himself nothing to hide,
either. Councillor A. Vincent stated: let us change the "ball-game" and I will support you if 'the truth is
going to be told here. Mr. MacKinnon advised that the original proposal for the Hazen Creek area was the
installation of a lagoon sufficient to handle the sewage waste of residential and industrial ~rea; since,
that time, negotiations have gone on in order to obtain the land for the lagoon - in attempting to place'
this lagoon, our original design showed the lagoon being placed immediately adjacent to the present sewage
lagoon - the estimated cost at that time was somewhere in the area of $350,000.00; since that :time, the .
, '
owner of the property has suggested alternate areas for the location of the lagoon - that is, :the enlarged
lagoon - and it went from a 50-foot separation between the lagoons to 100 feet, to 1,000 feet,' to a change
in configuration of the lagoon all the time - at each change, because of the problems with acquiring the
land the cost subsequently went up and at the present time the cost is somewhere in the area qf about
$1,500,000.00 to instal - that is an approximate figure, at the moment - it is about $1,500,000.00 to
instal a lagoon, in the area as originally designed - and the difficulties, of course, were th.at the
I
I
.
~
,....~
529
//.:J~e~
Sewa.5e
T~me.
"Pkud-
lagoon was going to be partially out. in the bed of the Creek area and it was going to be very difficult to place
there; as a result, we discussed with the consultant and with the Department of the Environment the possibility
of going to a treatment plant, and a treatment plant was always viable except that the plant was much more
expensive than a lagoon - now, the plant is about the same cost as the cost to put in the lagoon - approximately
$1,500,000.00 - and he felt that these negotiations going over the last year and a half we have been dealing with
Council and with the land owner and they were aware of the escalating costs - although he cannot say that we did
come back to Council on the change of design - however, the decision by Council was for a treatment facility and
that facility was initially for a lagoon - it is now for a treatmant plant - we have not changed the concept of
treating sewage and we are now going to a plant system located on the banks of the Hazen Creek stream - it is a
treatment plant, and not a lagoon, at the present time. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understood from Mr.
MacKinnon that it was around $2,100,000.00 which was the mechanical plant, if we got permission to cross the
Irving lands. Mr. MacKinnon replied: no, the total cost is in the area of about $1,500,000.00. Councillor A.
Vincent stated that that is for a miniature treatment plant. Mr. MacKinnon replied: no, that is the total cost _
the treatment plant allows for the future expansion - he thinks, in the final analysis, we are going to treat the
sewage from the treatment plant at Canada Packers and may even treat the sewage from the city centre, and should
all of that happen then the treatment plant that is planned there now can be expanded to accommodate that, but in
this particular phasing of approximately $1,500,000.00 it will accommodate to the same extent that the lagoon
would except for the problems of relocating. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he understands that when we first
started it was called the Hazen lagoon expansion. Mr. MacKinnon replied in the affirmative. Councillor A.
Vincent noted that we made payments for the Hazen lagoon expansion and that he has all the Council correspondence
kits since he was elected to Council, and nowhere has he been informed, until he was at a meeting outside the
City Hall building with Councillor Davis, the City Manager, and Mr. MacKinnon present, that it is now turned from
a lagoon to a treatment plant. He stated that he feels. that a million dollars is a lot of money, and he under-
stood the cost was $2,100,000.00. He stated that he has no fault to find with Godfrey Associates Ltd. - he
thinks their bills have been more than fair - but he asks: why do we not get the whole picture and get on with
the job? He stated that the only reason he voted against the City Manager leaving the city on vacation at this
time is because he understands that at the end of this month the Department of Regional Economic Expansion will
not pay anything unless an areement is signed, and he pointed out that regarding all the money the City spent the
said Department spend a couple of hundred thousand dollars, and he asked: is it not true that the said Department
will not comply after the end of this month if this agreement is not signed? Mr. MacKinnon replied: not that I
am aware of - the said Department's monies have been committed for this project, one or two years back - they
expire December 31st, 1976 and it is also the City's understanding that with the substantial start on the pro-
ject, that may be extended - however, it has to be a substantial start on it and not merely a commitment to start
in 1976, so that is why we have been going ahead with it. In summary, he stated that the project did start out
as a lagoon, the discussion originally centred around either a lagoon or a treatment plant and we opted for the
lagoon based on the fact that the costs for a treatment plant were much higher - now that the acquisition of the
land has put us out in the middle of the Marsh the cost of putting a lagoon in is now comparable to the cost of a
treatment plant ana that is why we have opted for putting in the treatment plant. Councillor A. Vincent asked if
the cost of this treatment plant will not be around $2,100,000.00, including acquisition of land and to instal
the pumps for future sewage treatment needs that we can expect, because lagoons never grow smaller. Mr. Mac-
Kinnon replied that the size of the treatment plant is large enough to handle the designed effluent from that
area - however, should the population or the industrial expansion necessitate the increased size of the treatment
plant, it will cost more money, and he has no doubt that it will go over two million dollars. Councillor A.
Vincent stated that he is prepared to pay the said progress certificate because he finds nothing wrong with the
consultants, but he would like to know when City staff will inform the other Councillors that this project is no
longer known as a sewage lagoon, but is now called a treatment plant. He noted that the project, with reference
to progress payments 1 to 36, was always known as a sewage lagoon, and stated that he thinks the City staff
should be informed. He stated that he was only trying to bring this matter forward for the information of the
Council. Councillor Cave pointed out that the new industrial park is also taking advantage of this lagoon, and
that is only recently. Councillor Higgins asked: what sewerage and industrial waste will be handled by this
plant or, say, lagoon? He added that he wants to know the extent of it. Mr. MacKinnon replied that it will
handle all of the sewage in the eastern portion of the city including Champlain Heights, the eastern land bank,
the Grandview Avenue Industrial Park and McAllister Industrial Park, and the proposed residential and industrial
development that was indicated in the Comprehensive Community Plan as well as the plan done by Proctor & Redfern
Ltd. for the eastern land bank assembly - it will handle all of that and it was designed large enough to handle
that volume. Councillor Higgins asked: was it not true that because of the ecological quality of the whole Hazen
Creek-Hazen dyke complex that there was some wariness about the lagoon idea as opposed to the treatment plant, as
far back as maybe two to three years ago? Mr. MacKinnon replied that that is correct - originally, when we were
putting the lagoon in it was sufficiently far enough away from the Hazen Creek estuary, as it was referred to,
that it was going to be accepted by the Department of the Environment - however, the design would indicate that
it was going to be out in the middle of Hazen Creek and it was not accepted from point of view although we were
still allowed to construct it - but the cost was then comparable to the plant. Councillor Higgins recalled that
the cost was comparable, and it was environmentally sound, now - in order to make it environmentally sound, we
had to go to the treatment plant idea. He asked if there was not a meeting held possibly when we were meeting
with many problems involving the Irving interests - that this was a long, involved talk with reference to changing
from lagoon to treatment plant. Making affirmative reply, Mr. MacKinnon stated that he thinks it was a significant
thing to mention at that time that one of their objections, of course, was that we were using fairly good land
for a lagoon, and to go to the additional cells upon expansion you would again use more valuable land, and they
were objecting, of course, to the use of that land for a lagoon; however, with a treatment plant facility, it
will use much less land and, in addition, you will even make available that portion of land where the present
lagoon is now situated. Councillor Higgins commented that that is what he was aware of, and he thanked Mr.
MacKinnon for confirming what he had heard before.
.
I
I
/I.;J :z en
CJ-1t?6'k
/D1!1 PP)')
.
I
.
I
Ldahd ~A>.
zrv//?'7
/n-ceMsts
Councillor Davis noted that Councillor Higgins touched upon the point made quite clearly. He stated
that when the Land Committee was negotiating with the Irving interests for a 40-acre lagoon it became obvious
that the lagoon was entering into an area that was going to be hard to support - there is probably no bottom
there, and the costs were rising to a considerable amount. He stated he thinks it was quite unanimous among the
members of the Land Committee that a treatment plant would be much better if the costs could be brought down. He
noted that the costs have not come down but the requirements have gone up - we have found that the potential
effluent that will enter that 40-acre lagoon would make the requirement much greater and there was nowhere to go
and there was no way of expanding. He stated that when they started drilling for foundations in the area and
taking soundings they found that the costs sky-rocketed, and the City staff then, with the acquiescence of the
Provincial authorities, investigated a sewage plant. He stated that he does not think that Councillor A. Vincent
is objecting to the change. Councillor A. Vincent confirmed this observation. Councillor Davis continued,
stating that this work, has been proceeding without knowledge of the Council; the Land Committee, so far as it
was concerned - and he was speaking as Chairman of that Committee - was concerned with the problem of acquiring
the land which is now no longer necessary. He stated that, therefore, it is quite startling to discover that
these changes have been made, which, incidentally, are excellent changes and are to. the City's advantage because
the expansion is practically unlimited - there are two additions that can be built and will probably be built
within the next ten years, and everything is just fine, but, once again, it is a problem of communications. He
commented that if the Council keeps hammering long enough communications will certainly improve. Councillor A.
Vincent stated that he understands that unless there are certain easements given that there is no mechanical
plant going to be there. Mr. MacKinnon replied that that stands correct. Councillor A. Vincent indicated that he
wished to continue this discussion, but he concluded this debate when the Mayor asked him to make his comments
brief.
I
.
Question .being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
~
sao
~
1J~/#7bk.s(/9'~)
L-i-,(
~t!f A1.1'r.
/ftlahllc /lna -
IyI-IedJ / S erl'/(:es
L--6L
"M%/h:J 0-1'
aBler 5o/po/
S'prt.<.c!e ~dfA/'"
s/rd~/hf
II1lhist-6'r or
hv/rbl7h7ed-
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that
granted for payment of the invoice from Chitticks (1962)
31st, 1976.
I
as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
Ltd. in the amount of $2,814.00 and ~ated May
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, submit'ting a
report prepared by Mr. W. J. Wilson of the Atlantic Analytical Services Ltd. on June 25th, 1976 as a I
result of Council's request on May 3lst, 1976 that the results of reports be made available on the testing
of water from the City's water supply lakes with respect to spray residues from the spruce buq~orm spraying
programme of the Province - the said analytical report stating, in part, that the recent test ';for org~
anophosphate pesticides showed that none of these bodies could be detected by the analytical procedures
used, and these detection limits are ten per cent of the maximum permissible level, and the analysts can
therefore safely assume that these pesticides are analytically absent and that the water complies with the
most stringent requirements for these compounds, and further stating that, in conclusion, the chemical '
properties of the Saint John City water supply comply with Canadian Standards for very acceptable levels
of purity and that problems that arise, such as low pH, are characteristic of waters of this type and are
not likely.to cause serious problems - be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the Minister of the Environment, Province of New Brunswick, in
reply to Common Council resolution of May 31st last concerning sampling of Loch Lomond and Spruce Lakes i
for spray chemicals, advising .that although his Department has been carrying out water quality surveys of
both the said lakes, they have not included the spray chemicals in their analyses for the following
reasons: (1) unless sampling is carried out immediately after spraying, the likelihood of finding any
trace of the spray chemicals is extremely small - it would therefore entail a great deal of expense, with
little chance of useful information, to include the analyses for spray chemicals in their water quality
survey; (2) the Public Health Services Branch of the Department of Health is carrying out a piogramme.of'
surveying public water supplies immediately after spraying; and further advising that it is the Minister':s
understanding that Loch Lomond was sampled by the Department two days later, and since the Spruce Lake
watershed was not sprayed, no samples were taken in Spruce Lake for spray chemicals; and further advising
that the Minister's staff has been in contact with the Public Health Services Branch and has lieen informed
that the City of Saint John will receive the results of the analyses as soon as they are avail~ble -- be
received and filed.
.
I
I
.
Councillor Kipping commented that he is very pleased to see that no pesticides could be detected
by the analytical procedures used, and that it is very satisfying. In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's
query, Mr. Park confirmed that the analysis that was made by Atlantic Analytical Services Ltd." will be
paid for by the City, it having been done at the City's request. Councillor A. Vincent asked if the City
is retaining the services of this analytical firm all summer. Mr. MacKinnon replied that this' report of '
the said analysts was a particular request on the part of the City to analyze a number of samples that we
had taken following the spruce budworm spraying; the City is paying this firm for chemical analysis and .
testing that goes on during the year on water and on sewer services, and we have periodically ,asked them I
to do tests on paint samples, environmental problems that have been referred to us and that we have aske~
for their analyses - they periodically give the City at the City's request chemical analyses of the water,
and that is what they have done in this case, and they do so at a charge, and they carry out that service,
throughout the year. He added that they have not been retained for the rest of the summer in regard to
this particular matter, but the tests that they took for us were specific tests just to ascert'ain whether,
or not any of the spray material had gotten into the water supply - however, they normally do testing on
the chemical analysis for the City. He added that there is a subsequent letter that is enclosed with this
report that indicates that they test for other toxic metals from time to time such as copper, lead, zinc,'
arsenic and manganese and they also look after calcium, sulphur, sodium, potassium - they do a: number of .
tests and quality them and give the City the results. Councillor MacGowan asked whether it is' necessary,
for the City to have the tests made of the water after the spraying operations at its own expense when '
apparently the Department of Health does it for us free of charge, and she also asked if this is the said
Department's responsibility. Mr. MacKinnon explained that the Department of Health basically does a test,
,
on coliform although it will take samples and refer them for testing ~ unless asked, they will, not spec-
ifically go out and do those tests - in this case, he thinks it was the prerogative of the City as they .
have employed a consultant to handle the chemical analysis testing, and we did ask them to do It. He I
stated that he thinks in the test it does indicate that it was their opinion that more than likely it was.
a pollen that had fallen on the lake (it was this film of material on the lake that had prompt~d the City:
department to have the testing done). In reply to Councillor MacGowan's query, he advised that Atlantic'
Analytical Services Ltd. did the specific 1975 water tests for the City when we had the report" about the
quality of the water supply. '
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
. RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, dated June 23rd, 1976
~ ~ ~~ with reference to Marsh Creek flood damage reduction, giving a summary of the current status of discussiors
I'/C?~ ~;' and of the work in progress, and advising that the Council will be kept informed as further deyelopIDents
f?~~ ~'/.7v~d ccur, be received and filed and a copy of same be sent to the Glen Falls Flood Committee for their
t:!'''5/'e$$''~ information.
6VRn b/;'s F/o,d .
~Y?7m. Councillor Kipping noted that one of the statements in the above report is that somei work has
~ been done on the concept of phased construction over a number of years so that those works which give a
major cost benefit increment are built in the first phase, and stated that he would ask whether these are:
the ones comprising the scheme that the Council agreed to. Mr. MacKinnon made affirmative reply to the '
first question (these are the actual works that the Council has agreed to, Councillor Kipping noted).
Councillor Kipping, with regard to the statement in the above named report, "I understand that the Min-
ister has already contacted the Federal Minister involved in order to pursue the matter of cost-sharing on
the Marsh Creek in more detail later in the summer.", asked: is provision for follow-up made -: it is
actually going to take place later in the summer - is there a date set? Mr. MacKinnon replied: that he is'
not going to avoid that question. He stated that the Minister has indicated that he would follow it up
with the Federal Department, and he (Mr. MacKinnon) would have to assume that the Minister is going to do,
that - there has been no date given to the City as to when the Province is going to follow it up. Couno
cillor Kipping suggested that that is a matter that needs to be pursued and the initiative has'to come
from the City. Mr. MacKinnon replied that at the present time, the Minister will pursue that issue, he
would imagine, as soon as his staff is satisfied as to the discussions with the City _ we have! one or two,
more meetings with the Provincial staff on that matter and as soon as those issues are cleared up he. would
assume that the Minister will then take the matter to his Federal people to get some sort of approval. .:
Councillor Kipping, referring to the statement in the City Manager's report concerning the forebay land, :
'y
~
I
I
.
~
,....
-') 1
t,..J....
.
I
/Ilar$h a
.f-'/op~
cudrt7!
I
.
Jl"eJett1 J" q..
I ReAt-l'el"n
/bI.
U4teJ?
::;#'ndfe
<i/I'edS
.
~nL use
I Ct7"n-I>O/
I
fUN?
CoHP~/C-8Ht-
a~n~!I
:/:i;J!f
. .f'o"eJ..;/!f
a.l>eOl
~SC!"J1
.(-t-L
....
"...a preliminary discussion was held with Mr. A. L. Irving and he has asked for complete information to be
provided on this matter...", asked: has Mr. A. L. Irving been provided with the information yet? Mr. MacKinnon
replied that our discussion with Mr. Irving was of a nature that the forebay area was required - Mr. Irving
disagrees essentially that it is required - Mr. Irving has a copy of the consultants' report - and that is
basically where we are - the said report indicates why the forebay area is required and Mr. Irving disagrees with
the concept. Councillor Kipping noted that, in other words, Mr. Irving has complete information on the problem.
Mr. MacKinnon stated that he thinks Mr. Irving would like to discuss the matter - he added that he would suggest
that Mr. Irving has the complete information because he has the said report, but he would think that Mr. Irving
would like to discuss the matter with regard to the acquisition of the forebay area. Councillor Kipping stated
that he just wanted to know whether Mr. Irving has complete information, because the last time the Council
discussed this subject, at the June 21st Council meeting, it was intimated that ~IT. Irving did not have complete
information and this was to be given to him at some future time - he added that we now know that Mr. Irving has
the information. Mr. MacKinnon advised that the information was not given to Mr. Irving after the last Council
meeting, and that he was merely clarifying what maybe should have been said at the last Council meeting - 11r.
Irving had the information and he is arguing the basis of the report and the fact that the City requires the
forebay area.
Councillor MacGowan noted that Mr. Barfoot's report says, "In order that the total runoff reaching
Marsh Creek does not continue to increase as the watershed is further developed, a policy has to be adopted that
would require new developments in the watershed to control total runoff to the amount which would have run off
the land in its pre-development state.", and she asked if we should not be looking at a policy as far as that is
concerned. Again referring to Mr. Barfoot's report which says, "The Province has a particular interest in the
possibility of controlling land use within the so-called 100-year flood line, but legislation must be introduced
by the Province before controls can be implemented.", Councillor MacGowan noted that then we say that the policy
of the Planning Advisory Committee. She stated that she would like to know, therefore, whether the Council
should not be considering both of these whether we want to ask the Province to pass legislation for control and
whether we should have our own policy that they must have something to control the runoff. In reply, Councillor
Cave stated that when he was in Fredericton he read in that city's newspaper, "The Gleaner", that there is a Bill
that has been presented to the Legislature - he has not seen any Fredericton newspaper since then to determine
whether or not the Bill had been passed - along the lines that Councillor MacGowan had suggested. He added that
when this is done it will be under the advice of the Planning Advisory Committee who will have to. follow up on
the Bill. Councillor Parfitt noted that the said report from the City Manager is suggesting, as an interim
measure, that Mystery Lake be drained so that the total capacity is available for flood damage, and she asked if
that has been done, or is that in the future. Mr. MacKinnon replied that in addition to the weir that is con-
structed in the dam there is a pipe with a valve on it which would allow for the lowering of the dam - the pipe
was found, about three or four weeks ago, by the use of divers, to be partially closed off - since that time, we
have corrected the problem and we have attempted to lower the Lake - at one particular point there was a fair
vortex at the entrance to the pipe and the valve was throttled down to allow for slower passage of water _
however, it is our intention that with the wet period coming on the level of the Lake would be lowered substantiall.
to allow for an increased volume of water. Councillor Davis noted that this report refers to the letter of
Euroconsultant of Holland, and stated that as he recalls it, they think it is a good report but they felt that
the forebay area is the wrong place to have a storage area and that it is a most unusual thing to store water
after it has passed through the area that is normally flooded. He asked if Mr. MacKinnon has studied that letter
or been in contact with Proctor & Reafern Ltd. concerning additional storage area up in higher levels. In reply,
Mr. MacKinnon stated that, first of all, with the volume of water that is going to fall the basic principle is to
improve the instantaneous runoff of the whole area - as part of the package proposal it was the intention of the
City to improve local drainage so that the instantaneous runoff would get to Marsh Creek fast enough and, at the
same time, we could store a great deal of the water in the upper areas - however, this water would still stay in
Marsh Creek and the Creek itself will not hold the volume of water without either the pumping or the storage in
the forebay area - however, should one constriction be removed upstream it would allow for more storage in the
lower part of Marsh Creek and the obstruction that was noticed in the Proctor & Redfern report was the Strescon
property - they are indicating that that property happens to be a natural area for holding the water and that
from that point backwards they were constructing floodways and that the water was not being held in the lower
reaches of the Marsh Creek, and if it was not held in the forebay area and with a substantial rise in the tide
there would be flooding unless there was some means of controlling it. Refe~ring to the Euroconsultant of
Holland report, he noted that one of the solutions was dyking and he felt that the dyking as far as these con-
sultants were concerned was the rising of the tide and not the outflow of water from the land - they can dyke
their land so that it is holding back the tides - in this case, we are trying to get rid of the water and if we
dyke Marsh Creek we would only control the water that was coming down from Mystery and Kelly Lakes and that
instantaneous runoff but not at the instantaneous runoff from the Glen Falls area itself - and that is the
critical area - the attempt is, of course, to get the water out of the Glen Falls area as soon as possible.
Councillor MacGowan noted that Mr. Barfoot's report says, "In order that the total runoff reaching
Marsh Creek does not continue to increase as the watershed is further developed, a policy has to be adopted that
would require new developments in the watershed to control total runoff to the amount which would have run off
the land in its pre-development state.", and she asked if we should not be looking at a policy as far as that is
concerned. Again referring to Mr. Barfoot's report which says, "The Province has a particular interest in the
possibility of controlling land use within the so-called 100-year flood line, but legislation must be introduced
by the Province before controls can be implemented.", Councillor MacGowan noted that then we say that the policy
of the Planning Advisory Committee. She stated that she would like to know, therefore, whether the Council
should not be considering both of these whether we want to ask the Province to pass legislation for control and
whether we should have our own policy that they must have something to control the runoff. In reply, Councillor
Cave stated that when he was in Fredericton he read in that city's newspaper, "The Gleaner", that there is a Bill
that has been presented to the Legislature - he has not seen any Fredericton newspaper since then to determine
whether or not the Bill had been passed - along the lines that Councillor MacGowan had suggested. He added that
when this is done it will be under the advice of the Planning Advisory Committee who will have to follow up on
the Bill. Councillor Parfitt noted that the said report from the City Manager is suggesting, as an interim
measure, that Mystery Lake be drained so that the total capacity is available for flood damage, and she asked if
that has been done, or is that in the future. Mr. MacKinnon replied that in addition to the weir that is con-
structed in the dam there is a pipe with a valve on it which would allow for the lowering of the dam - the pipe
was found, about three or four weeks ago, by the use of divers, to be partially closed off - since that time, we
have corrected the problem and we have attempted to lower the Lake - at one particular point there was a fair
vortex at the entrance to the pipe and the valve was throttled down to allow for slower passage of water -
however, it is our intention that with the wet period coming on the level of the Lake would be lowered substantiall:
to allow for an increased volume of water. Councillor Davis noted that this report refers to the letter of
Euroconsultant of Holland, and stated that as he recalls it, they think it is a good report but they felt that
the forebay area is the wrong place to have a storage area and that it is a most unusual thing to store water
after it has passed through the area that is normally flooded. He asked if Mr. Ma~~innon has studied that letter
or been in contact with Proctor & Redfern Ltd. concerning additional storage area up in higher levels. In reply,
Mr. MacKinnon stated that, first of all, with the volume of water that is going to fall the basic principle is to
improve the instantaneous runoff of the whole area - as part of the package proposal it was the intention of the
City to improve local drainage so that the instantaneous runoff would get to Marsh Creek fast enough and, at the
same time, we could store a great deal of the water in the upper areas - however, this water would still stay in
Marsh Creek and the Creek itself will not hold the volume of water without either the pumping or the storage in
the forebay area - however, should one constriction be removed upstream it would allow for more storage in the
lower part of Marsh Creek and the obstruction that was noticed in the Proctor & Redfern report was the Strescon
-3')
b....
~
~/en h//s
./'/t?,FbHff
/J1dr~A CreeK
-/Y,pd C'oH ~~p/
,kUpp a~k
7?e~ppt'-
c;,~"bh07y'
:lJ.d!f. ~~JdY
.,Ii?hi? f /I?
:L,..nn~ /17~
~~
I11liJld~r ()-,C
.E"hy;,,4/1n?6'd-
JJ/.;;hl1.fJ~I'/S.
:J)6'I1.iJM L. ClvPi?o1l7
1?I?/'Id/L lIauyNVe
/Jf6'I,~ hOh?e
property - they are indicating that that property happens to be a natural area for holding the. water and
that from that point backwards they were constructing floodways and that the water was not being held in
the lower reaches of the Marsh Creek, and if it was not held in the forebay area and with a substantial
rise in the tide there would be flooding unless there was some means of controlling it. Refer~ing to the
Euroconsultant of Holland report, he noted that one of the solutions was dyking and he felt that the
dyking as far as these consultants were concerned was the rising of the tide and not the outflow of water
,
from the land - they can dyke their land so that it is holding back the tides - in this case, we are
trying to get rid of the water and if we dyke Marsh Creek we would only control the water that: was coming
down from Mystery and Kelly Lakes and that instantaneous runoff but not at the instantaneous r~noff from
the Glen Falls area itself - and that is the critical area - the attempt is, of course, to get'the water
out of the Glen Falls area as soon as possible.
Councillor M. Vincent noted that at a recent Council meeting the City Manager was asked if he
was aware of the fact that the proposed forebay area might be being filled in, and the City Manager's
response, as he recalls it, was that he did not believe it was being filled in - but that he thought some
soil or some ground was being levelled off. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the City staff has.: watched the
area within the last week or so and has the staff now decided whether it is being filled in or~ just spread
around. In reply, Mr. MacKinnon stated that at the time that Mr. Barfoot made that comment it was his own
impression - he had looked at it - that they were re-arranging the soil and that they were, as, they have
done over the last number of years, spreading that fill in order to lower it and to create less of a dump
site - however, since that meeting there is a substantia~ amount of the area that has been filled in and
they have lowered it probably four or five feet. Councillor M. .Vincent asked if he suggested that some-
where in the vicinity of 35 feet had been filled in on the forebay, would that be approximately correct.
Mr. MacKinnon replied that it could well be, and he added that the area as indicated by the consultants'
report does not include part of the area closer to the causeway and closer to the eastern portion of the
causeway - it indicates a large part of the forebay, but he thinks that the consultant was assuming that a
good part of it was filled in, when, in fact, it was not - they are filling it in now, though ~ a sub-
stantial part of that area. Councillor M. Vincent made the following comment: I said that, after Mr.
MacKinnon having pointed out that at the time the City Manager advised Council that there wa.s no fill-in,
,
Mr. MacKinnon has noticed that since then there has been, which was following a meeting held between
members of staff and the Irving interests - therefore, they would be officially aware of our concern for
that forebay. Mr. MacKinnon confirmed that the Irving interests are aware of it. Councillor Gould asked
if the said forebay area is privately-owned property. Mr. MacKinnon confirmed that it is. Councillor
Gould asked if the owner does not have some right to do what he wants on that property, until the City
buys it or does something else to it or rule by legislation on Some such thing. Councillor Davis made
affirmative reply. Mr. MacKinnon noted that legal problems are in the hands of the City Solicitor as to
what the City can do legally with the land. Councillor Gould recalled that at the May 3rd meeting the
subject was broached regarding the cost benefit ratio. He asked if that was ever looked at and used, that
it is true that this project would never get off the ground, in comparison to others in Canada'. Mr.
MacKinnon replied that the figures as originally given indicate a very low cost benefit analysis and it
was the intention from one of the first meetings that City staff has held with the Provincial staff with
the idea of re-examining the figures and trying the increase the cost benefit analysis - this was done and
there is a better cost benefit analysis - however, to be very practical it is not practical. Councillor
Gould stated that the reason he brought that up is because.he was concerned about what was being said,
here - he noted that it ~ays that some work has been done on the concept of phased construction over a
number of years so that those works which gave a major cost benefit increment are built in the, first
phase - he further noted that, therefore, it is a first phase but it is a number of years. He: further
noted that the said report proceeds to say "with the balance of the work to be built when the :benefits to
be derived therefrom can justify the expenditures" - and he noted that, therefore, what Mr. MacKinnon is '
really saying is that maybe thirty years from now the project will be completed. He asked if that is a ~
pretty good interpretation. Mr. MacKinnon replied: no. He added that he would not indicate that the time
is anywhere near thirty years - it would be less time than that. Councillor Gould stated that, it seems t'o
him that if you want to bring this back to the cost benefit ratio, that it will never justify .expenditure's.
In reply, Mr. MacKinnon stated that at this point in time it may not - however, the future mai indicate i
any number of things going on with development and once development takes a different turn it may be well
justifi~d and/or depending upon what happens in the area - right now, with the existing costs that are '
being paid the cost benefit analysis is not justified - that is from the point of view of the larger
scheme of 4.4 million dollars - in the discussions with the Province, the Province has suggested that we
should consider a smaller scheme which would be in dollar value, approximately 1.5 to 2 million dollars.
Councillor Hodges asked: you could not buy the forebay? In reply, Mr. MacKinnon stated, no, and that it I
is his own opinion that the figures are not necessarily practical in the report on the cost of, acquiring
the forebay - these figures are for the construction of holding areas in the area of Mystery Lake, Kelly
Lake and the Glen Road as well as the policy of improving the local drainage that the City would embark
upon, as well as the land use management programme which would control the flow in the future.'
The Mayor advised that Mr. Barfoot, who is in Europe at this time, is going to call on Euro_
consultant of Holland and he will make some enquiries as to the dyking. The Mayor asked: when. Mr. Mac-
Kinnon met a while ago with Mr. Barfoot and other members, he believes, of the City staff possibly, and
they met with the Government - who were they with at that meeting? He added that he understands that Mr.'
Dube, the Minister of the Environment, was there. In reply, Mr. MacKinnon stated he believes that the
newspaper report has indicated that City staff had met with Mr. Dube this past Monday (June 21st) prior to
the Council meeting. He stated that that is an inaccurate report - staff has not met with Mr. Dube - Mr.
Barfoot in his report has indicated that we have met three times with the Provincial Department, and all
of those times we have met with Mr. Dube's staff and not with Mr. Dube.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent ,
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory' Committee
with regard to the request made by Mr. Donald L. Cullinan, Barrister, that his client, Mr. Ronald Hargrove,
be granted an extension of permission relating to the location of his mobile home on Lot 72-3:(Mitchell
Carr property) on the south side of Lorneville Road, recommending that permission be granted for the
continued placement of this mobile home for a period of one year, be received and filed and the recom_
mendation adopted.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
Councillor Hodges noted that the Council seems to recommend these mobile home permission ex-
4 .
tensions year after year, and that the above mobile home matter is four or five years old. He stated that
he does not like to cut anybody off regarding these matters, but he does not think that the Council should
haphazardly grant these permits because some people get them and some people do not, and he has a hard
time understanding why those people do not. He stated that he thinks the Council should treat: these .
applicants all alike - if we give one person who wants such permission, for five years, then ~e should
give another person who wants such permission, for one year - he has a hard time understanding:' why we
should favour one applicant over the other. In reply, Mr. Zides explained that in some cases it is a
situation where the individual applies for a year and then alleges that he has some problem a~d he wants I
to do it for another year and the Planning Advisory Committee cannot see anything wrong with it. He added
that the Committee can turn around, of course, and permit somebody on a permanent basis if that is what
~
,....
~ .
-.) .)
b'~),'?
.
.1
I
~17J1, /1~l//s
c-'0);;,117,
JY- $. 7e~~1J.
. Cpj.-t-Ifl.
W()J"k ed',
..d- /I'J////~
pi/Ie
klJ~//o/
p/dh
.
1
.
1
.lY1C~.
.IhsfJee~
t70fM7. 19.
1 V,ncent-
S.T%~
P5F
.11u/IL/7
/epml
.
~
the applicant indicates, but they are getting people to say, "Well, now, one more year" - that is the way it has
been going. Councillor Hodges stated that this information does n?t answer the question at all because he thinks
there have already been others that have been dealt with who had such permission more than three years, and other
people have only asked for one year whose application has come up and we did not give them permission. Mr. Zides
replied, pointing out that is a different question. He commented that there will be situations every time where
the Planning Advisory Committee is going to recommend against a particular mobile home at a particular location,
and that the Committee turns down some people who go to the Committee for permanent location, in very much the
same way - the Committee judges the situation by whether there are a lot of houses around it and whether the
reaction of the people in the area is favourable or not - that type of an approach. Councillor Hodges recalled
that even though there was no objection to one application, it was still turned down by the Committee. Mr. Zides
noted that he cannot look at every individual case and tell why.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, advising
that last year, the New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited applied for a building permit to erect an extension
for its Work Centre in Millidgeville between Boar's Head Road, Woodward Avenue and McIntosh Street and the site
plan showed, in addition to the building extension, a complete development of the site by the provision of large
parking areas, a pole yard, cable yard,' fencing and landscaping, and that the site is in an "I-R" restricted
industrial zone in which the required front yard is 50 feet, and this front yard is required to be landscaped
over its full width by grading and the planting of trees, shrubs and lawn and so maintained, and the Company
sought a variance from this requirement because it needed some of this front yard area for its proposed site
development and it wished to landscape but about no more than 10 feet in width; and further advising that the
Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to permit, subject to such terms and conditions
as they consider fit, reasonable variances from certain requirements of the Zoning By-Law, and in this particular
case, the Committee granted the necessary variance on condition that the landscaping plan be acceptable to the
Municipal Planning Director - and such a plan was subsequently prepared; and further advising that the said
Company is now .requesting that changes be made to the approved landscaping plan for the Work Centre in Millidge-
ville, some of which involve the use and occupancy of portions of City streets rights-of-way, which is why this
matter is being referred to Common Council; and further advising that the Company is proposing to relocate its
proposed plant material screen some 850 feet along the Boar's Head Road from inside its property line out to the
City street right-of-way as shown on a large plan which is being filed with the Common Clerk - the property line
will be defined by a chain-link fence - the Company feels that the plant material would have a greater chance of
survival outside of the chain-link fence, not being endangered by snow removal and material handling and storage
in the pole and cable yards, which the plant material is intended to screen; and noting that a second change
would result from the Company's present desire to instal curbing and sidewalks in the street right-of-way along a
portion of Woodward Avenue (250 feet ~ of sidewalk and an additional 90 feet of curbing), which area is marked in
blue on the plan being filed with the Common Clerk - the proposal would give a more finished appearance to the
staff parking area and provide walking access for staff using the area - this would leave a wider planting strip
between the parking area and Woodward Avenue - several small landscaped islands projecting into the parking area
are proposed to be eliminated and the trees provided relocated into this larger planting strip along the street
-- and recommending that the proposed changes be accepted contingent on (1) the evergreen trees to be planted
along Boar's Head Road to be at least the height of the existing fence which is 60 feet, and (2) an acceptable
agreement between the City and New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited with regards to such items as the con-
struction of the curbing and sidwalks along Woodward Avenue and the maintenance, replanting, liability, et
cetera, which should be assumed by the said Company in relation to the planting proposed along Boar's Head
Road -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor Kipping withdrew from the Council table at this time, advising that he was doing so because
of a possible conflict of interest in the above matter.
Question being taken, the motion was carried. Councillor Kipping thereupon resumed his seat at the
Council table.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he wished to add an item to the agenda, for discussion, with regard
to the Saint John Regional Hospital. He added that this is an emergency.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that Councillor A. Vincent be permitted to place an item on the
agenda at this time for discussion, pertaining to the Saint John Regional Hospital.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that the question he wanted to bring up is - how the Saint John Regional
Hospital can be built without a building permit. He stated that they only have a foundation permit, and he
thinks it is morally wrong and legally unfair and wrong that widows and orphans have to have building permits and
they can continue boldly even where the flag flags of the contractors on top of the steel building without a
building permit. He stated that he would therefore move that all building permits from now on be abolished.
There was no seconder to this motion. He explained that his reason for proposing such motion is that if we are
not going to make the Saint John Regional Hospital comply, he feels .we should make everybody free. The Mayor
suggested that the Council get a report, first, in this regard. Councillor A. Vincent .stated that he thinks we
should dismiss the Building Inspector and everybody in charge if they are not having the Hospital comply. On a
point of order, Councillor MacGowan stated that she wondered if this was an emergency, and if this has gone this
long, why could it not be put on the agenda a week from now, in writing. Councillor Higgins suggested that a
report be obtained from the Building Inspector. -The Mayor noted that the Council can ask for a report from the
Building Inspector. Councillor A. Vincent asked if it means: I can go ahead and start and do a week's work
without a permit and not be charged. He pointed out that we are talking about the law, here - there is a law
that you must have a building permit and there is no way this Council can say "one week". He stated that he will
have no part of it. He asked: are we monkeying the law - are we fooling with the law - or do they comply - and
they do not comply, and let us charge them. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he took Councillor A. Vincent's
point, but he wonders if the Province of New Brunswick, who, he believes, are the owners or builders or develop-
ers of the General Regional Hospital, require a building permit. Councillors Davis and A. Vincent noted that they
already took out a foundation permit. Councillor A. Vincent added that they cheated us on their price for the
contract, and cheated us badly.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that this matter be laid on the table and the Council receive a
report from the Building Inspector and the City Solicitor next week.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor M. Vincent voting "nay".
sa4
~
(JPUH,/J, t1~N
7J~LI?~~6
s.:r 7?9/P)?';-;/
1Ie>~ P
13ltZff'Z;~P.
aUh./lY/';;O~Wt-
.zva:'.f,k~e-to
"?ehS/p.17 '7JL
1i'e-?/,.e ,"~n1f-
hoeL ~~h1
If/bm-s .7Jep-&:
f/e11$Jon :BL.
1(eh~en&-
1k")?PJ1~/y
R pI!' .JJt!'j7r.
l?SCI'.-r ~rJ-s .
/Ifill/IS, 23,(. .
s.r ..7hL~rG'~'
~A;i// C/rd
(;!/'IDihr
CU~h 1Y~'bO#~
:JjqS4b,*// ~h1
Councillor A. Vincent asked for a legal opinion as to whether we can vote ourselves out of the
aw, or not, for next week, because he does not think the above motion is legal, even though he cannot
debate on it and he has to find himself in a very embarrassing position that we cannot table that motion
because we are now saying that the contractor and their cahoots from Toronto can sub-let contracts without
,
building permit, which they are doing - and we cannot contract outside the law. Mr. Rodgers'advised
that he is not aware of any discussions that the Building Inspector h~s had - but let us assum~ that it is
the Province that is building this hospital... Councillor Cave interjected that the above moti~n asked for
the report from the City Solicitor and the Building Inspector next week, not at this time - he' added that
he himself does not want an opinion at this meeting - he wants it next week. The Mayor asked the Council
members whether they wished to have the legal advice at this meeting, or next week. Councillor M. Vincent
stated that in the event Councillor A. Vincent is correct in saying that we cannot vote ourselves out 'of
it legally, he thinks the Council has to have the explanation because maybe the Council is going in a
wrong manner by tabling this until next week. Councillor MacGowan pointed out that the Counil! needs to
have the information before the Council members know whether they are doing anything illegal o~ not, so
one week.... Councillor A. Vincent interjected that the Council should ask the Building Inspector, stating
that he (the Building Inspector) knows that they are going to give them the building permit next week.
Mr. Rodgers advised that, generally speaking, the Crown is not bound by zoning - however, they' usually co-
operate and meet our requirements. He added that, on this point, he does not know what discussions have
taken place with respect to the Province and the Building Inspector's Department. The Mayor noted that
the Council will have the report next week, then. Question again being taken, Councillor A. Vincent voted
"nay" to the above motion.
Councillor A. Vincent, speaking to the Building Inspector, stated "AI, they called you a monkey,
and I guess it is true.". Councillor Higgins asked Councillor A. Vincent to withdraw that remark, stating
that he is sick and .tired of snide remarks from this Council to members of staff sitting there, and that
he thinks it is uncalled for - ignorant, and is not even within the bounds of good manners. He stated
,that he does not want Mr. A. Ellis on the stand this evening - he simply wants Councillor A. Vincent to
withdraw his remark. Mr. A. Ellis stated that in answer to the Councillor's question, there is a building
permit on the original hospital - doing excavating and foundation work - this is a progressive permit; the
project manager, Mr. Ramsey, has contacted him last week and is in the process of up-dating that permit
now to another nine million dollars point some odd to the Council - in order to do this, he has to have
approved form from the Government in order to make out the cheque to pay the City the permit fee. Coun-
cillor A. Vincent stated that there is no such a thing as a progress building permit, and there is no such
thing as a firm set of plans out there - he cannot tell Councillor A. Vincent whether the walls are made
of glass or marble. Councillor Higgins stated that he wants Councillor A. Vincent to apologize to the
Building Inspector for the remark made as a Councillor to a member of City staff sitting there.. Councillor
A. Vincent stated that .he never spoke to Mr. Ellis. Councillor Higgins stated that unless Councillor A.
Vincent withdraws (his remark) he (Councillor Higgins) will withdraw this evening from this CoUncil
chamber. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he, 'too, will follow Councillor Higgins in withdrawing from
the Council chamber. Councillor MacGowan stated that she seconded the motion (of Councillor Higgins) that
Councillor A. Vincent apologize to Mr. Ellis. The Mayor pointed out to Councillor A. Vincent that a motion
has been placed that he make an apology to the Building Inspector, and that Councillors say if he does not
do so they are going to withdraw from the meeting. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he did not speak t~
Mr. Ellis, and that what he did say was that Al Sadler, who is in charge of the architect's firms, called
us all monkeys here - he stated that he was talking about the consulting firm who has no plans or anything
else - he stated that he did not mention Mr. Ellis' name nor did he mention Mr. Building Inspector. He
stated that there are no plans available for this hospital.
,
At this point, the Mayor noted that the Council members believe that Councillor A. Vincent made
the statement - that they heard him making a statement - about making a monkey, and referring~o the
Building Inspector. A five-minute recess was agreed upon by the Council members during which ~ime the
taped record of the aforegoing Council proceedings was heard to verify their recollection of Councillor A.
Vincent's statements. The meeting then resumed and Councillor A. Vincent expressed his apologies.to Mr.
A. Ellis, Councillor MacGowan felt that the people from Toronto should be asked to apologize !for making
the remark that they did to Councillor A. Vincent regarding this hospital project.
Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of Trustees ofxhe Civic
Employees' Pension Plan, recommending the retirement of Mr. Fred Graham, an employee of the Works Depart~
ment, effective February 26th, 1976, in accordance with Section 9, Sub-Section 1, of the Pens ton Act, Mr.
Graham having complied with the provisions of the said Sub-Section by providing medical reports as to his
permanent disability, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Pye
;i
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of Trustees of the Civic
Employees' Pension Plan, advising of receipt of a letter from the Fire Chief recommending tha~ M~. Vernon
Daley, Fire Department Dispatcher, be placed on disability pension, or retired under the provtsions of the
Heart and Lung Act, as soon as possible, and that this application was dealt with at a meeting of the
Board held on June 17th, 1976 and that the Board advises the Common Council that Mr. Daley, ~ employee of.
the Fire Department, is eligible for retirement by reason of age and service, or disability on the basis,
of a medical board report, be received and filed.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
Mr. Park advised that Fireman Vernon Daley qualifies for retirement on a number of grounds, and,
at the same time, the matter of the application of the Heart and Lung Act to his case is awaiting the I
report from the Senior Legal Counsel, Mr. George T. Clark, Q. C. so that a final decision can ;be made. as .
to the best options that are available in this particular case; there is no question that Mr. ':Daley is
entitled to be retired but the exact provisions under which he should be retired will have to :await the I
filing of the legal opinion from Mr. Clark; this is an unusual case, but the reason for putting it forward
at this time is so that it can be recognized that the Fire Department will have a vacancy so ~hat the Fire
Chief can take steps to have this vacancy filled - at the same time, personal position of Fireman Daley
will not be prejudiced because it is awaiting the filing of the legal opinion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
.
J
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Recreation and
Board, submitting a copy of a request from the Saint John Dodger Senior Baseball Club
assistance in the amount of $250.00 to cover anticipated deficit in hosting the Cuban
Team with a game at the St. Peter's Park on July 9th, 1976, and recommending that, if
such that a deficit is incurred, a maximum grant of $200.00 be provided, subject to a
Parks Advisory
for financial
National Baseball ,
circums~ances are
deficit :being
.
....
,...-
-.)-
b~~
.
1ST 2)/s-f;
C~nc/1. an.
. C/17/p~ ~
Publ/c
r./1J'p/o!t'~
C7le$It!!~ .Dr.
repa.l'ps /Pi?
I p/7 plpell"he
crty /I'ltfr.
C~'ilo/I;j'
~ #/17 J'V($
.L"y/h!l (:1//
C'p.
.
,1;0#1"
e,:c2f/.;Jllh
sCJreet-
I
s.IIIUPfdJ?
..:oev~.IbpH79.
'1?-~ec.-t-
/Yf?m/J1.r1-G-t'n
. C7o~h7.
I
:i).X ,f!L/e,PO
4k$$~-
t.Piiv.
$effer
t!Ohl7t!?C-/-/D
-lee
I
.
lIl....
incurred, substantiated by a full financial statement being submitted outlining revenues, and expenditures, be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that the above request be referred to
the Grants Committee. In reply to a query, Mr. Park advised that the above named grant, if approved, would be
charged against the appropriation that is made at the beginning of the year for this kind of relatively 'small
grant that does come up from time to time during the year but is not known by name in advance.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried with the Mayor voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Canadian Union of Public Employees,
Saint John District Council, submitting a petition to have Chesley Drive properly repaired so as to be in the
same condition before the installation of the pipe line beneath the paved surface, and also requesting that such
work be done at no cost to the City taxpayers, be received and filed and the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Engineering and Works be asked to arrange with the proper authorities that the said street be paved.
Councillor Parfitt advised that Mr. Stuart Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations of the City's
Engineering and Works Department, has been negotiating with Winkler & McCoy, the contractors who built the said
pipe line. She stated that she is told there is no reason to believe they will not comply when Mr. Armstrong
submits his full restoration report to them. Councillor A. Vincent stated that it is his understanding that
before a contractor tears up a City street a performance bond has to be provided. The Mayor asked if a per-
formance bond was provided in this particular case. Mr. MacKinnon advised that, as far back as last year at the
start of the construction of the pipe line, we have had discussion with the contractor, Henkle & McCoy, with
regard to doing the work on the Chesley Drive and the restoration of any grassed areas - they have agreed that
they would do that following the completion of the contract and we have had a number of meetings with them; they
have already repaired some of the landscaped areas and we are presently preparing the cost of having the asphalted
portion done and they, in turn, have indicated that they would like either the City to do it or a contractor, and
he believes that Mr. Armstrong has already indicated to them that the City's programme would probably not allow
the City to take it on and that they should have the programme done themselves; they have not reneged on doing
the work and they have indicated that they will complete the work, as he (Mr. MacKinnon) has reported to Council
in the past. Councillor A. Vincent asked for the serial number of their performance bond in this regard, and
stated that he understands that anyone who tears up a City street has to put up a bond, and he understands that
this company did not put up the bond. He asked if it is not true that the City failed to get a performance bond.
Mr. MacKinnon replied that there is no bond in the case, nor is there a bond required - there is a fee for
tearing up.. Councillor A. Vincent asked what their fee would be for tearing up the whole length of Chesley Drive
compared to the fee of a private individual for opening up 30 feet in the road. Mr. !1acKinnon replied that it
would be approximately the same price. Councillor A. Vincent noted that the fee would be $35.00, and that they
are going to forfeit $35.00 for the whole area. Noting that this comment is not correct, Mr. MacKinnon pointed
out that the company has agreed to the principle of repairing the work - we have not gotten involved in the
discussion as to what we would do if they have refused to do it - however, he believes that in the discussions
with the Irving company as well as with the contractor, they have made a commitment that they would reinstate not
only asphalt but the landscaped areas. Councillor A. Vincent stated that all he is saying is that there has been
inconvenience to the public and for that reason there should be a performance bond. Councillor Cave recalled
that this matter was discussed by the Council with the Irving interests and the Irvings agreed with this Council
and only two voted against it - Councillor Pye and himself. Councillor Cave stated that he voted against it
beca~se he figured this was coming. He recalled that the Irving interests assured the Council that the streets
would be restored to the condition that they were in prior to the installation of the pipe line. Councillor
MacGowan pointed out that the question is when the Irving interests will carry this out.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the Management and Advisory Committee of
the Saint John Human Development Project, inviting the participation of two members of Common Council to sit on
the said Committee, be referred to the Nominating Committee.
Read the following correspondence: (1) a letter from Mr. D. I. Adler on behalf of the residents of the
Myles Sub-division, advising that with no notice the application fee for City sewage has been doubled and that
they have been advised that this decision has been implemented immediately although they had been led to believe
that any increase in rates would go into effect on July 1st, and that they therefore appeal this situation to the
Common Council and ask that due to the limited time left before July 1st, the Council consider this appeal and
petition at this meeting of Council; (2) a letter and submitted petition from the residents of Westbrook Avenue,
Myles Drive and Josselyn Road, advising that last fall the City installed the main sewer line on the said streets
and as a result many of the residents approached Mr. Sloat of the City Works Office, to attempt to make application
for City sewage service but these applications were rejected and the deposit of $100.00 refused with the ex-
planation that although the main sewer line had been intalled, the City was not prepared to connect any residences,
unless it was an absolute emergency, and as such, they were advised to keep their $100.00 deposit and submit it
next year - and, as a result, Mr. Donald Farnham, of Myles Drive, made an enquiry to the City Works Department on
June 10th, 1976, and was advised that the increase in the City sewer application fee from $100.00 to $200.00 was
pending and would go into effect on July 1st and, as a result, he advised the remaining residents of this pro-
posed increase and the effective date of July 1st, and as such they have attempted to make payment for the second
time, but upon doing so they have been advised that the increased rate is now in effect, and that it was so
enacted without prior notice, to even the employees of the department; and further advising that these petitioners
submit this situation for the Council's consideration, and submit that due to the fact that they had previously
attempted to make their deposit and were in fact refused, and also due to the fact, that they were not properly
advised of the effective date of change, that they should be given consideration and should be permitted to make
application under the previous fee structure; (3) a letter from Mr. William H. Dupuis on behalf of the residents
of the Josselyn Road advising that they were advised in 1974 that a sewer line would be extended, but, to date,
they are still waiting although they feel some progress has been made in 1976 as a survey has been made and
hopefully a pipe will follow as provision was made at a Council meeting to include the installation in the 1976.
budget (in May 1976); and further advising that, however, at a meeting of Council in 1974.the same matter was
approved; and further advising that it is therefore felt that had the work been performed when promised
the rate of a hook-up would be $100.00, not $200.00 - in other words, it would appear that they are victims of
circumstances over which they had no control; and noting that the matter of cost was brought to the attention of
Council with their original request in 1974.
Councillor M. Vincent noted that the brief referred to above is somewhat encompassing and that it gives
the Council an idea of perhaps what may have gone on; however, he had a conversation with some of these people
and there appears to be a little more to it in that they at one time came to the City to make their payments and
were told that the money could not be accepted at that time, and for them to wait until later on - so, after
having offered their money to the City they now find that the rate has doubled without having been notified. He
noted that ~IT. D. I. Adler was present at the meeting, and he suggested that the Council hear him regarding this
5GB
~
matter.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
.
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that Mr. D. 1. Adler be heard.
S,per t?~J?~-
~/(;n f'ee
Mr. Adler, a resident of Myles Drive, stated that these residents have been pressing~ for years
to have the services there and they appreciate the fact that inflation and construction costs have es~
calated and as such the Council saw fit to increase the cost to the residents of this area, but the fact
remains that last September when the main sewer line was installed in this sub-division a number of
residents approached the Works commission and offered to pay their $100.00 connection fee and at that time
they were refused and the reason given them was the fact that the Works people had been instru6ted not to;
accept any more applications, that it was late in the fall and they had quite a heavy work load ahead ,of:
them, and therefore they suggested that these residents keep their $100.00 fee and bring it ini'next year;!
he added that this they attempted to do this month and upon so doing, were advised that the fee had
increased from $100.00 to $200.00. He stated that it is basically this, that they appeal the fact that
they had attempted to pay the fee under the old rate and were refused to do so. During further discussion,
Mr. Adler stated that just by luck, a number of residents of this sub-division found their way: into City'
Hall on June lOth, 11th and 14th and paid the $100.00 fee, and he himself came in to City Hall' on June
22nd to pay his $100.00 fee and was advised that it was no longer $100.00 but was $200.00. He; stated that
he feels these residents should have been notified of such change and been given an opportunity to pay
under the old rate, keeping in mind that they had offered to pay and were refused before the rate was
changed. He stated that what he was objecting here basically to is the lack of communications, and the
lack of information passed on to the tax payers and the property owners.
I
7),r /JA'/e-r
1J/j'#S SJ.~y.
I
Mr. MacKinnon stated that, dealing specifically with the water and sewerage services'that the
City was installing in the fall the'services were not terminated on the installation of servic~s until
about December 17th, 1975, he believes, and at that time the Works Department indicated to those people
that were coming in that we could not install any more services; basically, there is an allowance in the
by-law for that, if the seasonal work demands that we cannot do them, that we can refuse to pu~ the
services in. He stated that at that time he believes a number of people did come in and he talked with
the individual that was dealing with the permits, and the question he asked him as to whether pr not he .
turned down the deposit of money and his answer was that he had not, that he merely indicated that they
could not instal the services and that we could not take any applications - however, at no time did they
say that they could not take the $100.00, nor, as a matter of fact, in most cases, the individuals in-
dicated that they would hold on to their money rather than leaving it with the City. He stated that in
dealing with the matter after the by-law, the by-law was signed on June 7th, 1976 and there was a great
deal of discussion in the newspaper about the Water and Sewerage By-Law at that time - it had been going
on for approximately a month, he noted, on the increasing of costs for water and sewerage services and the
cost of laterals.- the public comment to the Council that the costs would be increased as of JUly 1st was!
dealing with the billing for the water and sewerage charges as the other billing had already gone out ,and
that the charges would.start July 1st - any calls made to the Works Department with regard to laterals
were given at the new charge effective June 7th, 1976 and there have been a number of applications made by
individuals at the new rates and the individuals have subsequently paid for them at the new rates -
however, there is also a number of individuals in the Myles Drive, Josselyn Road area that have not wanted I
to pay the increased rates and have refused to make payments and, subsequently, there is a pet'i tion before
Council. He stated that the only comment is that we have been dealing with the by-law - at least staff
has been, as far as the cost of laterals is very expensive and we have not been recouping our costs well,
over the past year and, certainly, even now at $200.00 this is what he considers a nominal fee' and should.
the fee not be carried at $200.00 but at $100.00 certainly the cost is going to have to be borne by
somebody else or by the Department. He stated that on confirmation from Mr. Park, the new billing for ,
water and sewerage rates is effective July 1st - however, the new by-law has been signed on June 7th; with
regard to effective dates for new rates, the billing for flat charges, et cetera, would go out; effective:
July 1st and would take effect them - however, the signing of the by-law did not, nor did the comments,
deal with the cost of sewer laterals. Speaking only with regard to the rates, Councillor M. Vincent asked
,
what is the effective date of the new rates, as Mr. MacKinnon understands it, or as 1m,. Park understands
it, whoever wants to answer the question. Mr. MacKinnon advised.that the by-law does not deal'with
the new billing - it merely says that the by-law is in effect on June 7th, 1976 - however, he believes
that the comment from Mr. Park was that the other billing had already gone out and that the next billing
would be July 1st. The Mayor pointed out that the question is the date that the $200.00 fee became .
effective. Mr. Park replied that the date on which the by-law was authorized would be the date of change'
in the fee but at that particular time the billing was under way and it takes a period of time: to complete
the billing and in order to treat all areas alike with the billing partly done at June 7th buti.partly not'
completed we completed the billing then under way at the old rate so that the new rates will be applicable
for water and sewer billings made after July 1st. Councillor M. Vincent asked when the new metered rate :
becomes effective to those people on the metered rate, both in terms of the June 7th third reading of the'
by-law and the July 1st deadline, and also, that of a flat rate. Mr. Park replied that water ~nd sewer i
rates at the flat rate billed from July 1st onwards will be at the new rate; meter rates that are billed
from July 1st onwards will be at the new rate. Councillor M. Vincent asked if there is anybody on either
system that pays the new rate prior to July 1st. Mr. Park stated there is not, for water and sewer rates I
because the billings will be taking place after July 1st and that is when the new rates will, in fact, be'
going into effect. The Mayor pointed out that the Council members were told, and they are not"clear on I
it, that those on a flat rate pay in advance and those on a meter pay for the usage. Mr. Park' stated that
that is correct. Councillor M. Vincent pointed out that in that case, there would be people wpo would be,
paying the rate increases prior to July 1st even though they might not get their bill by that date. Mr.'
Park replied that they would not be paying before they receive a bill; he added that it is partly true
that the bill would be billed from a period of time prior to July 1st, in the case of meter consumption.
Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Adler if there were any hook-ups made last fall that: were not I
paid for under the $100.00 fee. Mr. Adler replied that he does not believe there were any hook-ups made
last fall. Councillor M. Vincent asked for Mr. Adler's comment on Mr. MacKinnon's explanation' regarding ,
the matter of refusal to accept any money last fall by the Works Department. Mr. Adler stated'that he cah
only speak from his own personal experience in that regard, and he approached the Works Department and
offered to pay the $100.00 connection fee - it was explained to him that they had been instructed not to
accept any further applications and that he should keep his $100.00 and bring it in next year _ that is
basjcally what was said. He stated that he accepted that fact that he could not accept his application
and he felt from that remark that he could not accept his $100.00 - he stated that in business: practice,
unless he has an account to credit $100.00 to he cannot accept $100.00 either - this is, of course, what i
he assumed the Works employee was telling him. He stated that June 7th was mentioned as an effective date
for this change, and he knows for a fact that there is a number of residents who more from good luck than ...
good management found their way in to the Works Department at City Hall and paid their $100.00: connection!
fee and their application on June lOth, lIth and 14th and the $100.00 fee was accepted as late' as June,
14th; on June lOth, one particular neighbour after paying his $100.00 fee returned to the sub-division and
informed all the residents there that effective July 1st - and he was told this at City Hall in the Works:
\
~
,....
,
531
.
I
I
.
:}),L I1d/.?r
/I161/t!?5
'S6Sb-~/V.
SeWeJ'>
~Pl'll'lec-t-/t7h
-Ae
/lc~in5 c~
iliff'"
6l!y~~~
I s.x/(~
,(,,;,/1,,( &p?/7?
.
LCJhL aNh1
I
Sdl'lL ~e ~
/ll7l'/ex p/1tJ,P-
eJ~h o/' tJ.
.tV4~he
,(~/~
s,;;z//~~
~
Department when he paid his $100.00 fee - the rate was increasing from $100.00 to $200.00; these residents
therefore, including himself, made up their minds to pay their fee before the increased rate and for that reason
he went to the Works Department on June 22nd to pay his fee before July 1st - so, he does not feel they were
notified properly.
Councillor Gould felt that the problem before the Council in this matter is that, technically, the new
rate comes into effect June 7th, the date the by-law was enacted because there is no reference as to when the new
rates will come into effect, but for billing purposes, it comes into effect another date, and that either the
City will have to go back and collect another $100.00 from those residents of the sub-division whose $100.00 fee
payments were accepted on June lOth, 11th and 14th, or the City will have to make the remaining residents of that
sub-division pay just the $100.00. Councillor Kipping felt that it should not be taken for granted that there
will be a bill for another $100.00, and stated that it seems to him that most governments have to signal very
strongly and clearly their increases in rates, particularly for a utility - he felt that there really was not a
lot of signal in this particular matter, but, rather it was a mistaken signal because the signal was that every-
thing was going to change on July 1st - but everything did not change on that date - some things changed on June
7th, the date that the by-law was passed, and it seems to him, as much as he hates to see the City lose revenue,
and all the.rest of it, and as much as he is very well aware that we have been falling behind in the sewer rates
and in no way do they pay their way, nevertheless he thinks that in a case like this we should reassess what has
happened; he added that it is not a large item to the City, but it is a big item to an ordinary citizen who has
to pay ~200.00 instead of $100.00 - and he believes that this is the kind of thing we should do - we should
reassess this whole business because the publicity was July 1st, everything pointed to July 1st and all the media
comment was upon the City to correct a very poor public relations problem - he believes that the City has a
responsibility, here. Councilor Gould stated that his concern now, if Councillor Kipping suggests July 1st is
that there may be a lot of other people just like this and the matter might "snow-ball" and it will get all out
of control, and he felt that he cannot go along with that in any way, because it has too many repercussions with
too many other people.
working
Sunday.
wording
Councillor Cave advised he received calls complaining about a contractor putting a building up and
on Sunday. He asked if there is a by-law in this city which says that a developer shall not work on
Mr. Rodgers replied that there is no by-law restricting it, and he would have to examine the exact
of the Lord's Day Act to see if it applies in that case.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that in view of the fact that the Common Council has been
advised that money was taken for the $100.00 sewer connection fee after the date of June 7th, 1976 (the date the
fee increased to $200.00 under the Water and Sewerage By-Law enactment date), on the dates June lOth, 11th and
14th last, the matter be referred to the Acting City Manager and the City Solicitor.
Copies of the letter dated June 28th, 1976, signed by Mr. J. D. MacCallum, Q. C., Chairman of the Saint
John Housing Commission, on all the circumstances with regard to the development proposals for the City-owned
Annex property on Sand Cove Road, which report was asked for by the Common Council on June 21st last, were
distributed to the Council members at this time.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above noted letter be placed on the agenda.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
It was noted that on May 25th, 1976 the Council asked the Land Committee and City staff to make an
appraisal of the above mentioned property and to report back to Council, and that the resulting report from the
Land Committee is on the agenda of this meeting, in legal session. Mr. Rodgers was asked for his opinion on
bringing that report out to open session of Council at this time, and he stated that there is nothing legal about
that report, that he is aware of.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the above noted report from the Land Committee be taken
from legal session and brought to open session of Council at this time.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, the City-owned
land on Sand Cove Road, known as the Annex Property (comprising approximately 3.04 acres of land and buildings)
be sold for the appraised value of $54,000.00 and that the purchasers be informed of the Fire Marshal's Order
dated July 9th, 1976 (correct date is June 9th, 1976) requiring the demolition or rehabilitation of the buildings
on this property by July 30th, 1976.
Councillor MacGowan advised that she was concerned about this, because the Land Committee always makes
recommendations to Council to whom and for what use the land is being sold. Councillor Davis reminded here that
it was not the Land Committee's mandate to do that. Councillor MacGowan expressed the view that this should be
decided ahead of time, and stated that she thought the Land Committee's report should have stated what the
Committee feels is the best use of the land of the three expressions of interest that the Saint John Housing
Commission received.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay" and stating that she
feels this is putting "the cart before the horse", that we do not know for what use and we do not have anything
settled.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the City-owned property on Sand Cove Road, known as the
Annex Property (comprising approximately 3.04 acres of land and buildings) be sold to The Church of The Nazarene
providing that within twenty-four hours the said Church delivers a certified cheque to the City of Saint John for
the sum of $54,000.00 to be given to the Legal Department in trust pending turning over the deed with no en-
cumbrances (no taxes, et cetera) for the said property:
AND FURTHER that all correspondence regarding the above matter, including the report submitted at this
meeting, and dated June 28th, 1976, from the Saint John Housing Commission on all the circumstances with regard
538
.
~
S'.;r /Is~. C 0YlI".m.
S<rJ?LCPpe ~
/lnl?~X 'p/OPp
CJuI'>Ch of -6he
/Y412;/N'ne
,,(.;Jh4-H'//
ooP?~~{')1"
/IolPes~..fe
P{a.l'1/
RG15$t:!'.I" ~ks
A".-&L
to the development proposals for this property, which report was asked for at the June 21st last meeting;
,
of Common Council -- be received and filed.
I
Councillor Kipping pointed out that the Saint John Housing Commission has advised that the
proposal of The Church of The Nazarene was received late, after the closing date of March 31st:, 1976 for
receiving proposals, and he referred to the above named letter of June 28th, 1976 from the Commission
Chairman in this regard, which states that the Commission at its meeting of April 26th last resolved that
the said Church be advised that their proposal was received after the March 31st deadline and that it had
been turned over to the sub-committee on housing development. He stated that it would appear that the
sub-committee on housing development which he presumes is a sub-committee of the Saint John Housing
Commission, acted improperly in dealing with the Church of The Nazarene's proposal at all because of the
timing - he noted that we are usually very fussy about timing on tenders and on proposals and .~bout ,
closing dates, and well we should be, and he stated that he has no particular interest in either of these
three proposals except to the extent that we really should follow a decent procedure here and be con-
sistent about it. He stated that he does not know what to do about this whole mess - all he can is that
it is a terrible mess - people apparently have been misled, either deliberately or just through sort of
bumbling - they have been misled into thinking that their proposals were being considered and,' at the same
time, other action was being taken. He stated that it is the worst administrative jumble he has seen in a
long time. He felt that it is a problem of poor staff work - not necessarily of City staff, b~t of the
staff of the Commission, or the members of the Commission, and poor administration, and we are. in a
"box" - now, what do we do about it, he asked. He stated that he does not think that we can legitimately
support the motion that is on the floor until we have a thorough-going discussion and an explanation to
the other two parties concerned. Councillor Gould pointed out that the said June 28th report ,says that
neither of the two proposals that were received within the March 31st deadline were acceptable" so it was
obvious that we were not going to have anything done there, anyway, so the Commission looked at a proposal
that was a few days late - and he finds no argument in that.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Kipping voting "nay", on principle.
Councillor Davis stated that he would like to add an item on the agenda of this meeting con-
cerning the sanitary landfill compactor.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED
pactor be added to the agenda of this meeting.
that the item regarding the sanitary landfill com_
~i
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the City of Saint John purchase the s~nitary
landfill compactor that was discussed at the June 21st last meeting of the Common Council, the most
advantageous way.
Councillor Gould asked that Councillor Davis explain "the most advantageous way". CoUncillor
Davis replied that if he knew it, he would explain it. Councillor Kipping stated that he, too, feels it I
should be explained because we are deviating once again from the standard practice - Councillor M. Vince~t
,
brought it up last time and he is quite correct - and when we deviate from the standard practi~e there
should be an explanation. Councillor Davis explained that he suggested at the last Council me~ting that
we should try to discuss with the Pension Board the possibility of that Board purchasing equipment and
leasing it back to the City until such time as the City wishes to purchase the lease. He stated that he
thinks this should be seriously considered under the present circumstances for the City only and for
equipment that we feel is essential. He added that he is not so sure that this can be done but he feels.
I
that it should be done and it would be to the advantage of both the City and the Pension Fund., Councillor,
A. Vincent added: at over-draft interest, not four cent. Councillor Davis agreed with this observation.
Councillor Kipping stated that this is all very well for the City and our financial position, which is
,
fine, but he asked what it means to the supplier of the equipment. He stated that what it means to the
suppliers of equipment is that they cannot deal in the same way all the time with the City, and that is
why he says we are deviating from the standard practice. He stated that he was surprised that, Councillors
Gould and A. Vincent are agreeing to readily with this proposal because they are usually the ones who
stand up, and rightly so, for tendering procedures - and he agrees with them when they stand up for normal
and consistent tendering procedures - he feels that we have to stick to such procedures very carefully.
He noted that we are now deviating from the tendering procedures once again and without sufficient ex~
planation except to say that it is to the City's advantage. He felt that it is fine that it i~ to the
City's advantage, but he pointed out that it is to the suppliers' extreme disadvantage and, he, would
think, a certain amount of disillusionment. The Mayor stated that he was speaking on this mat~er today
with staff, and the way it should be tendered would mean they could do two things - first, they could.take
the specifications that that machine is written under and they put them up for tender and that: would be
the only machine that would be qualified to meet the requirements. Councillor Kipping interjected that
that is wrong specification writing. The Mayor continued his explanation, stating that the second al-
ternative is that it is the only machine that is now available within the delivery time that w~ required.
Councillor Kipping stated that you can write specifications in that way - he knows this, and he has seen
it done, but it is not honest to write specifications in that way - specifications are suppose~ to be
general enough that any company can bid if they have a machine that comes anywhere close to it' - but
specifications can be written, and he has seen it done, so specifically that nobody can get in, there
except one supplier, and that is absolutely dishonest. The Mayor stated that he agrees with Councillor
Kipping, but the information he has just given is what he has been told is the way it can be done. He
added that the Works Department is putting this information straightforward as a machine that is available
on the job ready to purchase, and that if it were a dishonest procedure, he would be the first. to yell.
Councillor Kipping stated that he is in sympathy with the fact that the machine is on the job and that we
need it, and he has been hollering for that dump to be properly handled for a good many years, but when we
get to the point where we use the writing of specifications as an excuse for not doing something cor-
rectly - the calling of tenders correctly - and the writing of specifications in a way which is not
correct and not acceptable in the business, then it is another question, and we should watch ourselves on
this kind of thing. He stated that he cannot vote for this, the way it is put. In reply to Councillor
Kipping's remarks, Councillor Davis stated that he cannot accept that - and that he cannot go ~hrough this
with the suspicion that he is being foolish or dishonest or doing the wrong thing. Councillor 'Kipping
stated that ,he was not referring to Councillor Davis - whoever recommended it. Councillor Davis pointed
out that we have two machines and the difference in price between them amounts to about $200.00 on an
$80,000.00 machine; one has been tried and is being used and is ideal, and he asked: why bother looking
for trouble? He added that the said machine is here, we are using it, we are compacting with it - it is
working - there are lots of other machines and they are all different - and there might be another one
that is just as good but we need it, we have got it - there is no saving. Councillor Kipping replied that
he agrees with that, but you are going to get the legalistic interpretation of the whole thing" saying
that we did not do it properly - that is what was coming up here last week - that is what Councillor M.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
.
t'Phm/~
t9t7M&n
&!J'7PVtP ~
I
C'ph7,ffl'~e
W-?p/e
LEG A L
I ~'-tH 5P;;el-
./ .,!.t))"
ep~~hft<!!"e
~P/e
TIf,;3P!en
Re.;;?/ty ~-t-.
$<<b-~/'y,
19 ffNt' hi/!?
.
I
.
I
i/.;J,.bpuJ"t//
Sub:"'~1II.
S~tJt'N-
I C'(/$~-~r/
C't?//ect-IN'I
~<< /lead
/apPI1
f4xen GNt!'1r
~_#
Sew~e
s!/$e.m
,(am:( UAlPt.
.RJcA'~$.fd'r
:un .aMa
IY. :B. 1I:5H,t$,.p
n 1_ -./ the
rtl7<Ui1ve 'pm
.....
r
539
Vincent mentioned. The Mayor recalled that he himself b~ought it up, too. Councillor Kipping agreed,
that the Mayor felt we were not proceeding in a correct manner. He added that we really are not, even
what the Mayor says is true - that we have an advantage in doing it the way we are going to do it. He
that we are not doing it strictly correctly, and that is what we get criticised for.
recalling
though
stated
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Kipping and M. Vincent voting "nay".
Councillor M. Vincent recalled that recently the Mayor appointed a Committee to deal with the residents
of Golden Grove Road, to fix the road, and he noted that the four Council members who were appointed to that
committee were not given any directions as to what they are to do. The Mayor advised that the said committee is
to call a meeting and get started. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the committee has the Mayor's permission to
proceed to do that. The Mayor gave affirmative reply.
Councillor A. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.
Following a session in Committee of the Whole, the Committee arose and the Mayor resumed the Chair, in
legal session of Common Council.
Consideration was given to the letter dated June 25th, 1976 from the City Solicitor in regard to the
discussion that.took place on May 31st, 1976 in Committee of the Whole between the Council and the City Manager
with respect to the 1968 Subdivision Agreement between Traders Realty Limited and the City of Saint John, at
which time the City Solicitor was asked for an opinion as to the City's legal obligations as they exist today and
future development. The letter states that having examined the agreement and other related correspondence, it is
his opinion that the City should argue that it is not legally obligated to continue the 1968 cost sharing ar-
rangements in subsequent development phases; and further advising that an argument that is available is that the
agreement, as it relates to subsequent phases, was merely stating the general intention of the parties without
becoming legally bound to any particular development phase - for example, paragraph 4 of Section C of the agree-
ment clearly indicates that the developer's intention was to schedule development so that it would be governed by
the economic conditions prevailing from time to time, and "that nothing herein shall impose an obligation on the
developer to develop the said lands within any particular period of time". The letter states that on the basis
that the time period for the development of subsequent phases is so indefinite, it is his opinion that the City
is not obligated to proceed in 1976, on the basis of a 1968 cost sharing arrangement as outlined in the agree-
ment, and that, however, he believes representatives of the City should meet as soon as possible with the develop-
er to discuss this matter in the light of present day conditions and City policy that presently exists.
Mr. Rodgers pointed out that the City Manager was recommending in Committee of the Whole on May 31st
last that the City attempt to negotiate out of the contract, and that in his opinion, where the City has no legal
obligation, there is nothing to negotiate out, and that the next step is that the City Manager or his designate
should be discussing with them what the present-day policy is with respect to that sort of development - in other
words, the City cannot very well say to this developer that it is developing too fast for the City and the City
does not have the money to put into that development, but then, next week, enter into another sub-division agreemen'
with some other development for cost-sharing - in other words, if you have the money to enter into an agreement
with developer "X" next week, you will not succeed very far by saying to this developer that we do not have the
money to go with cost-sharing under that 1968 sub-division agreement. He stated that he thinks it is important
to not admit any liability under the contract with respect to subsequent phases but discuss with them the 1976
policy with respect to cost-sharing so that you are treating everyone the same. He added that his letter to
Council is for information, and for guidance to staff when they start negotiating. Councillor Davis noted that
there is more involved than just this - there is a sewerage system that has to go in and they were talking about
taking it around the road and they want to contribute this so that they do not have to go up through their
property. Mr. MacKinnon noted that this was a separate item, and he thinks that what was brought in was actually
a matter of whether or not we should share in the costs, not in the development of the sub-division, but in the
development of the main going from the sub-division to Hazen Creek area, and arising out of that discussion was
the question as to whether or not there was any legal liability to participate in the future development of the
sub-division at all. He stated he thinks Mr. Barfoot had mentioned that as a basis of the negotiation that we
might negotiate out of any further responsibility in the development, and he noted that what the City Solicitor's
letter says is that we may not be responsible for any further costs in the development, anyway - however, that
still does not necessarily answer the question as to whether or not we should discuss with them the cost-sharing
for the sewage main, and he thinks that was the question that we were actually entertaining. He stated he thinks
it is still a viable thing that it should be something that we can get involved in. Mr. Rodgers pointed out that
his opinion deals with general future liability - in other words, there is a large area of land involved and in
no way can we say we are committed to, say, for the next twenty years on the development; in other words, the
opinion has to be given that we are either committed or we are not, and if we are committed today then he does
not know much is left to be developed. Noting that there are 350 acres to begin, and that it would be another
300 or 400 homes, Mr. MacKinnon asked if the City Solicitor's comment is in regard to servicing in the sub-
division and not the cost-sharing of a main. Mr. Rodgers made affirmative reply. Mr. MacKinnon asked, as some
direction, is the Council still suggesting that the staff continue to negotiate with this group for the inst-
allation of the main sewer down, and also indicate to them that the City is not participating further in services
(paving, lights, et cetera). The Mayor made affirmative reply. Mr. MacKinnon, in reply to Councillor M. Vincent's
query, advised that the lagoon that is presently there, is not capable of handling the houses that are there now.
Councillor Davis pointed out that a decision has to be made to service those lots, and stated that he thinks the
Council should make a decision.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the City staff inform the developers of the Harbourview Sub-
division of the fact that the City no longer cost-shares by fifty per cent on services, but that the City will
negotiate with them on the proposed collector sewer from the present location at the Red Head lagoon back to the
existing sewage system at Hazen Creek lagoon.
Councillors Hodges and Parfitt withdrew from the meeting.
Councillor Davis advised that tomorrow morning, the Land Committee is going to view the McAllister
Drive area because there is a problem: New Brunswick Housing Corporation says that it is already to go ahead with
the Andave property, et cetera, and wants to know why the Land Committee is always holding the Corporation up on
everything it tries to do. He stated that the second problem is that Mr. Arthur Irving says that nobody should
be that close to a refinery, particularly the biggest refinery in Canada; the third problem is that Mr. Slattery
has come in to the Planning Advisory Committee with a housing project on the alternate route for McAllister
Drive -- so, for all these reasons, the Committee felt it should have an on-site look and then it will have a
helicopter inspection of the area, if necessary. He invited any Councillors who wished to do so, to accompany
the Land Committee on this inspection tour, and to give any in-put they wish to make.
Mr. Park advised that the Director of Personnel and Training was to proceed tomorrow to Fredericton for
discussions on the employment of a labour relations consultant. He recalled that the Mayor had asked that
540
~
~~~eo~~ ~~~ Mr. French do so, and he added that the meeting
co~~~I't<~~ officers of The Cities of New Brunswick, on the
C'/~/es of IY-~
~C1J'N" p%l;'~
p?e~~ UtU'ecU€
Pde.l"EC;..;z~
The Mayor stated he wished to point
~ I? a~h~/ valid and binding on the corporation by their
O~/o.?&' expressed; the Council must give a collective
v~I/A( ~/S/'I1~ ust take the form of a by-law or resolution.
P"~t!'~ I'€~
LEG A L
JPhn~ 76:ko7'
/(1)I?Ht!'k&i'$/s
..znrdh)e~
,( TAt.
:!l,;,;, /loc'Jo'd
S<<b-L/v.
$,d;-~/y. _
OQ$~-6~'/~
PQ//cy
$tdL/ris/on
.1Jo7'-./""'""
a..m.....,/~ter ~t1/e
C'o~hd //D,. t:t'44
C'e>una/llJ/et!'-//
:Bf/-,(';uv
is being held he believes with other administrative
proposal advanced by Mr. Peter Grady.
.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~'e"^
I
I
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday,
of July, A. D. 1976, at 6.30 o'clock p.m.
th~ fifth day
,
I
I
I
I
.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
,
I
Read a letter from Mr. John G. Riley, Barrister, on behalf of Kennebecasis Investments Ltd.
regarding Phase 3, Stage 1 of the Bon Accord Sub-division which the said company has been nego~iating with
the City in regard to the required subdivision agreement, advising that their negotiations with the City
at present are at a standstill because of an indicated freeze on cost sharing with the develop~r, and that
the basis of developing this phase of the subdivision was under the understanding that the CitY would
participate in the cost sharing. The letter notes that the company has been negotiating for approximately
one year on this phase of the subdivision and at no time were they advised that the City would not par-
ticipate, and upon that premise the expenditures referred to in the letter were incurred. The letter
requests that Council approve cost sharing in this matter and enter into a subdivision agreemint as time
is of the essence. 1
Councillors Cave, Davis, Green, Gould, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. R. Park,
J. C. MacKinnon,
Assistant to the
Acting City
Commissioner
City Manager
Manager, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor,
of Engineering and Works, and H. Ellis,
I
,
,
Mr. Park outlined the discussion held to date by City staff as a result of Council'i directive
regarding the proposed change in the City's cost-sharing policy with regard to the servicing df subdivisions,
and advised of advertising that is to be inserted in the local newspaper requesting written cokments from
I
developers in this regard, which written comments must be received by July 30th. The City So~icitor noted
that any change in the City's cost-sharing policy will require an amendment to the SubdivisioJ By-Law.
Considerable discussion ensued on the proposed change in the City's cost-sharing policy and n~ decision
was made on the particular request contained in the above noted letter from Mr. John G. Riley,1 Barrister,
on behalf of Kennebecasis Investments Ltd. I
I
Following the legal session of Common Council, the Council proceeded to the Council iChamber for
open session of Common Council at 7.00 o'clock p.m., when there were present Mayor Flewwelling, Councillors
Cave, Davis, Green, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M.I Vincent and
Messrs. R. Park, Acting City Manager, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commisstoner of
Engineering and Works, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community
Planning and Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector, R. Thompson, Chief of Rehabilitation Services of
the Community Planning and Development Department, E. Ferguson, Chief of Police, and A. W. C. ;Robertson,
Deputy Fire Chief. ,i
I
The meeting opened with silent prayer. I
I
The Mayor noted that an article in the local newspaper following the last Council m~eting
erroneously reported that Councillor Gould did not attend a Committee of the Whole session fo]lowing the
said Council meeting, when in fact Councillor Gould was present. :
I
I
The Mayor advised that his report in detail concerning his proposed motion submitted at the last
Council meeting to establish a committee to carry out the developing of a five-year plan in conjunction
ith the Comprehensive Community Plan is being held in abeyance pending input from City staff ,land could
ossibly be considered at the next meeting. I
I
Common Council cannot make a decision
separately, although un~nimously
,
not as individuals - such assent
,
I
I
The Mayor advised that he would like to bring to Council's attention the following excerpt from
he by-law respecting the regulation of the procedure of Common Council meetings, which was adopted under
authority of the Municipalities Act 1966 and amendments thereto, namely,- "DECORUM - By Common Council
embers. While the Common Council is in session, the members must preserve order and decorum,1 and a
I
i
I
I
.
I
I
out that the members of
assent individually and
judgement as a body and
.
~
,..-
.
It!;t!f /)f.9p.
$fQb-cLil/.
~"t?tf'h?t9l?-t-
:lJes-t- ZJu /1cIt?;
,U,t.
~I"" PJ?
e~<<J'1Cj,
I
/ldiJ?fft::.t.9"
/IJ tjJ".
. SI/'!lu/;J6,J?
G~I7-t-
Q/fllte I1v,.
st.:Jn"?~
,11117.,1fHh.
/In'Cl//-rS
I
7e~A"t?.I'S
-=ilee~d
.G~"'h k;"ce
{pji-,{
khCf?
.A"IYt?/I~ ~
/7~1?o&>>eSil~
#r;(e.4/;..te S-t-.
/!eel". .sITt?
'7e/?bl"s . ./
. "';>~F.<&
~M
h;l.;>~.I>/.,;>~
(/llJ?e~ .
See ~k
I
I
541
member shall neither, by conversations or otherwise, delay or interrupt the proceedings or refuse to obey the
orders of the Common Councilor its Presiding Officer, except as otherwise herein provided. ENFORCEMENT OF
DECORUM - If any member uses insulting or tmproper lang~age to the~e~td~g @ff~eror any me~ters ana refuses
to apologize or withdraw his remarks when sO directed by the Presiding Officer, or wilfully obstructs the conduct
of business, and refuses to desist when called upon to do so by the Presiding Officer he may be ordered by
the Presiding Officer to leave the Common Council Chamber for that meeting, and, if he refuses so to do, he may,
on the order of the Presiding Officer, be removed; and on making an apology to the Presiding Officer and to any
member insulted by him, may by a majority vote of the Common Council be permitted to resume his place at such
meeting.". The Mayor stated that this action he intends to carry out in the future and he trusts he will have
the support of Common Council in this regard.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated June 17th, 1976,
advising that Best Builders Limited, represented by Mr. Gordon Church, is developing the remaining portion of
Meadowbank Avenue and Bullock Street which will involve the construction of approximately 800 feet of street and
services, thereby making fourteen lots available for single family homes, and that according to the City's sub-
division policy, the City will be responsible for the following costs:- (1) water materials $9,350.00; (2)
sanitary sewer materials $3,700.00; (3) storm sewer materials $10,200.00 -- making a total of $23,250.00 -- and
recommending that the above expenditures be approved for water and sewerage materials to be charged to the 1976
Capital Budgets, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the sub-division agreement in due
course -- be laid on the table.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that
on December 30th, 1975 the City made application through the Department of Municipal Affairs for a Stimulation
Grant and the following projects were given as the City's priorities: (1) New Fire Station and Headquarters
$550,000.00; (2) Willie Avenue Standpipe $275,000.00; (3) Wellesley Avenue Storm Sewer $180,000.00; (4) Shamrock
Park Fieldhouse $200,000.00; and that the City has been informed today by the Minister of Municipal Affairs that
a grant has been approved for the City of Saint John in the amount of $125,000.00, and that plans and specification
for the City's project must now be submitted to his Department and it therefore appears that the choice of a
project has been left to the City with the allotted amount of $125,000.00; and further advising that in dis-
cussions with the Commissioner of Finance and the Commissioner of Works, it appears that the project most suit-
able at this time, and in light of the amount approved, would be the Willie Avenue Standpipe, and it is therefore
recommended to Common Council that the Minister of Municipal Affairs be informed that this is the project of the
City's choice and that plans will be submitted in due course, be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
Discussion ensued with regard to the matter of the amount of the Stimulation Grants given by the
Province, and on the actual costs of the said Willie Avenue standpipe.
Councillor Pye voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, the following
bids of Eastern Fence Co. Ltd. be accepted for supplying and installing chain link fencing at the following
locations:- Lowell Street Arena $13,643.26; 175 Rothesay Avenue $8,600.26; Recreation - Adelaide Street $4,783.04,
funds having been provided in the capital budget for these projects.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, tenders be
awarded for supplying water and sewerage materials from July 1st to December 31st, 1976, as shown on the sub-
mitted bid summary.
Considerable discussion took place regarding the awarding of the above tenders, and Councillor A.
Vincent pointed out three instances where a local firm was only slightly higher in their bid as compared to a
Halifax firm. Councillor MacGowan stated she believes a previous resolution of Council stated that local bidders
would be considered provided they were within a certain percentage of an outside firm, and she feels that Council
resolution should be looked into. In explaining the staff's findings on studying the said tenders, Mr. MacKinnon
advised that the City staff as a rule recommends the lowest tenders, and that it is the prerogative of Council if
it wishes to accept local suppliers provided they are within a certain percentage of outside suppliers. Several
Council members expressed the view that local suppliers should be given consideration in the awarding of tenders,
and Councillor Davis outlined the recommendations which were adopted by Council as a result of a committee
studying the entire tendering procedure a few years ago, and noted that it was arbitrarily decided at that time
that Council can award to local suppliers, however, the staff cannot recommend other than the low tenders,
provided all specifications are met. It was suggested that in future the staff might consider using three
asterisks to note an item where the local supplier is relatively close to the price of other firms, in order that
the Council can make a decision as to the awarding of such tenders. In reply to a query from Councillor M.
Vincent, Mr. MacKinnon stated that all the tenders listed meet the City's specifications, however, the experience
of staff with the firm recommended in this instance has been very good as far as supply and availability of
materials.
Moved in amendment by Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, tenders be awarded
for supplying water and sewerage materials from July 1st to December 31st, 1976, as shown on the submitted bid
summary, with the exception of the supplying of 18-inch and 21-inch gasket type reinforced concrete pipe and 4-
inch off 10-inch P.V.C. Saddles, which are to be awarded to Jos. A. Likely Ltd.
.7P :U'1./iK6'&
~'6t.
(.( fla - see
d~e P/fdiDl1 present
.
~ht?h&
"eptJPr
~
Question being taken, the amendment to the motion was lost with a majority of the Council members
voting "nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors A. Vincent and Green voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report for May of the Division of Technical and Inspec~ion
I ')
54,;;"
;?f,~/y 1'9t?""
/l1J1J1Wi/ ;;p~
hne.2J~
~';U" ..73f?o/r
/l17J?Udl/ If~
.K''1 euj; /17t!"nt"
/975"
s.. -;T~:?/o~/
.H'&>.:;//7!~ /
:Bee/7eV""'!?
.zn$/'~pr
73u//~.~t1
,Pt!'r/J?/~
Services, including Plumbing, be received and filed.
I
,
I
,
,
i
Departmentl' be received
I
I
,
I
I
Department be re-
I
!
On motion of Councillor Gould
and filed.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report for May of the Fire
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the 1975 annual report of the Fire
ceived and filed.
,
Councillor A. Vincent asked when action will be taken on the Council resolution which asked
staff to have the annual reports of the various civic departments incorporated in an annual year book for
the City. The Mayor ,stated that we will check into that resolution. In reply to a query from Councillor
MacGowan, Deputy Chief Robertson advised that the two firemen who were reported as off-duty in the above
annual report have now returned to duty.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Annual Equipment
the Commissioner of Engineering and Works, be received and filed.
Report for 1975 as
,
prepared by
I
,
,
i
Read a letter from Mr. A. R. Ellis, Building Inspector, with regard to the issuance :of a building
permit for the erection of the new Saint John Regional Hospital, which was questioned at the ~ast Council
meeting, advising that Mr. R. Beattie Ramsay of Zeidler Partnership/Architects, made written application
to locate a construction trailer on May 29th, 1975 and permission was granted on June 20th, 1975; that on
June 25th, 1975 Mr. Ramsay visited the Building Inspector's office to discuss the procedure involved in
obtaining a building permit, and how the Building Inspector would like it handled and at that ~ime they
came to an agreement that Mr. Ramsay, as Project Manager, would apply for and obtain all permits instead
of each individual contractor; that on August 24th, 1975 plans were received for excavation and foundation,
,
which were forwarded to the City Engineer's Department for their comments and on August 26th ,'1975 ap_
, .
plication was received along with a letter containing the breakdown of contract costs for different items,
a copy of which is enclosed for Council's information. The letter further advised that this bJilding
permit was processed through the various departments for approvals and a purchase order recei~ed from
Z.R.V. Holdings Ltd., which was forwarded to Fredericton and payment was subsequently receivea on December
3rd, 1975 in the amount of $11,800.00, a copy of such building permit issued at that time is ~ubmitted for
Council's information and covers the first phase of development of the hospital and clearly st'ates for
"excavation and foundation only" which was inserted only to point out that further applicatiods for
,
additional permits must be applied for. The letter states that according to Mr. Ramsay they have used
approximately three million dollars of this permit and have ample leeway to carryon the proj~ct under the
present permit until the additional permit is issued; and advising that on June 25th, 1976 Mr., Ramsay
contacted the Building Inspector in this regard and informed him he would have the applicatiori, and plans
for the next phase of the project this week, ~nd on June 29th the plans were received, and du~ing further
conversation with Mr. Ramsay, he informed the Building Inspector he was proceeding to Fredericton to have
the purchase order approved, which it is understood is being done - the application is being ~ade for an
additional permit to the value of approximately eight million dollars which will net the City :a fee of
$35,000.00 - this will not be the final permit as additional permits will be required as work ;proceeds.
The letter notes that the co-operation of Mr. Ramsay and his company has been excellent; they 'supply the
Department with weekly and monthly tests of all materials, and these reports are examined and filed for
future reference.
i
The above letter from Mr. Ellis brings to the attention of Council that the proced~e of issuing
permits on a progressive, or first, second and third phase is, and has been carried out with Rocca Con-
struction, Trizec Corporation, Irving Refinery, and other large complexes, sub-division develdpments and
contractors, and it is sometimes impossible to hold up a large development until the entire p]ans are
completed - in other words, these projcts could be held up from three to five years before they could get
started. The letter concludes by submitting the following recommendations: (1) the Saint John Building
By-Law be amended to read: The City Building Inspector be authorized to issue progressive, or ifirst,
second and third phase permits for the construction of projects when he feels it is necessary ,~, and after
all approvals have been obtained from the various departments involved; (2) that the Common Council give
immediate consideration to securing a Deputy Building Inspector (as previously recommended), t'o carry out
the inspections on these large projects and assist the Building Inspector in his numerous dut~es; (3) that
the 1975 National Building Code be finalized for adoption, as presented to the Common Council Ion November
lOth, 1975, without the two amendments as recommended by the Building Inspector and Fire Chief, as it
appears to be the opinion they are already included in the code and are not necessary as an amendment.
Enclosed with the said letter was a copy of a letter received from Mr. Ramsay, dated June 29tti, 1976,
together with a copy of a building permit, also received by the Building Inspector's office ttiis date, for
Council's information. j
,
,
I
i
,
j
report from the Building Inspector with
the new Saint John Regional H~spital, be
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the above
of a building permit for the erection of
regard to the issuance
received and filed.
In reply to a query from Councillor Kipping, IJr. Ellis advised that there was a valtd building
permit in effect at the time of the last Council meeting, and Councillor Kipping suggested thdt the
Counci~lor who made the allegations regarding this matter at the last Council meeting should apologize to
the contractors involved. Following further questioning of Mr. Ellis by Councillor Kipping in 11'thiS regard,
Councillors Hodges and Cave suggested that there be no further discussion in this regard. ,
I
I
I
I
'7J 7l. Seconded by Councillor Gould ,
~~;I'~/~ ~ RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Building Inspec~or that the
be-{ '~' Saint John Building By-Law be amended to read: "The City Building Inspector be authorized to issue pro~
I/e /~~'l(\greSSiVe, or first, second and third phase permits for the construction of projects when he f~els it is
;:>.e"...,,/Es(J'A ) necessary, and after all approvals have been obtained from the various departments involved", lbe referred
L~R/ ~_ to the Legal Department. 'j
~2f~~~~/'~o~ Councillor Davis noted that it is his view that a building permit which is issued fbr foundation
I
.-'
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...
54:1
.
2Jed/tL::;
z;,~ 'O/'
~, ~/t€tf.
J..nd~tYr
/ld/l?5 c;'-t;
1?J.1 r.
I
only does not give authority to the contractor for the erection of steel, and he feels this should also be looked
into by the Legal Department.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Building Inspector that the
Common Council give immediate consideration to securing a Deputy Building Inspector (as previously recommended),
to carry out the inspections on large projects and assist the Building Inspector in his numerous duties, be
referred to the Acting City Manager for a report and recommendation.
In reply to a query from Councillor Gould,
position of Deputy Building Inspector for this year.
appointment of a Deputy Building Inspector.
Mr. Park stated that no monies have been budgeted for the
Discussion ensued on the above recommendation regarding the
Councillor Pye voted "nayT; to the above motion, stating he does not feel the City can afford to fill
this position at this time.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the recommendation of the Building Inspector that the 1975
National Building Code be finalized for adoption, as presented to the Common Council on November 10th, 1975,
without the two amendments as recommended by the Building Inspector and Fire Chief, as it appears to be the
opinion they are already included in the code and are not necessary as an amendment, be referred to the Legal
Department.
11V,wY. 2Y4'5'
C'1?d'e
e#~
Sp//'c/-!I?r
eOJ?#p2~ts . .
.L'.' ' .1_./ proprlate
<<~TI J1/.s;;ea
.
$e.s SILe
C-t/p
I Ire- ;z.1?J?/n~
tf/t?J?6/1
/ke#-I s
:l)r. ~ /J'1.
'Penh/fA
C/~
. s;te/~pr
I
I
H/1tdiJ.I'L
//'/~hfSkt.
~e-:Zf?l'7ih.1
.
Llo/ ~#4'lf(J.
Seo;~!/
CI?I7~cti().
Wen..)',.
~
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the Legal Department study the possibility of including in the ap-
by-law that the Building Inspector have some authority where a contract is started and then abandoned.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the joint report from the Acting City Manager and the
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development regarding efforts by City staff to assist Sea-Side Co-Op. in
finding another location for the co-operative store, and suggesting that if the City is to establish as policy
that staff are to assist commercial enterprises in their location in a similar manner to the City's industrial
promotion activities, it would need to establish proper budgeting and staffing and allow a reasonable lead time
for this work, be received and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he does not feel that the City was adopting a policy in assisting
this group to relocate, but due to the extenuating circumstances in this case, it was felt that assistance should
be given. Councillor Kipping stated that it was his understanding at the last Council meeting that the Coun-
cillors individually were going to try and assist the said Co-Op. Councillor Hodges stated that he sympathizes
with the Co-Op. and he is sorry that a suitable location could not be found for their needs, and he felt that
Council could have done something helpful in complying with the group's request for re-zoning of the property on
Summer Street.
At the request of the Mayor, the Common Clerk at this time read a communication received from Mr.
Wendall Huestis advising that the citizens of the West Saint John community are planning to honour Dr. R. M.
Pendrigh on the occasion of his over 50 years of service to the community as a whole, in the form of an old-
fashioned "At Home" to be held at the Masonic Hall, Charlotte Street, Saint John West, on August 9th, 1976, and
extending an invitation to the Mayor and Members of the Common Council to attend.
Consideration was given to the letter from the City Solicitor, dated June 18th, 1976, submitting an
oplnlon regarding amending the Municipal Development Plan with regard to the proposed re-zoning of 77 Coburg
Street and the lot at its rear next to 28 Garden Street for Hilyard Holdings Ltd., and also submitting an opinion
regarding third reading of the amendment to the Zoning By-Law in connection with the said proposed re-zoning,
which had been tabled at the June 21st Council meeting. It was noted that first and second readings of the
amendment to the Zoning By-Law with respect to the proposed re-zoning had been given on June 7th, 1976. Coun-
cillor Kipping noted that on June 14th a letter was received from Mr. Ralph J. Stephen, solicitor for Dr. W. M.
Zed, objecting to the proposed re-zoning as requested for the reasons as stated, and asking that Council table
third reading and re-examine some of the problems as listed by his client, and that the said letter was laid on
the table, and he suggested that consideration has not been given to the problems listed by Mr. Stephen. Con~
siderable discussion ensued on the re-zoning request.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the former church building at 77
Coburg Street and the lot at its rear next to 28 Garden Street and across the street from 21, 23 and 25 Garden
Street, from "RM-l" Multiple Family district to "B-2" General Business district, be read a third time and enacted
and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the proposed re-zoning be tabled for one week to consider
the objections of Mr. Ralph J. Stephen, solicitor for Dr. W. M. Zed, and that the matter of the effect of the
proposed re-zoning on the traffic in this area be referred to the Chief of Police for his input.
Question being taken, the tabling motion was defeated with the Mayor and Councillors Kipping, MacGowan,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent voting "yea" and Councillors Cave, Davis, Green, Gould, Higgins, Hodges and
Parfitt voting "nay".
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Cave, Green, Gould, Hodges, Higgins and
Parfitt voting "yea" and the Mayor and Councillors Davis, Kipping, MacGowan, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor in reply to a question
raised at the Common Council meeting of June 21st last as to whether it is lawful for a business to be conducted
on Sunday, namely, the construction of homes by a developer, advising that he has examined the Provincial and
54'4
~
Federal Lord's Day Act, and it is his oplnlon that such operation is prohibited by virtue of Section 4 of
the Federal Lord's Day Act, and stating that he is not aware of any Provincial regulation perm~tting the
operation, such as the construction of homes, to take place on the Lord's Day, be received andl. filed.
,
Councillor A. Vincent asked how the Council could ensure that Section 4 of the said 1ct is
enforced, and Mr. Rodgers replied that Council could ask the Minister of Justice to enforce thb Lord's Day
,
Act, which would be enforced locally by the Saint John Police Department. I
I
I
Seconded by Councillor Green I
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee advising that in
November 1974 the Land Committee agreed that Gulf Oil Canada Ltd. be offered the appraised value for the
560 square feet of property the City required at the corner of Lansdowne and Wellesley Avenuesjto cha~ge
6?~~t1,;;I~~~ the traffic pattern at this corner, and that a letter has been received from Gulf Oil acceptin~ the City's
~1f~. offer of $1,100.00, and that the City proceeded with the work at this corner, however, Gulf Oi~ Canada
. ' Ltd. was never paid for the land the City acquired, be received and filed and Gulf Oil Canada Ltd. be paid
~;oJ.7~ ~/~~/~ the sum of $1,100.00 for the 560 square feet of land the City required at the corner of Lansdo~e and
'/.;;/J.7sd"tJN'Ae." Wellesley Avenues. I
M//e~/e!l /'9V€'S. On motion of Councillor Green I
!
$ "n~-.2. t"Q'>>Sl'l
-t-1f7J? wpI:'k
.(f7"',ts~.Y 4ar
/J1;J?/~" ,7;dlce
?O~t-~.:zJe.pt':
~.5V);1 (bmh'l.
7K:1I1h. /lQ( (//S.
'7JOl!f,.,e.n~ 1/7 k~
,,-1= pu,bfi'e 'pu"-
,oP5~ /qn~
J: 19;r&h~N" /Ylc~
II/pt//e ~Op?e
Z/J7eS /lahJ.7
,
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Gould I
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Comm~ttee,
recommending that Common Council accept the sum of $320.00 in lieu of land for public purposes! in respect
to the subdivision of the J. Arthur Nice property, to be deposited in the City's trust fund fo~ the
acquisition and development of land for public purposes, and advising that the said property t~es on the
easterly si'de of Lorneville Road and fronts on School Bus Road as well, and it is proposed to :subdivide
the one and one-half acre lot, which contains Mr. Nice's dwelling, into two lots; and further~dvising
that the Property Management Branch estimates that the market value, before a subdivision, of the res-
ulting new vacant lot would be $4,000.00, and that at eight per cent of that figure, the sum of $320.00 is
payable to the City be received and filed and the recommendation adopted. ,I
~
i
,
,I
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory combittee with
regard to the request of James Achorn for a temporary permit to place a mobile home on a lot o~ed by Mr.
Kurt Ganz on the north side of Golden Grove Road about one-half mile east of Hillcrest Road, which is
within the area in which the Planning Advisory Committee could grant approval for the placement of a
mobile home on a permanent basis, advising that the Committee would be prepared to grant permahent per-
mission but the owner of the land has indicated he does not want the mobile home to be on his ~and on a
permanent basis, and that the Department of Health found that the property is suitable for watbr and
sewage facilities on site for a mobile home, and recommending that Mr. Achorn be given tempora~y per-
mission for one year to locate his mobile home on the Ganz property, on obtaining a building p~rmit, be
,
received and filed and the recommendation adopted. I
i
,
Read a letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee regarding the Committee's
concern with the problems which the S.M.T. bus terminal seems to be creating on King Street, stating that
, '
Council is no doubt aware that when the firm was given permission to locate on King Street well over 30
years ago it seemed to be an ideal location, however, since that time traffic has increased, the number of
buses using the terminal has increased, and the buses are considerably longer, necessitating phrking ,
,
extending onto the street and over a good portion of the sidewalks, which causes problems for, both motor-
ists and pedestrians, and it is also contrary to our City by-laws which prohibit vehicles parking beyond
the curb. The letter states that buses are no longer confined to carrying passengers but also!, transport
freight, which is transported across the sidewalk at all hours of the day, which further impedes pedes-
,
trians and other traffic; and noting that many passengers await their buses on the street creating con-
gestion ,for pedestrians. The letter further states that citizens wishing to unload or pick upl' passengers
,
add to the problem because of inadequate parking and the Committee feels it would be in the best interests
of the travelling public, the company and the citizens, if the company was requested to make hkste to find
another location in which to operate without creating these problems.
On motion of Councillor Green
Councillor MacGowan, Chairman of the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee,. referred to
a letter from the Transportation Committee which was discussed at a Council meeting held on January 27th,
1975, in reply to a letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautificiation Committee regarding the said bus
terminal, in which the Transportation Committee advised that the said Committee has no controlfover the
operation of the said bus company, however, the Committee is concerned over the movement of traffic
,
causing delays to City Transit buses caused by angle parking of buses at the S.M.T. terminal on King
~~~. I
Discussion ensued on the parking of the said buses on King Street and the unsuitablejfacilities
at this location for a bus terminal. Councillor Kipping stated he would like to see a time limit during
which the company must seek an alternate site. In reply to a query from Councillor MacGowan, Mr. Rodgers
stated that Council can set a date for termination of the said bus terminal although he would not be
prepared to discuss at this time what the effect would be if the company refused to comply with such a
request. Discussion also took place on the illegal parking of buses on the sidewalk at this location and
the lack of enforcement of the City's by-laws in this regard. Councillor M. Vincent stated he feels that
as the City seems to be permitting parking violations at this location he feels the matter should be
referred to the Chief of Police for action. Councillor Green expressed the opinion that he would like to
see the Mayor arrange a meeting with the company officials to resolve the problems caused by this oper-
ation, and Councillor Higgins agreed with this opinion. Councillor A. Vincent noted that there has been
discussion of the bus terminal possibly locating in a proposed parking garage, which may be located in
this general area, and he would like the City to co-operate and encourage the company to locate in the
proposed parking garage, where adequate facilities would be available for passengers.
6y/i:' .:z;.,pl'l>V~~
~eN~/74'~t'/'~ Seconded by Councillor Higgins
~/.V~. RESOLVED that a copy of the above named letter from the Civic
S. IY7 -r- ('~a~~ mprovement and Beautification Committee, as well as a copy of the letter from the Transportation Com-
.,,/,/. ~~~ mittee referred to by Councillor MacGowan, be forwarded to S.M.T. officials requesting them to find a
. suitable location for the. operation of their bus terminal, and that the said company relocate within a
6<<s 7fer/J?/~'/' year.
k/;,Y' Stf.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Councillor Gould proposed an amendment to the above motion that this matter also be referred to
the Chief of Police 'for action, but there was no seconder to the motion.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....i
,..-
.
5AalYJ"MK
1?e.a11 /.-t-d".
I SOfA. F174
J)(?f/e/6>'pH/<
(! ~Il' fA
So""H, ,6,4'
::!3/o~k /0
{l.;l/I-f'or J}ev.
",el7l-
I PrtJfJPs.;Ils
Ij{;-bhiie/Yel
ExhiJ,. t'o"'h1'
r<ll',rt-
.
I
Exl,/6/fi.t?I1
/lssoe.
memkrsh/'p
.
l/lfk17l/c M
/("d,;J. a",m.
1f1'1?~i// a
I ;::s1ttet'J:
S~a~
Sc~ f'/qe
11 ot~es,gy I1l
U/p,pJrs (~h/m.
545
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Davis, Higgins,
Kipping, MacGowan and A. Vincent voting "yea" and Councillors Green, Gould, Hodges, Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent
voting "nay".
The Common Clerk advised that two development proposals have been received for the development of Block
10, in the South End, which is the area enclosed by Sydney, Britain, Charlotte and Broad Streets.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the said development proposals be opened.
The Common Clerk thereupon opened the said development proposals and reported that they had been
submitted by Shamrock Realty Ltd. and South End Development Corporation.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the development proposals received for the development
of Block 10 in the South End, be referred to staff for a recommendation.
Read a report from the Council Committee' on the Exhibition Association of the City of Saint John,
submitted by Councillor M. A. Vincent, Chairman, advising of the work of the Committee in looking into various
aspects of the Atlantic National Exhibition and further advising that during a May meeting the Committee upon
examination obtained information to the effect that the Mayor of the City of Saint John and members of the Common
Council are, as elected representatives, automatically members of the Exhibition Association of the City of Saint
John, and that Mr. Frank Rodgers, City Solicitor, advised the Committee that he concurred with the interpretation
as developed by the Committee in that the Mayor and Councillors by virtue of being elected representatives are
indeed members of the Association entitled to attend meetings and should have their names in a book identified as
the Association registry; pointing out that the Council as a whole is not entitled to membership in the Assoc-
iation but rather the individual members who are Councillors are entitled to membership in the Exhibition As-
sociation. The letter states that a meeting was arranged between officials of the Exhibition Association and the
Mayor, Councillor M. Vincent and the Cit~ Solicitor, at which meeting the Mayor presented the findings of the
Committee to the Association officials and an expression of their thinking on the Committee's findings was
requested. On June 23rd the Association advised Councillor M. Vincent, through its solicitor, Mr. C. Y. Swanton,
that the Association agreed that the Mayor and Councillors are members of the Association and Councillor M.
Vincent was furnished with a copy of the by-laws and constitution of the Association and advised Councillor M.
Vincent that as soon as the Common Clerk supplied the appropriate listing of the names of the Mayor and Coun-
cillors they would be placed on the registry forthwith. The report states that it would appear at this time that
as a result of this Committee's findings the ensuing course of action of having the elected representatives
established as members of the Association is in line with the legal documents presently in existence relating to
the establishment of the Exhibition Association and it should be pointed out that the Association themselves are
in agreement with this and await participation from the elected representatives. The report submitted by Coun-
cillor M. Vincent concludes by expressing his appreciation to the individual members of the Committee who have
worked since November 26th, 1975 and congratulates them on their efforts which brought about the introducing of
this information, and, in particular, the Committee thanks Mr. Frank Rodgers for his legal advice and guidance
and the Exhibition officials who met with the Committee in a warm and friendly manner and who agreed with the
findings of the Committee.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the Common Clerk
supply the Exhibition Association with the list of names of the Mayor and Councillors, for insertion in the
Association's registry.
During discussion of the above report regarding the Exhibition Association of the City of Saint John,
Mr. Rodgers advised that in examining the by-laws of the Association it will be found that notice of annual
meetings of the Association is by publication in the local newspaper. Councillor Davis expressed his opposition
to the fact that the land and buildings of the Association are assessed at over eight hundred thousand dollars
and yet no taxes are collected from the Association, and it was ,pointed out that this was by a special act of the
Legislature. Councillor M. Vincent advised that Mr. C. Y. Swanton is solicitor and Secretary of the Association,
and that the guidelines for setting up the Council committee was to discuss the origination and establishment of
the Association, as a result of which the said report is being submitted to Council at this time, and therefore
the terms of reference of the committee have been fulfilled. Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels the Exhibition
Association has done a tremendous job over a period of years and the trouble is we don't support it enough.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the committee established by Common Council on November
3rd, 1975 to look into various aspects of the Atlantic National Exhibition, be dissolved, and the members thanked
for their efforts.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Fernhill Cemetery Company regarding the
laying of pipe on Rothesay Avenue, which has necessitated the closing of the Rothesay Avenue entrance to the
Cemetery over a period of several months, advising that there have been remarks about the unsightly appearance of
this area by the general public and the Directors of the Company are concerned over the inconvenience and dif-
ficulties experienced by the lot holders being barred this access to the Cemetery, and requesting that the
Company be advised when work will be resumed, be referred to the Works Committee for a report at the next meeting
of Council.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of School Trustees of School
Se~t?f)/ :if". District No. 20, advising that when Bayside Drive was widened and straightened, the Board made available to the
.~~)';r/~:O". City a small corner of the East Saint John Elementary School property leaving a sheer rock face approximately
~,Pt~J.1/J1;r fifteen feet high at the edge of the school property, which constitutes a serious hazard for the students of the
,lE said School, and the Properties Committee of the said Board has recommended that the Common Council be requested
~'.?~~jr to install a safety fence of steel wire construction along the Bayside Drive edge of the school property, and the
~a~~,~, Board trusts that this request of the Board to protect the safety of the students of the said School will be
~~e~~~~ approved by the Common Council, be referred to City staff and the Land Committee.
/CJhd ~:h1-
~
546
...,
t!e".mdh, SE.
-&-trP/ jlOl"yr4.
e/o~I/I~
AO:f://isr 7)~y.
m...//
/lH'/'It!',I/ ff~"/e.
'?a.s~PJ1 :J3nn6
Cb,A-t-L
7?t!'-;zonJ n~
7//.:I17H, /I,€,,1s-
c!pmm.
~e-%oJ?/~.f
'P.t:l~"n :lJ,.d~
a.L-t-L
Z,';nl/2J,."'b,,oL
.B~/t::.;l/ Mr.
~oca/ !:'IJ:l
~e- zOhlHt/
?/al1J? /lhJ'5.
:J)emp!lfioJ')
tlt!?pl'is
a,., Sy~ney<r
~rli-.;/I'J? ..5t'$.
l&;;'e~ 2Je,Pt.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels the cost of erecting such fence should be part of the
total cost of the Bayside Drive widening.
.
Read a letter from Mr. D. A. Shippee, Chairman of a group of merchants and businesses of the
Quality Block, which is located on Germain Street between King and Princess Streets, requesting Council's
approval for the temporary closing of the area from Church Street across Germain Street to the entrance of
the City parking lot, to King Street, to facilitate an attractive mall/rest area in conjunction with
Loyalist Days, as shown on the submitted sketch.
It was noted that Mr. Shippee was present at the Council meeting.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that Mr. Shippee be heard at this time.
Mr. Shippee advised that his group is composed of eleven merchants and businesses of the Quality
Block on Germain Street who are very interested and dedicated to the proposal being submitted to Council,
as well as a possible permanent mall at this location in the future. He stated that the Chief of Police,
the Commissioner of Works and the Fire Chief have all been advised of details of the proposal and have
expressed their approval, and that as well, this proposal has the approval of the Loyalist Days Committee.
Mr. Shippee advised that the temporary closing being requested at present represents the first phase, with
the second phase of the proposal being consideration to the permanent closing of Germain Street from
Princess to King Streets, upon the approval of the various City Departments. Several Council members
commended Mr. Shippee for the efforts and interest of the merchants of the Quality Block regarding this
prop'osal.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M.Vincent
RESOLVED that approval be given for the temporary closing of a
portion of Germain Street, as requested by the merchants and businesses of the Quality Block, during the
forthcoming Loyalist Days celebrations, to facilitate an attractive pedestrian mall/rest area as proposed
by the .said firms.
.
The Councillors noted that the Council will consider the permanent closing of the Quality Block
on Germain Street following an 'assessment after the operation of the mall during Loyalist Days.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the application from Mr. Alfred H. Brien, on
behalf of his client, Pascon Brothers Co. Ltd., for re-zoning of property on the east side of Sea Street
between residence Nos. 483 and 509, to permit construction of an office-warehouse building, be referred to
the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation and that authority be given to advertise the said
proposed re-zoning.
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the
east side of Sea Street between residence Nos. 483 and 509 from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to
"I-I" Light Industrial classification, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the application of Local 502, International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers for re-zoning of property on Ludlow Street between Tower and St. George Streets,
formerly used as the city car barns, to permit construction of a Union building for offices and meetings,
be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation and that authority be given to ad~
vertise the said proposed re-zoning.
.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that the City called tenders for demolition of property at the
corner of Sydney and Britain Streets about three months ago and the tender was awarded and the property
demolished, however, the debris from the demolition is allover the sidewalk. ~~. MacKinnon advised that
the specifications for demolition tenders state that the contractor has to dispose of the material in' a
place acceptable to the Commissioner of Works - in this instance, the contractor was unable to deposit and
burn the material at the Howe's Lake site (which is the only site the City has for disposing of such
material) due to a recommendation of the Fire Department and the Provincial Department of the Environment
as a result of the high fire index and high pollution index. He noted that ~he contractor in this case,
namely, Grove Construction, could deposit the debris in any other site suitable to the Works Department,
and that according to the tender specifications, it is the responsibility of the contractor to have a site
for depositing such debris. In reply to a query from Councillor A. Vincent, Mr. MacKinnon stated that the
firm would have deposited 10% of the tender price to the City. Several Councillors expressed their concern
with the appearance of this site, and Councillor A. Vincent asked that staff look into this problem
tomorrow and if the company fails to comply in having this debris removed, that the company forfeit their
deposit and that it be done by City forces, and the contractor charged the cost of same. In reply to, a
suggestion from the Mayor, Mr. MacKinnon stated that if the contractor was permitted to haul the debris to
the Howe's Lake, dump site and leave it there until conditions permit burning of same, it would undoubtedly
be set on fir~ by persons scavenging in the dump.
I
I
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he had an item relating to the Police Department which he
would like to discuss at this time.
On motion of Councillor Pye
.
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above item be added to the agenda.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
~
,..-
5/:t 7
'Prr4et?t11J'J
. Clomm.
/ld/~., (}-I-.
/I7!JI",
tfffsteJ"/1
I ';Zbll~~ 5th.
rel':31J?'5
. 7Jo;"ce7kJ71:
.L17$UJfl~
t!/.;:lIh1
I
:B;-i.;m S~
'/bllee .1k
St~
.
I
~~P/~17
t!ross/J?q .y
If'h"s"
~ oc.lt ,(O/J';(lh
'/(r/.
,(~ ~~~
~/1D1
.
I
I
.
......
Councillor M. Vincent stated that approximately two months ago the Protection Committee toured the
Police facilities and it was found that the Western Police Station was badly damaged due to to the February 2nd,
1976 storm and as a result of this tour the said Committee made several recommendations, one of which included
the cleaning up of this Police Station, which recommendation was forwarded to the City Manager, and to date, to
the Committee's knowledge, this work has not been carried out and the Police Department is presently working out
of one room at the rear of the Church Avenue fire station, which is grossly inadequate.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the Acting City Manager check into the matter of the
present status of the Western Police Station and have it repaired and opened so that the Police Department can
resume operations from this location.
Councillor Davis inquired if this work was held up due to an insurance claim, and Mr. Park replied that
as he recalls, this item was cleared with the insurance adjusters and he was not aware that this work had not
been completed and that he will inquire into the matter and report to Council next week.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he had a point of inquiry he would like to make to either the Chief of
Police or the Acting City Manager, if the City has somebody who is conducting an investigation or inquiry or is
now a new employee in the Police Department - he stated he believes his name is Mr. Shanks. Chief Ferguson
replied that we have a new employee, Mr. Brian Shanks, who was hired on the recommendation of the Chief to the
City Manager, and is doing a study on the Police Department to determine where the offences are taking pl~ce, the
proposed setting up of a new file system and other areas that the Chief feels should be reported properly to the
Council confidentially. The Chief advised that Mr. Shanks is a civilian employee and he feels the function Mr.
Shanks is performing should not be reported out. Councillor Davis questioned this item being on the agenda.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
session.
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that this matter be tabled for a report to be submitted in open
Councillor M. Vincent stated that his reason for asking the above question was not to embarrass the
Acting City Manager and/or the Chief of Police - his reason for asking was because it was rumoured throughout
this building that there was a new employee in the Police Department and that he was performning certain functions
and Councillor M. Vincent did not know we had a new employee in the Police Department and he felt in his position
the correct way to deal with this was to ask the question in open session of Council if in fact there is a new
employee in the Police Department, and this has now been determined, and if there is something about this per-
son's duties or role that the Chief wishes to have placed confidential, he will certainly respect that opinion.
,
Councillor Pye requested permission to place an emergency item on the agenda pertaining to the in-
stallation of the pedestrian traffic lights on Loch Lomond Road in the vicinity of the Loch Lomond Villa.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above item be placed on the agenda.
Councillor Pye stated that six weeks ago he had he occasion to question the Commissioner of Engineering
and Works and the City Manager as to whether or not the pedestrian traffic lights had been ordered for the Loch
Lomond Road in the vicinity of the Loch Lomond Villa and he was advised that in one month the lights should be
received. He asked why the 'lights have not been delivered to the City. Mr. MacKinnon reported that the said
lights have been ordered, the bases and wiring have been installed, and that the lights will be erected as soon
as they are received. He stated he will question the supplier in this regard and he reiterated that the lights
will be installed as soon as they are received. Councillor Pye proposed a motion that immediate action be
initiated through the City Manager to see that this necessary equipment is received and installed. The Mayor
noted that no Council resolution is required in this instance as the Council has been advised that the lights
have been ordered and will be installed as soon as they are received.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
,~,
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twelfth day of
July, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. R. Park, Acting City Manager, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor,
H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner
of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning
and Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector, D. Buck, Deputy
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services of the Community Planning
and Development Department, G. Baird, Commissioner of Economic
64S
CWJf.;;?/'tfte pe,
';tl//bdioh /Js"SoC,
Siep5t'17 a>>sIr<<d.
a"A-t-rL
tY,/ttl;;'~S(/'1{,t)
:?J .//cld/eht' .4
IYPrP?.;mJK;I7O{/.;}I7
;rent' .>l10
.:lJ,.oolvi!/e IIffff-
(7f7,~~L,
..7J.7? ~ E:
2;,!jS/ P 2>r.
~eeghS.fP.'" ed.
/J'leht:J ~h~
Lt~.
()h.>V7/p/ai ~ ~. 2.
elJ//. Sew/?,.
P"lJcrd;. 4-
7?e~..,ct!'rh ~-r~
7e11'&r c1t"t!'I?j7k~
~J1t:~
.( eill1Ca.s-ter
/I'lsmt?l"i""j Ho/d
(7..;/ I"!I t/i i?t:e h't-
:l).;lve .ZJo.?b/1'1
7(t:J~erl-f/l'nceh-&-
~k /lJ1/1:hr
.ZheLff ifl(i"hci7nt'S
13/"Uae ?f} i!4,drA's
mIKe S6-een
;;Pe>~ HI!>_..;(I~
$ 2,026.00
$ 66,840.50
$ 2,814.00
$ 15,659.86
$ 2,568.00
$ 11,072.00
$ 15,256.35 1
$ 6,231.21
$ 8,640.00
$ 3,271. 87
$ 3,222.25
Development, E. W. Fergsuon, Chief of Police, D. French, Director
of Personnel and Training, and J. Brownell, of the Recreation and
Parks Department
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
June 28th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
July 5th last, be confirmed.
Councillor Davis advised that during discussion of the report of the Council Committee on the
Exhibition Association of the City of Saint John at the July 5th Council meeting, he is quoted as having
expressed his opposition to the fact that the land and buildings of the Association are assessed at over
eight hundred thousand dollars and yet no taxes are collected from the Association. He stated that at
that time he did not quote exact figures, and that the amount actually was $733,000.00, but $1,148,000.00
is taxed, so there is a total of about $1,800,000.00 of which $733,000.00 is not taxed.
The Mayor expressed gratification that although some Council members were away and were unable
to attend, there were nine Councillors present at the One Hundredth Anniversary observance for the City
Market on July 9th last. He also expressed pleasure that it was an excellent event and was well planned
by the Deputy Market Clerk and by the Market Committee the Chairman of which is Councillor Pye, all of
whom he congratulated at this time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority
be granted for payment of the following invoices:-
Stephen Construction Company Limited - dated June 16, 1976
- dated July 2, 1976
Chitticks (1962) Ltd.
- dated May 31, 1976 (May 16-31, 1976)
- dated June 17, 1976 (June 1-15, 1976)
D.' Hatfield, 'Ltd.
- dated June 2, 1976 (May 16-31, 1976)
- dated June 2, 1976 (May 15-31, 1976)
- dated June 18, 1976
- dated June 18, 1976
- dated June 1-15, 1976
- dated April 30, 1976
- dated April 30, 1976
Norman Donovan Rentals
Brookville Manufacturin~ Co., Ltd.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager,
authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices
for engineering services regarding projects that have been undertaken in connection with the Department of
Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
1.
Bayside Drive Reconstruction and Extension - Phase IV
Metro Construction Limited
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention 15%
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1
$ 652,187.00
46,890.46
7,033.57
Nil
$ 39,856.89
Champlain Hei~hts Collector Sewer
Proctor & Redfern Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 33,
dated June 28, 1976
$ 202,359.60
$ 227.69
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that
five bids, as listed in his letter, were received for supplying and constructing plywood fencing at
Memorial Field, six feet in height, and that all tenders for this work (for which the City's estimated
cost was $32,000.00) had omitted to include letters regarding bonds and insurance, which is required by
the City's Tendering Procedure, and the low bidder had two other discrepancies, and that one in the tender
was not witnessed and one in the unit price; and further advising that, in the meantime, the City had
received letters from the low bidder and the second low bidder regarding bonds and insurance, which were
found satisfactory; and further advising that in the days following tender opening on June 23rd last, City
staff has met with the low bidder, Gary Vincent, as there was some concern regarding (1) his ability to
perform, and (2) legalities - and that the staff has been informed by the said 11r. Vincent, in writing,
that the following people form part of his group for this contract: Mr. Gary Vincent, Mr. Dave Dobbin, 11r.
Robert Vincent, Mr. Dale Knight, Mr. Doug Richards, Mr. Bruce Richards, Mr. Mike Steen and Mr. Ron Howard;
and further advising that most of these people have had experience in house building in the past, and that
with a twenty per cent certified cheque in lieu of Performance Bond, insurance as required and close
~
.
.1
1
.
.
I
1
.
...4
,..-
e
I
I
.
/entJt'd'I"~
C;'/p~~/
p.flv~n"
7-ff~l(D-k t'o.
t:It!J",. ^-l-~. 'D
C'Aet~/.;1iu( Fl.'
C~pt-IS ~_
.2W,q~ Io/~C9
I ~~t?l"Si1h ~
c.,,o/t.;,- / ~-
~d-
/~.J.
-"~/~
~h. S.,(I/t-CO.
}?..v~j ~
~n- Hd.
TnL~}?
"
/~t?,.~
P'
eS.U,ctIltt1M
.".S,h.$ ~-I'd.
/ldll'1~ C:ty
/11,2'"
Jbltee JJ,~
, tJrlmt?.Jl1Uti.
l7iehh/C/_h
ZJ,..!.;(/n
Sh.>1hA-S
I
:BeL. ,(fel-
"es-l,,/ctloJ?s
eli-if f71 ffr.
C}'vlc BI>JP/u.
hl,.i17ff
. pr;//cff
~
549
inspection by staff, it is felt that the City's interests are well protected - and stating that the matter of
legalities have been cleared by the Legal Department; and recommending that'the low bidder, Gary Vincent of Saint
John, N. B., be awarded the said contr~ct amount~ng to the'b~~ of $22,500.00,~~ be~ece~eq an~ f~le~ and the
recommendation adopted.
Councillor MacGowan asked what the cost would be for ~ chain link fence at a field of the size of the
above named Memorial Field, and she commented that she feels a chain link fence would look much better than a
plywood fence would look and that it probably would be much more pernament. Mr. MacKinnon replied that he did
not have the exact figures on the cost; however, this is just a plywood fence and he would have to think that the
cost would be at least comparable. He added that as far as the design is concerned, it was intended not only to
provide controlled access to the site but he would think that having the plywood fence around this Field would
also provide a sound barrier for the area and keep the noise inside the Field rather than outside, as requested
by the people in the area. In comparison, he noted that with a chain link fence, everything is visible to the
people in the neighbourhood, and that was one of their complaints at that time. Councillor MacGowan asked if the
City had great in-put from the community in this regard. Mr. MacKinnon replied that, as he understands it, the
in-put was through the Recreation and Parks Department - however, he believes there was a number of people and
presentations made with and through Mr. Nicolle, Director of that Department, and the people in the area are
aware that it is a plywood fence. Councillor MacGowan stated that she is afraid a plywood fence will not be very
attractive. In reply to Councillor Parfitt's ~uestion, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the City's estimate of c.
$32,000.00 was on a plywood fence and that the only design was for a plywood fence. Councillor Higgins, speaking
as Council liaison to the Recreation and Parks Department, noted that this matter has been discussed, he believes,
for well over a year and that there has been in-put from the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board as well as the
Recreational Development Committee (a citizens' committee) that came to Council and presented the lighting, and
this is just part of the over-all plan for that park. He stated that the other factor is that there is a baseball
park back-to-back with a softball facility and this type of fencing will separate the two facilities rather than
just having the view straight through - so, it has been well discussed and well thought out, and he believes that
this proposal has been under consideration for at least six months. Mr. Rodgers, referring to the recommendation
that the contract be awarded to Gary Vincent, stated that he believes the intention is to award it to the entire
group - or is it just to Gary Vincent. Councillor Higgins noted that Gary Vincent is responsible. Mr. Rodgers
replied that he does not know if Mr. Vincent is or not, and he asked whether it is Gary Vincent or the group that
is going to be the other party to the contract. Councillor Higgins confirmed that it is Gary Vincent only who is
the other party to the contract.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Coucnillor MacGowan voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report from the Acting City Manager, advising that only
one reply has been received in response to the City's call for tenders for chipsealing various roads in the City,
namely, that of The, Flintkote Co. of Canada Ltd., who bid, as follows: single cost of chipseal at .47~ per square
yard; double cost of chipseal at $1.13 per square yard; and further advising that the following roads are to be
chipsealed: Churchland Road (15,200 feet x 30 feet - single coat), Curtis Street, Martinon (700 feet x 24 feet -
double coat), Duffy Place, Martinon (300 feet x 24 feet - double coat), Henderson Road, Martinon (1,200 feet x 24
feet - double coat), and that funds have been provided in the 1976 Capital Budget to cover this expenditure --
and recommending that the said company be awarded this contract at the above quoted prices -- be received and
filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report from the Acting City Manager,
the bids of Canadian Salt Co. of Pugwash, N. S. in the amount of $11.40 per ton for supplying highway salt, and
of Ralph's Transport Ltd. in the amount of $7.70 per ton for trucking highway salt, be accepted.
On motion of Cou~cillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Acting City
Manager, the lower bid received for the supply of 1,700 feet of Class 2, cement lined, ductile iron pipe, namely,
that of S. T. E. Fetterly & Sons Ltd. in the amount of $15.82 per foot, be accepted.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, in reply to the
request made at the July 5th, 1976 Council meeting for information on the hiring of a civilian employee in the
Police Department, advising that the position occupied is that of Crime Study Technician which is a temporary
position dating from June 21st, 1976, utilizing money approved in the 1976 budget, and that the employee is Mr.
Brian Shanks, who was well suited to the position because he had had experience on two occasions for a number of
months in 1974-1975, and again in 1975-1976 under the Internship Programme on Urban Studies arranged by the
University of New Brunswick in Saint John and the City of Saint John; and further advising that the duties of the
position relate to police records and crime statistics, and that some of these records lead to the kind of
information that had been included in the Police Department annual report for 1975, Pages 29 to 45, which report
was recently received by Common Council; and further advising that revision of the Department's filing system by
1977 is needed to conform to standards set up by the Provincial Government Department of Justice in co-ordination
with other Police Departments in the Province - and that this is the nature of the said temporary position -- be
received and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent explained that he is not objecting to Mr. Shanks in any way, or, for that matter,
really, what Mr. Shanks has been doing, except that he was under the impression, and still is, that the Council
had instructed the City Manager to watch the number of employees that were being hired and the matter would be
brought before Council before this was done - and, to his knowledge, that was not done and he was not aware of
it, and in that light he raised the matter in the first instance. He added that when the City Manager is back in
the city he will ask further questions of the City Manager, himself. Councillor Kipping raised the question as
to whether it is the Council policy now that any employee hired is to be cleared through Council. Mr. Park
replied that his recollection is that the City Manager is responsible for hiring in all departments except only
for the Legal Department. The Mayor stated that he believes that is correct, but the Council also asked, one
time - and he does not know whether the Council retained that policy - that the City Manager would inform Coun-
ncil when he hired. Councillor Kipping felt that the Council should be very clear on that policy - that is, if
anybody is going to be hired, is it the policy that this Council be notified. Councillor M. Vincent felt that a
search of the records will indicate that the Council requested the City Manager to advise before any positions
were filled - he added that it was only in that light that Council having been advised that this had happened
that he raised the question. Councillor Hodges noted that this discussion was with reference to two groups of
positions: those that are already established, and those that are to be established. He stated that if Mr.
550
~
/le-t-/h~ 6'-Jy
/JJ~r.
M.5f~rh Pot'
S",J?, ,,~,;urs
.23on,{.L ssue
Pri 176'115
..2bn;( Iss~e
ammo h'nc;;nce
1hh~ Esue
Shanks is in the category of those that are to be established, then the Council should have been notified.
The Mayor noted that the best thing for the Council to do in this matter is to check that over and find
out next week what the motion was that Council passed or asked of the City Manager and bring that in along
with the answers. Councillor Kipping again made the point that the Council should be very clear on that
policy. Councillor Higgins made the point that this appointment was within the budget, and stated that he
can see Councillor M. Vincent's point that when you get something in a "grey" area like the appointment of
Mr. Shanks,/it is a matter of information to this Council because when a Council member hears about it on
the street or is asked about the new employee the Council member does not answer the question - so, it is
a matter of the information being obtained rather than the permission of Council to hire, and this sort of
matter. The Mayor agreed with this observation.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report from the Acting City Manager, in reply
to the request made at the July 5th, 1976 Council meeting that the status of the Western Police Station be
checked into, advising that the repair work that ensued following the storm of February 2nd last has been
completed and the duty personnel have, as of July 9th, 1976, left the temporary quarters at the Church
Avenue Fire Station 'and returned to the Western Police Station, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the Commissioner of Finance with
regard to the proposed bond issue and submitting a list of capital expenditures to be approved as bond
issue, be received and filed and authority granted for payment of the various items by bond issue, the
said items being as follows, namely:-
FOR GENERAL PURPOSES:
General Government - $26,970.00
Protective Services - $636,900.00
Transportation Services -
Cedar Point Mobile Home Park $11,812.00; Lansdowne Avenue $91,164.00; Rockland Road $36,799.00; Wellesley
Avenue $19,668.00; Rothesay Avenue Garage $70,634.00; Millidge Avenue $19,058.00; Golden Grove Road
$3,763.00; Loch Lomond Road $23,857.00; Lakeview Drive $3,966.00; Latimer Lake sidewalk $29,555.00;
Westmorland Road $14,446.00; Ellerdale Street $5,579.00; Lakewood Avenue $5,294.00; Pauline Street $7,553.00;
Grandview Avenue sidewalk $48,698.00; Churchland Road $51,220.00; McAllister Drive $69,981.00; Mt. Pleasant
Avenue $60,832.00; McCavour Drive $10,944.00; St. John Street $26,575.00; Main Street West $12,382.00;
Chesley Street $6,587.00; Water Street $151,012.00
-- $781,379.00
Urban Renewal, land acquisition and tourist building - $483,051.00
Housing - refunding of 1956 bond issue - $73,000.00
Recreation and Parks -
Arenas $300,083.00; Golf Course $35,553.00; Shamrock Park $10,468.00; Lancaster Memorial Field $62,674.00;
Rockwood Park $13,757.00; Community centres and playgrounds $19,618.00; Swimming pool $10,078.00; Boat
dock $9,748.00; Park roads and landscaping $36,721.00
-- $498,700.00
Total General Purposes - $2,500,000.00
FOR SELF-SUPPORTING UTILITIES:
Water construction and system development -
.
I
I
.
I
Loch Lomond Road watermain $40,237.00; Lakewood Heights watermain $3,071.00; Summit Avenue watermain .
$26,488.00; Grandview Avenue watermain $19,024.00; Silver Falls Park watermain $11,310.00; McAllister
Drive watermain $102,051.00; Hickey Road watermain $10,585.00; Rodney Street watermain $36,200.00; Rothesay
Avenue watermain $19,789.00; Thornbrough Street watermain $11,667.00; Forest Hills pumping stations
$25,762.00; Latimer Lake chlorine plant $57,915.00; Land purchased $128,544.00; Subdivision services
$120,357.00
-..: $613,000.00
Water system - refunding of 1956 bond issue - $427,000.00
Sewer construction and system development -
Woodward'Avenue $197,892.00; Visart Street $119,058.00; Lakeview Drive $16,301.00; Greendale $157,263.00;
Ann Street $13,897.00; Summit Avenue $39,999.00; Lakewood Drive $116,546.00; Crescent Avenue $23,020.00;
Garnett Road $35,579.00; Myles Drive $39,003.00; Fairville Boulevard $18,224.00; Marsh Creek $280,035.00;
Allison and Francis Streets 457,322.00; Lansdowne Avenue $54,372.00; Pauline Street $52,851.00; Westb~ook
Avenue $12,102.00; Rodney Street $26,310.00; Mount Pleasant Avenue, East $50,000.00; Subdivision services
$150,226.00
-- $1,460,000.00
Power Commission: Substations and extension to distribution system - $1,000,000.00
Total Self-Supporting Utilities - $3,500,000.00
A total for all purposes - $6,000,000.00
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the Commissioner of Finance be authorized to arrange
for printing of the bonds for the current debenture issue.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report from the Commissioner of Finance, in reply
I
I
,
.
~
,..-
--1
,bi);, '
. .2nut.
hsu.e
C'Jes/e!f ~
/.;J h.l'i
.:J &,/u/s/t-/
I ('/~
Soltt:itor
Phd self
bf:t.-f!~I?IH
~ W7JIt-t fI'
Cf/,{U
I
.
I Jje<I'/d/h~
.lJy-AC1W
.
I
I
.
~
to the request made at the June 1 th, 197 meeting of Common Council, when the Notice of the forthcoming bond
issue was given, for information in respect of the completed capital projects, submitting the required information,
derived from the Works and Water Department, be received and filed.
In regard to the above named report, the Mayor noted that under "Transportation Services" therein
reference is made to land acquisition regarding Chesley Street, and he asked what land was acquired there, the
cost of the land acquisition having been $2,180.00. Mr. Park advised that he is not certain whether or not this
would have been acquisition of a small piece of land for the alignment of that street, and that he can look into
the records and inform the Mayor just what land was involved.
Read a letter from the City Solicitor, dated July 8th, 1976, in reply to Council resolutions of July
5th last which referred to him two recommendations from the Building Inspector, these being:- (1) The Saint John
Building By-Law be amended to read:- The City Building Inspector be authorized to issue progressive, or first,
second and third phase permits for the construction of projects when he feels it is necessary, and after all
approvals have been obtained from the various departments involved; (2) That the 1975 National Building Code be
finalized for adoption, as presented to the Common Council on November lOth, 1975, without the two amendments as
recommended by the Building Inspector and Fire Chief, as it appears to be the opinion they are already included
in the code and are not necessary as an amendment. The letter advises that the Building By-Law is enacted under
the authority of the Community Planning Act, and there is no authority from that statute wherein the Building
Inspector may be authorized to issue prgoressive building permits - however, this is not to say that a project
may not be covered by the issuance of several building permits from the time of commencement to completion - and
quoting the National Building Code, Subsection 2.9.4 of Section 2.9, which provides for "Approval in Part". The
letter further advises that the recommendation, on the adoption of the National Building Code from the City
Manager which the Council received on November 10th, 1975, did not contain a recommendation with respect to the
adoption of Part II of the National Building Code, and that if the Council is desirous of having a regulation
governing "Approval in Part", wherein permits may be issued on a progressive basis then subsection 2.9.4 of the
Code has to be adopted - and that he has inserted, for adoption, the "Approval in Part" portion of Section 2 of
the National Building Code in the submitted By-Law amendment together with the City Manager's recommendation of
November lOth, 1975, save and except the modification made as a result of the Building Inspector's recommendation
to Council of July 5th, 1976 - and further advising that first and second reading to the amendment is now in
order, if the Council so wishes.
Mr. Rodgers advised that he has prepared another amendment to the Building By-Law, with a couple of
minor changes. At this time, he distributed copies of the said amendment, and explained that the amendment given
to the Council members with the above named letter talks about repealing Section 4, and that should be Section 5,
and the amendment also has Part 2 - Administration - Subsection 2.9.4, whereas the amendment just passed around
does not contain that and the reason for it is that the Community Planning Act prevents the municipality from
adopting the "Administration" section of the National Building Code by reference. He stated that what he has
done in the amendment that was just passed around is insert the portion of the "Administration" section with
respect to approval in part, directly in the by-law as a new Section 5(a). He stated that is why this couple of
changes are made, and the amendment passed around at this time just replaces the Part 2 reference to "Admini-
stration" - except for the changes described at this time, the original proposed amendment remains unchanged.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting
the Construction, Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John", be read a first
time.
Councillor M. Vincent, for clarification purposes, asked if Council can be advised by the Acting City
Manager, the City Solicitor or the Building Inspector if, in fact, there is any difference between progressive,
and first, second and third phase permits, or is Council's understanding of them now to be the same thing. In
reply, Mr. Rodgers stated that -- of course, if this is adopted approval in part of the by-law will take care of
that, but in the past any reference to the permits with respect to progressive permits or first, second and third
phase permits are only for clarification purposes - it does not turn a building permit into several portions. He
pointed out that a project could have several building permits over the period that the construction is taking
place. He added that this approval in part section makes it very clear that permits can be issued as the project
progresses with the understanding that the owner is not guaranteed that further permits will be issued; he thinks
it will clarify that point. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he mentioned that because there had been some
previous discussion at Council about progressive building permits and, in his own opinion, we did not have such a
thing as a progressive building permit yet. He asked if what the City Solicitor is saying is that, under this
by-law amendment, we will have a progressive building permit. The Mayor made affirmative reply.
Councillor Davis read the proposed clause 5(a), namely, "Application shall be made for the complete
project and complete plans and specifications covering that portion of the work for which immediate approval is
desired", and stated that he thinks the important thing is if the permit is for the foundation but the permit
covers more expenditure than the cost of the foundation, does that then apply to part of the steel work. He
noted that would be a progressive building permit whereas the other one - the phase - would be specifically for a
certain portion of the structure. He asked if that should not be more clearly defined in the by-law amendment.
. Rodgers replied that he does not understand the technical problem that it is causing - he does not know how
e can define it at the by-law level - this approval in part portion is taken directly from the National Building
Code. Using the Hospital as an illustration, Councillor Davis explained that the foundation permit, say, was for
five million dollars, the cost of the foundation was actually three million dollars, which left them a balance of
two million dollars, which they applied to the steel. He stated that that was probably perfectly all right under
he circumstances, but, under this by-law, he asked if that would apply, or if it would not apply. Mr. Rodgers
felt that the Building Inspector should comment on what effect that might have with respect to the two million
dollars. He asked if that was authorized in the plan. Councillor Davis added that all he is saying is that if
he permit is for the foundation and the permit is higher than the cost of the foundation, can it be applied to
he next phase. Councillor Kipping felt that Section 5(a)(b) covers that, where it says that the holder of the
ermit may proceed without assurance that the permit for the entire building will be granted - he felt that the
ey words are "may proceed". Councillor Davis replied that that means that if the permit is given for the first
hase it does not guarantee that the holder is going to get a permit for the whole thing. Councillor Kipping
agreed, but noted that the holder can go ahead within the money limit. Mr. A. Ellis stated that in order to try
o clarify this matter, a progressive permit has always been the basis of issuing a permit - the first $1,000.00
he permit costs $20.00, the next $1,000.00 is $4.00 per $1,000.00 from then on, and if the permit was issued
independently you would have to start at the first $1,000.00 again on each individual permit; therefore, this is
hy we called it a progressive permit; in other words, if it is one million dollars now, and then two million
dollars, it would only start at $4.00 per $1,000.00 from then on. In reply to Councillor Davis' question, he
stated that they said approximately three million dollars was spent on the foundation and therefore they had a
surplus left over - and that did not mean that the full foundation did not cost more than three million, as he
derstood his comments when he made them to the Building Inspector. Councillor Davis acknowledged that that is
correct, but when they started the steel work, he asked if they should not have applied for the second phase -
hat is, you cannot go into the second phase because your foundation is not finished - you still have two million
dollars left over. He added that if they do that, then it is a progressive building permit and they can do
--.1'")
b [) ...
~
:Jk//it'//?5,
~-Ao1W'
P/oll1l'1. /l'(V/S,
Comm.
1?M"".i/l-Iob.71 /
..'JJwe~;vnenT
eOh7m/~
-<Dlhe. A/'t?h?"JrI.1
Re/~ /lffh.e-/h.
+VdQcAer s&7ts
cJ' -/ence
fA/. Z'lJ'/eC.;j;oj>4I/
.{/?<<",.'/I l!ehslhf
.u
~/?k."r l?eeHers
/ne,.e.ilse
tY. 8.,(/~v()1" Cbn6
C!l?m#1.
('$u ~/t(',,;("'''
~ t'~3)
whatever they like if you had the plan. Mr. Ellis explained that the application was made for the ad-
ditional work. Councillor Davis explained that he did not want to bring up the Hospital - he just wanted
to know what this clause means, and he added that he guesses it means just about anything you want it to
mean. Mr. Ellis stated that he would take it that the progressive permit and the first, second and third
phase would almost be the same thing only the progressive would be the deletion of the first $1,000.00
for... The Mayor interjected at this point, that Mr. Zides was being asked if he had something to add to
that. Mr. Zides advised that it is very simple - it says that you get an approval for the portion that
you desire to get a permit for, and the plans have to be hand for that, so in a case of what we are
talking about, if they have foundations plans only, that is what they have a permit for. The Mayor asked:
with regard to this amendment, do we start right at the bottom - do we start allover again, for each step
forward. Mr. Zides replied that he had not thought about the money part of it but a waiver could be
written into the by-law if the Council so desired, he thinks, to cover that point. Councillor M. Vincent
stated that he understands the City does not have anything that relates to a progressive building permit,
and we are continually using the word "progressive" and he thinks it is causing confusion perhaps even on
Council and outside of Council. He asked if it is true that we do not have anything at the present time
that is called a progressive building permit, officially and legally. Mr. Zides replied that Councillor
M. Vincent is correct. Noting that Section 5(a) as proposed is approval in part, Councillor Green stated
that he sees no reason why you cannot deviate a bit to get the job rolling. Councillor Cave referred to
clause 5(b) and stated he is not too sure that he understands this. He noted: should a permit be issued
for part of a building, such as we have already done in the Hospital matter, the holder of such a permit
may proceed without assurance that the permit for the entire building will be granted - so that means as
he interprets it, that they can go on with 'the Hospital two weeks before it is finished and then ask for a
permit. He stated that he does not like the wording in that clause, "without assurance that the permit
for the entire building will be granted". Mr. Rodgers advised that what the Council has before it is the
ways and means of assisting the Building Inspector in administering this programme with respect to approval
in part; without this portion taken from the National Building Code, you have no authority, whatsoever, he
pointed out - it is strictly the issuing of building permits when all the requirements are met under the
by-laws which is very difficult to do. He pointed out that this is a relief to expedite the work and this
is what the wording is, and if the Council wants an interpretation of what this wording is, then he will
have to give it some study. Councillor Cave stated that he is looking for assurance that there can be no
hold-up, that they have to come back and get the second permit or the third permit as a progressive step.
Mr. Rodgers replied that they are both separate, as will be seen from 2.9.4(1) where it says, prior to the
issuance of a permit, approval of a portion of a building can be given.
.
I
I
.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Construction,
Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Respecting the Construction, Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John",
be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Construction,
Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John".
I
In reply to Councillor Higgin's question, !kr. Rodgers advised that the above amendment also
covers the adoption of the National Building Code by reference as well as the approval in part portion.
Mr. Rodgers advised that the Act requires that the view of the Planning Advisory Committee be
obtained before the above named by-law amendment is enacted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the views of the Planning Advisory Committee be
obtained regarding the ,above named amendment to the Building By-Law prior to enactment of the said pro-
posed amendment.
On motion of Councillor Green
.
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Recreational Development Com-
mittee, submitting a progress report regarding the Lancaster Memorial Field lighting project, and ex-
pressed the Committee's appreciation of the Council's support for this endeavour, as well as for the
provision made in the 1976 budget of the Recreation and Parks Department for the other necessary amenities,
that is, bleachers and appropriate fencing, backstops, et cetera, and noting that the bleachers and
backstops are already in place and that the fencing contract is about to be awarded, and advising that the
Committee has heard many good comments about this major facility improvement and that it will do much to
enhance the image of this community and the quality of life here -- be received and filed.
I
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he feels the Council could extend to Mr. W. J. McCarroll,
Chairman of the above named Committee, and to Mr. McCarroll's Committee, a vote of appreciation for the
progress that they are making and the interest that this citizens' committee is proving in this develop-
ment, and that he feels they certainly should be commended for it. Councillor Gould added that he would
expect that this group of people will endeavour to carryon other projects such as this throughout the
community.
On motion of Councillor Davis
I
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Judge Lloyd B. Smith, Chairman of , the
Liquor Licensing Board, Province of New Brunswick, in reply to the June 14th, 1976 resolution of Common
Council which expresses the Council's concern regarding the increasing number of liquor outlets in the
City of Saint John and in which the Council petitions the Provincial Liquor Commission to reassess their
policy regarding the establishment of licensed beverage rooms - advising that he shares the Council's
concern about this serious problem and that the Council's resolution will be placed on the agenda for the
next Board meeting; and advising of procedures that have been started or will be started in the near
uture dealing with short-term and long-term problems relating to liquor, and also advising that the Board
is considering a number of changes in the policy of the former ,Commission relating to the better control
of the issuing of various kinds of licenses and permits and in respect to standards and enforcement and is
reviewing the whole licensing sitaution; and stating that if any City Council makes objections at a public
.
~
,...
55~3
.
I
I
.It:'-a17 r
()U~/el-s
/ J?Cl"ed se
.
I
e/ei;/ 50h'e '
.i/f<<'P"~
..('fltpr
//eeI'/5t!:S
(sFI.iJ/
eVi!I'/t-s)
I
I S"ut-h /:17,(
:z>evelo.e. HIe.
c:,'P' I he.
JimA'" 'PM.$'
t/l1s/~hf&
p"up?/ses
· J?kls fhd
~r .lot-
!/hSI,U!ff
~/ses
~-A'Q1W
~
hearing to a license being issued in'that city, he thinks that their objection will be given a great deal of
weight by the Board - and noting that the Council's resolution will form part of the Board's permanent records;
and advising that with respect to the Special Events License, he does not believe the Licensing Board can issue
this type of license unless it is first approved by Council, and further advising that this permission must be
obtained before anyone can apply for this license, and, therefore, the Council does have effective control over
Special Events Licenses in its area; and stating that he admits it is a grey area of the law but one would think
that by the issuing of a building or renovation permit the city has a control factor before any application is
made to the Liquor Board for a license or change of license -- be received and filed.
Councillor Parfitt referred to the above named letter in which Judge Smith states, "I cannot speak for
the Board but I can state that if any City Council makes objections at a public hearing to a license being issued
in that city, I think that their objection will be given a great deal of weight by the Board. You are the
elected representatives of your city and you should know the situation in your area. Your opinions are therefore
not only very important but are also very informative. Your resolution will, of course, form part of our per-
manent records." and "May I draw your attention to one more tYJle of license, that is, Special Events License. I
do not believe the Licensing Board can issue this type of license unless it is first approved by Council. This
permission must be obtained before anyone can apply for this license. You do, therefore, have effective control
over Special Events Licenses in your area.". She stated that it seems to her a city council's opinion will have
more weight when an application is made for a liquor license, and that she is just wondering how the Council
members would measure up as a Council if a vote were taken, for or against, and if the Council were against it
and it were to appeal to the Liquor Licensing Board in Fredericton: would the Council be for, or against? The
Mayor noted that that is a question that would have to be dealt with when it is encountered, and the Council
members can express their opinion and send the information to the Board. Councillor MacGowan stated that she
definitely sees problems there because, many times, we have heard different Councillors say that in no way would
they get involved in such a controversial subject, and she thinks that this will be what will happen, time after
time. She added that she does not think that is the solution to our problem, right there, but she thinks the
rest of the above named letter is very good. She added that she would like to see the said point pursued a bit
further although she does not know exactly how to go about it - perhaps if the Council were to meet with the said
Board Chairman and tell him our concern. Councillor Hodges made the point that this is not the only problem on
the social scale in Saint John, and that there is also the problem of racial discrimination in this city, and
added that if the Council is going to take viewpoints on liquor, then he will have to bring in his pet prejudice _
and he is sure that the other Council members will bring in theirs - and ask the Council to support them in their
beliefs of that nature. He stated that he does not think that the Council members should look after anybody's
personal prejudices, as a Council, but they can do it as personal individuals.
Councillor Kipping called attention to the paragraph in the above named letter, "May I draw your
attention to one more type of license, that is, Special Events License. I do not believe the Licensing Board can
issue this type of license unless it is first approved by Council. This permission must be obtained before anyone
can apply for this license. You do, therefore, have effective control over Special Events Licenses in your
area.", and asked if that means that for anyone who wants a banquet license, or something like that, the Council
would have to approve it, because that is a special event, and so is a wedding party or a certain reception.
Councillor Davis pointed out that it would be a public Special Events License. Councillor M. Vincent expressed
the view that the said paragraph in the said letter is a rather important one because the Chairman of the Board
is making a suggestion on something which he, himself; does not seem to be very positive about, and if the
Council accepts the said paragraph the way it is prepared it would appear that the Council has not researched the
matter thoroughly enough to know whether, in fact, it is true or not. He felt that the Council should refer this
matter back to the Legal Department before passing the motion, in view of the said paragraph in the said letter.
Councillor Hodges pointed out that this matter is the commission of the Provincial Government and they have the
Justice Department who should be looking after that and giving them advice on this matter, and that the City's
Legal Department does not interpret for the Provincial Government. Councillor M. Vincent stated that the point
he w~s making is that he thinks the Council should be clear itself of its authority and responsibility, and if
there is something here that is legally questionable as it relates to Council the Council, should be aware of it
before it passes something. Councillor Kipping agreed, noting that the Council should be clear on the Special
Events Licenses.
Moved in amendment by Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named letter be received and filed and that the
City Solicitor be asked for his comments to Council on the said letter and, in particular, with reference to
Special Events Licenses as to what is covered by such Licenses.
Councillor Gould expressed the view that the Council should send this query to the Justice Department
of the Province and that the City should not be putting its work into that to give Council an interpretation that
the Provincial Government should be giving us. He pointed out that this type of license in the past has per-
tained to the Provincial Government and he questions the fact that, all of a sudden, Judge Smith believes that it
is now the responsibility of the City. During ensuing discussion, Councillor Cave stated that he knows that the
special permits involve many things and that he does not think the Council should get involved in this, what-
soever, and that he therefore will vote against the amendment. In reply to Councillor Gould's point, Councillor
Kipping noted that the Council gives this matter to City staff to Query it, and he (the City Solicitor) asks the
Justice Department. Councillor M. Vincent asked Mr. Park to advise whether the City of Saint John can, or
cannot, or has or has not anything to say about special permits. Mr. Park replied that he has no knowledge of
the subject, whatsoever. Councillor M. Vincent stated that is why he thinks the Council should refer it so it
will find out.
Question being taken, the amendment was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Kipping, Green, Higgins,
Parfitt, MacGowan and M. Vincent voting "yea" and Councillors Gould, Pye, Hodges, Cave and Davis voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from the South End Development Corporation Inc.,
noting that many of the City-owned vacant lots were used as junk yards and that there were several other vacant
lots in the South End that were unsightly, and requesting that the City enforce the Unsightly Premises By-Law, be
referred to the City staff for appropriate action, and that the said South End Development Corporation Inc. be
asked to identify the lots referred to in the said letter.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the South End Development Corporation Inc.,
requesting~hat the City have Mel's Used Car Lot, located between Queen and St. Andrews Streets on Carmarthen
Street, removed under the Unsightly Premises By-Law, and that appropriate action be taken regarding this matter,
be referred to the Building Inspector for information in a report to Council as to whether the said used car lot
is a conforming use or a non-conforming use, and for appropriate action by the Building Inspector regarding such
55'4
SD,aI, Fhlt
;zJen!/o"p P1(!m't-
aJo.p. .zn~.
.ZJ;lap/~~
JJemo//I-/ bh
.YIA".1" .L11~}o
h"e :z;ei"", -
'PrlVt"'J,E/bh:lJtJ
{'i# ef P;: M .13.
/nemHr.sJ/'p -/'ee
J1.oy.-If/",,,. f:1f/WIC/
s~Jo' PI' CosT-
b'1 (i'-/-5
/f.;,~(Jtu',dew'
/!Pm"''''htY/!f'
/Ia~KJ"V/tNtJ
.sub-~/V.
fr.KCA-S /fYlj,.: .
CI-I'1 Sp//Cdpr
7b//~" 2J~.
.(/umcl ~"$-IHed.
~#~
:Re-~OI7/h:7.
lJ/aI'N? /l~V/.s.
C'P~h7.
Aft1//. qll/;/Itj"j
ES+~s A~.
7?e-;;%p~/.nef
7f3hh.&/P/S-
C'p".m.
~""'!f:T~'
1?ohClI LX 1f/gJe"
Su"p,I6-J},...
lOT
/l/;.,PPJO-t- E~s
w"""~
".(C'h~ ~mJn.
t!t't-:t S;;;'t!/r-f?
use.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the South End Development Corporation
Inc. asking that a resolution be adopted by the Common Council to demolish abandoned buildings in the
South End under the Fire Prevention Act, be referred to the Building Inspector and the Fire Prevention
department, and that the said South End Development Corporation Inc. be asked to idenify the buildings.
Councillor M. Vincent pointed out that the City has a pretty good list already compiled that was
presented to Council of the vacant and dilapidated buildings in this city, and that he does not believe
that it would be any great task to point out the buildings that exist to the Building Inspector.
On motion of'Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that authority be granted for payment of the annual dues
for the year 1976 of the City of Saint John in the amount of $200.00 to the Cities of New Brunswick
Association:
AND FURTHER that authority be granted for payment of the sum of $4,372.00 which is the share of
the City of Saint John for 1976 of the cost of the Provincial-Municipal Council:
AND FURTHER that the covering letter from the Cities of New Brunswick Association regarding the
above named matters, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Harbourview Homeowners
Association, advising that a great number of children reside in the area covered by this Association and
that the Association's main concern is having trucks that are over one-half ton in weight removed from the'
area as the community feels such trucks are hazardous to the safety of their children, be referred to the
City Solicitor for a report to Council as to what action the Council can take in this matter, and that it
also be referred to the Police Department to determine whether or not such trucks are creating a big
problem in that area.
Councillor Gould recalled that wi~h regard to the above matter, development is taking place in
that area and this requires the movement of trucks all the time, and he stated that until the construction
is completed he does not see any way of getting the trucks off the road. The Mayor noted that the report
back to Council will include such information.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the application from Lloma Construction Ltd., for re-
zoning of 54,125 square feet of land on Cindy Lee Street, Martha Avenue and /lark Drive to permit the
construction of townhouses, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommend-
ation, and that the necessary advertising be authorized regarding this,proposed re-zonin&.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application from Millidgeville Estates Ltd. for
re-zoning of 46,208 square feet of land on Noel Avenue in Phase 3 of the Millidgeville Estates Sub-division,
to permit the construction of 14 town house units, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a
report and recommendation, and that authority be granted to advertise the said proposed re-zoning.
Councillor Kipping expressed his concern about density in this area and stated he is wondering
whether we should be p~rmitting further concentration of multi-family residences here. He noted that this
area is getting really remarkably filled up in that area right now. He added that he is also concerned in
this regard about the social effects and the effects on all other facilities - that is, water, sewer,
electricity, traffic, schools - and he asked if these have all been considered and judged no severe
problems in this area. Councillor Kipping and the Mayor noted that all these matters will be taken into
consideration in the report that is to come back to Council from the Planning Advisory Committee.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Hr. Henry J. Marquis, of Willet,
Marquis & Faloon, Barristers, on behalf of Mr. Ronald J. 11aber who recently purchased a lot of land on the
eastern side of Summit Drive in the Lakewood area and who has learned that his application for a building
permit cannot be approved because this lot lies in the path of the proposed Airport Expressway - advising
that in view of the length of time the Expressway has been proposed without being built, Mr. Maber is most
concerned that considerable time may yet expire before the roadway will be needed, and, therefore, they
ask the Common Council to consider either the granting of a permit to Mr. Haber for erection of a dwelling
on this lot within the City's zoning by-laws or that the City purchase Mr. Maber's land, or as a possible
third alternative, that since it is obvious that the City is eventually going to require the land, a
possible land exchange take place between Mr. Maber and the City -- be referred to the Land Committee and
to the City Solicitor.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Common Clerk.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,..-
e5b
.
I
I
~Qn.IL
Lsu.e
.
I
.
I
I
.
1":-
~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the nineteenth day of
July, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Hodges, MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye and A. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. R. Park, Acting City Manager, G. T. Clark, Q. C., Senior Legal
Counsel, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C. MacKinnon,
Commissioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides, Commissioner of
Community Planning and Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector,
and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend David Yarrow, of Trinity Church.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that occasion having arisen in the public interest of the following
public civic works and needed Civic Improvements, that is to say:
FOR GENERAL PURPOSES:
General Government - $26,970.00
Protective Services - $636,900.00
Transportation Services -
Cedar Point Mobile Home Park $11,812.00; Lansdowne Avenue $91,164.00; Rockland Road $36,799.00; Wellesley Avenue
$19,668.00; Rothesay Avenue Garage $70,634.00; Millidge Avenue $19,058.00; Golden Grove Road $3,763.00; Loch
Lomond Road $23,857.00; Lakeview Drive $3,966.00; Latimer Lake sidewalk $29,555.00; Westmorland Road $14,446.00;
Ellerdale Street $5,579.00; Lakewood Avenue $5,294.00; Pauline Street $7,553.00; Grandview Avenue sidewalk
$48,698.00; Churchland Road $51,220.00; McAllister Drive $69,981.00; Mt. Pleasant Avenue $60,832.00; McCavour
Drive $10,944.00; St. John Street $26,575.00; Main Street West $12,382.00; Chesley Street $6,587.00; Water Street
$151,012.00
-- $781,379.00
Urban Renewal, land acquisition and tourist building - $483,051.00
Housing - refunding of 1956 bond issue - $73,000.00
Recreation and Parks -
Arenas $300,083.00; Golf Course $35~553.00; Shamrock Park $10,468.00; Lancaster Memorial Field $62,674.00;
Rockwood Park $13,757.00; Community centres and playgrounds $19,618.00; Swimming pool $10,078.00; Boat dock
$9,748.00; Park roads and landscaping $36,721.00
-- $498,700.00
Total General Purposes - $2,500,000.00
FOR SELF-SUPPORTING UTILITIES:
Water construction and system development -
Loch Lomond Road watermain $40,237.00; Lakewood Heights watermain $3,071.00; Summit Avenue watermain $26,488.00;
Grandview Avenue watermain $19,024.00; Silver Falls Park watermain $11,310.00; McAllister Drive watermain
$102,051.00; Hickey Road watermain $10,585.00; Rodney Street watermain $36,200.00; Rothesay Avenue watermain
$19,789.00; Thornbrough Street watermain $11,667.00; Forest Hills pumping stations $25,762:00; Latimer Lake
chlorine plant $57,915.00; Land purchased $128,544.00; Subdivision services $120,357.00
-- $613,000.00
Water system - refunding of 1956 bond issue - $427,000.00
Sewer construction and system development -
Woodward Avenue $197,892.00; Visart Street $119,058.00; Lakeview Drive $16,301.00; Greendale $157,263.00; Ann
Street $13,897.00; Summit Avenue $39,999.00; Lakewood Drive $116,546.00; Crescent Avenue $23,020.00; Garnett Road
$35,579.00; Myles Drive $39,003.00; Fairville Boulevard $18,224.00; Marsh Creek $280,035.00; Allison and Francis
Streets 457,322.00; Lansdowne Avenue $54,372.00; Pauline Street $52,851.00; Westbrook Avenue $12,102.00; Rodney
Street $26,310.00; Mount Pleasant Avenue, East $50,000.00; Subdivision services $150,226.00
-- $1,460,000.00
Power Commission: Substations and extension to distribution system - $1,000,000.00
Total Self-Supporting Utilities - $3,500,000.00
A total for all purposes - $6,000,000.00
THEREFORE RESOLVED that Debentures issue under prOV1Slons of the Acts of Assembly 52, Victoria, Chapter 27,
Section 29, and Amendments Thereto, to the amount of $6,000,000.00.
Councillor A. Vincent referred to the descriptive material that was prepared regarding the City of
Saint John in connection with the calling for bids for the debentures from investment dealers, and he stated that
if the said material has to be added in this regard he wishes to go on record as saying that this information is
very dishonest and that he would like to quote that the truth many times has been stretched and, sometimes,
almost lied upon, page by page, in that material, and that he thinks it is hurting this city in the international
bond market. He stated that the material he takes issue with is as follows: the prospectus says that the nuclear
plant at Point Lepreau' is built by the Province of New Brunswick and is in the municipality of Saint John -
whereas, that plant is in Charlotte County; it says a miniature steel mill is on the drawing boards - whereas, he
understands we want that for a holding plant for Marsh Creek - therefore, that is a false statement; with regard
to the reference regarding a nuclear power plant at Point Lepreau - he understands that Point Lepreau is in
Charlotte County; the material says that Grandview Industrial Park has full capacity - that is not the truth
.
--~
bDu
~
because there at least three to four lots available for anyone who wants to put their money where their
mouth is - he understands that we have been friendly to certain people and the lots are not sold, but
there are no buildings on them; the material refers to a new department store - whereas, there is no
125,000 square feet of a new department store in the Brunswick Square - he is also told by a long-distance
telephone call tonight that the Hilton has not signed any agreement for a 250-room hotel across the
street, here - and if he goes on, certainly the press, particularly the New Brunswick Publishing Company,
owned by heirs and successors, do not have to deny that he made a statement that Saint John Dry Dock was
going to be expanded - and they said it wasn't, but in this material it says that the Saint John Dry Dock
Company currently is under a large expansion programme. He stated that he therefore proposed the following
motion.
.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the bond issue in question be held up and that the said
descriptive material be rewritten under the truth.
I
Councillor A. Vincent added that false statements have been made in the said descriptive material,
and that he defies his fellow Councillors to call him a liar in anything he said.
Councillor Davis stated that he thinks there are some exaggerations in this description, and he
added that there were, last year, also, in the last bond issue, also. He stated that he thinks it is
time, as Councillor A. Vincent said, that this was corrected and written in such a way as to point out
what does exist and what may exist - he thinks that the points have been stretched a little too far - he
would hate to hold up the bond issue for this, but he thinks the bond issue should go ahead with a rewritten
prospectus. I~. Park explained that this material in question was an endeavour to describe the city and
the economic area in which it is placed. Councillor Davis stated that he heartily agrees that this material
is stretching the point, considerably. He,added that we do not have to do that. Councillor A. Vincent
also made the point that the City does not have to do that, and that the City's credit is good and the
City has other things to "sell". Mr. Park stated that if there are corrections needed he will be glad to
have them made, if the points can be identified; at the same time, in view of the expectations of the bond
issue coming, and the manner in which it is being co-ordinated with other bond issues in the Province,
unless there is some very good reason for changing the timetable that has been adopted, he would not like
to see any change result in changing the timetable - at the same time, the corrections that are needed can
be made.,
I
.
Councillor Parfitt discussed with Mr. Park the matter of, and amount of, interest payments over
the period to amortize the bonds in this current bond issue.
Councillor A. Vincent explained that the reason he broached the subject was because he feels
strongly that this city has so many points to "sell" that we do not have to falsify the records - we can
speak on Labour productivity; on the Mayor's own personal record of his personal occupation, what the
Mayor is doing for other people; on our productivity; on the fact that we built the largest oil refinery
in North America with 6,500 employees, with a shut-down of only six hours - not only a North American
record, but the world's record. He felt that these are the kind of things that cannot be disputed.
Councillor A. Vincent then made reference to the debenture issue item of $73,000.00 for housing - I
refunding of 1956 bond issue - and stated that they should have been paid off and he asked why we are
issuing another $73,000.00 in bonds in this regard. Speaking further to the descriptive material, he felt
that it could say that we have a space for a hotel across the street - it does not have to say that Hilton
(or anybody else) has got 250 rooms, but we are saying it is already leased; and the Hilton people ar~
denying this, he pointed out. He added that there is no hotel lease there.
Councillor Parfitt asked what the proposed delay regarding this bond issue might mean. Mr. Park
replied that a delay, in his opinion, would be extremely serious; changes that are needed in the descriptive
material forming part of the prospectus can be made, tomorrow - these, he would be glad to have done; it
would be extremely serious, in his opinion, to change the timing of the bond issue because this has been
co-ordinated for about the past five weeks in advance through the Municipal Bond Co-Ordinator, and it is
likely to be to the City's detriment and possibly to other municipalities in New Brunswick if the tim~ng
were changed at this stage for something which is capable of being corrected at very short notice.
Councillor A. Vincent asked whether the City would be "buying" American bonds - that is, is the City .
opening this bond issue to the American market.
Question being taken, the motion to table was defeated, with the majority of Council members
voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent again asked the question as to whether the City is now going to public
tender to sell these debentures in Canada, or the United States of America, markets, or to the European
arkets. Mr. Park replied that the proposal, here, is to go to public tender with tenders to be issued as
soon as possible after approval is given at this meeting, with tenders to close on July 29th; we circulate
the tenders as widely as possible and any who may not be included on the mailing list that the City has, I
who wish to apply, would naturally receive a tender so that the City is open to receive tenders from
anybody who wishes to bid; the said mailing list involves about 118 copies going out - some of these are
to branch offices of national firms.
Councillor A. Vincent expressed the opinion that this is a dishonest tender call regarding this
debenture issue because we are saying that there is a Hilton hotel - and he pointed out there is no lease,
and that there is a miniature steel plant in the city, and there is none; we are saying that there is a
major Dry Dock expansion - and there is none; his feeling was that this information would be misleading to
any prospective purchaser of the bonds.
3ol1L 7$$ke
Question being taken, the motion was carried with COlillcillors A. Vincent and Pye voting "nay".
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he had to vote "nay" because it was a dishonest vote; the City is
sending out information which is dishonest to a prospective purchaser of the bonds. The Mayor pointed out
that the said material in the prospectus will be corrected.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS by resolution passed by the required vote of the Mayor and each of the seven Councillors
resent, being members of the Common Council of The City of Saint John, at a meeting of the said Common
Council ,duly called and held on the 19th day of July 1976 The City of Saint John authorised the issue of
debentures in the aggregate principal amount of $6,000,000.
.
.....
,...
557
.
~/7~
h,Sue
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
NOW THEREFORE be it resolved and ordered as follows:
1. That the said debenture~ ~n the principal amount of $6,000,000 shall be in serial form to mature
according to the following schedule:
1977 $360,000 1987 $240,000
1978 360,000 1988 240,000
1979 360,000 1989 240,000
1980 360,000 1990 240,000
1981 360,000 1991 240,000
1982 360,000 1992 240,000
1983 360,000 1993 ,240,000
1984 360,000 1994 240,000
1985 360,000 1995 240,000
1986 360,000 1996 240,000
2.
of 9 3/4%
per annum
March and
That the said debentures shall be dated September 1, 1976 and bear interest from that date at the rate
per annum for those maturing 1977 - 1981, 10 1/4% per annum for those maturing 1982 - 1986, and 10 1/2%
for those maturing 1987 - 1996, such interest to be payable half-yearly on the respective first day of
September in each year of the currency of the said debentures.
3. That the said debentures and related interest coupons shall be payable at any branch in Canada of The
Bank of Nova Scotia, far northern branches excepted.
4.
tAl.
That the said debentures shall be substantially in the form hereto annexed and marked with the letter
5. That the said
by the Common Clerk and
interest attached there
debentures shall be numbered consecutively, shall be signed by the Mayor and countersigned
the Corporate Seal of The City of Saint John shall be affixed thereto and the coupons for
on shall bear the lithographed facsimile signature of the Common Clerk of the said City."
, ( Spec imen Bond)
CANADA
PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
NUl-IBER
DOLLARS
$1,000
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
10% Serial Debenture
The Municipal Corporation of The City of Saint John under the authority of Chapter 27 of
!,Ile A<;,t~ ?fc;i;J\~l~egi'sl~t,iY.:"cA?",,"!blY,,9f cI~ew:,.Bruns,!i~l> for.'~he ye,a;r; J!,. D. 1889, entitled
"An Act to Unite The City of Portland with The City of Saint John, in The City and County
of Saint John, and to Amend the Charter of The City of Saint John and The Law Relating to
Civic Government", as amended, and the l-Iunicipal Debentures Act, and amendments thereto,
and pursuant to Resolutions of the said Corporation passed on the 19th day of July, A. D.
1976 for value received, promises to pay to the bearer (or if registered to the registered
holder hereof) at any branch in Canada of The Bank of Nova Scotia, far northern branches
excepted, at the holder's option, on the first day of September A. D.
, ,".-
the sum of
ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS
in lawful money of Canada and further promises to pay interest thereon from the first day
of September A. D. 1976 at the rate of ten per centum (10%) per annum payable half-yearly
on the respective first day of March and September in each year of the currency of this
debenture in accordance with and upon presentation and surrender of the proper interest
coupons hereto annexed as they severally mature.
This debenture forms part of an issue of a total principal amount of $6,000,000 payable
as to both principal and interest in lawful money of Canada, issued under the statutory
authority above mentioned.
This debenture is transferable by delivery except when it is registered as to principal
in the register kept by the Chamberlain of The City of Saint John and such registration is
inscribed on the debenture. Notwithstanding any such registration, interest coupons shall
continue to be payable to bearer and shall pass by delivery.
DATED AT SAINT JOHN THIS FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER A. D. 1976.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the said Municipal
Corporation has caused this debenture
to be signed by its Mayor and countersigned
by its Common Clerk and its Corporate Seal
to be hereto affixed on this first day of
September A. D. 1976 at The City of Saint
John, Province of New Brunswick.
Common Clerk.
Mayor
(Specimen Coupons)
Coat
March
of
The Municipal Corporation of The City of Saint John, N. B. will
pay the bearer on the date shown in the margin at any branch in
Canada o! The Bank of Nova Scotia, far northern branches excepted,
at the holder's option, the sum of Fifty Dollars being six months'
interest when due on the debenture numbered as in margin.
1977
$50.00
Debenture
Number
1
Arms
Coupon
Number
Common Clerk
55H
2und ...Issue
7e'7,Lers to
041//
I(at!;erine
/Ir?/",l?S
'?dli/on .fJ..on"
~-'7 /7C'C'0n:f
$H6-et'/y. ,.e
dpa~~h-C-
b'/ezjr. neOlr
'/0-'7/61-'711I CPr-
.2J~m rlct:',,~
IreQ~f:Jl:bl$'/s
.:z;,vedWl~h-&-~
.,(-6-~.
~
Coat
of
Arms
September
The Municipal Corporation of The City of Saint John, N. B. will
pay the bearer on the date shown in the margin at any branch
in Canada of The Bank of Nova Scotia, far northern branches
excepted, at the holder's option, the sum of Fifty Dollars
being six months' interest then due on the debenture number
as in margin.
1
1977
.
$50.00
Coupon
Number
Debenture
Number
Common Clerk
I
Councillor A. Vincent asked Mr. Clark if it is legal to renew bonds that are supposed to be
amortized; that is, is it legal for the City of Saint John to call tenders to sell bonds to payoff the
bonds the City owes in 1956. He stated that he maintains that it is not, in his personal layman's op-
inion. He pointed out that the Saint John Housing Commission has bonds due, and instead of the City
paying them off, it is bonding again. Mr. Clark replied that he can see no objection to it; bonds are
continually retired "by the issuing of further bonds. Councillor A. Vincent then asked: what about the
devaluation of the property. He added that this property decreased in value - we did not increase the
rent. In reply to the question, Mr. Park advised that in this particular case, the answer is that when
the 1956 bond issue was approved by Council it was set up on the basis that after twenty years $500,000.00
of the issue that was then made would be re-funded at maturity for a term not exceeding a further term of
twenty years - and that is the reason that $73,000.00 in one case, and $427,000.00 in another case, are
included in this issue as being re-funded. Councillor A. Vincent advised that when the Housing Commission
was set up, he was around, and he does not think the project he was discussing was re-fundable. He stated
that it is true that the City staff did not collect all the rent it should have collected - that is many
years ago - and with regard to the said $73,000.00 item of "Housing - refunding of 1956 bond issue" that
is not what the Act provides for. He asked for an explanation with regard to that item of the debenture
issue, as to why it is there. Mr. Park replied that the explanation is that in 1956 the Common Council of
the day resolved that of the bonds that were being issued in that year, at maturity, in 1976, $500,000.00
would be re-issued for a further term, and that is the reason for including $500,000.00 in this issue that
had originally been issued in 1956. Councillor A. Vincent asked that 11r. Park describe to him the said
item for $73,000.00, as that is the issue, not the $500,000.00. Mr. Park advised that the $73,000.00 is
part of the $500,000.00, as mentioned above; the amount of $427,000.00 is the item "Water system - refunding
of 1956 bond issue". Councillor A. Vincent then asked how come, after retiring the bonds on those 24 or
30 units of housing of which he speaks, there is only $73,000.00 left in the building and there is $427,000.00
left in the Water Department; he asked why the said $73,000.00 is in the first phase and not in the back,
as part of Haymarket Square. Mr. Park replied that the $73,000.00 is not necessarily relating to the
Housing Commission - the description that he has picked up is that it is housing - whether or not it was
Housing Commission he does not know - he rather thinks it was not - he thinks it was for expenditure in
one of the other housing developments in which ,the City participated - possibly in Crescent Valley.
Councillor A. Vincent asked if it is not true that it is the concrete house that was built across, and
torn down for the Throughway, and we got our money, and then we now want a bond issue on it. 11r. Park
replied that it is not that same item - that particular concrete house, as far as he recalls it, was built
in the early 1960'S, so it would certainly not be this 1956 item.
I
.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the Commissioner of Finance be authorized to call for
bids for the current debenture issue from investment dealers in accordance with the form of tender call
submitted by him at this meeting of Council:
AND FURTHER that the necessary changes be made immediately in the wording of the material in the
prospectus that was submitted at this meeting of Council by the Commissioner of Finance.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor A. Vincent voting "nay".
.
Mrs. Katherine (Joseph) Holmes, acting as spokesman for residents of the Bon Accord Sub-division,
presented a petition which advises that these taxpayers disagree with the construction of the 30-unit
(multi-unit) apartment building being constructed in the said Sub-division adjacent to the single and two-
family dwellings in Lomond Court and Bon Accord Drive area by Kennebecasis Investments Ltd. for the
following reasons: they were told when they purchased these properties that apartments would be constructed
over the hill some distance from their homes; this large unit in their back yards would devalue their
properties and make it impossible to sell in the area - there are already several homes for sale at the
present time which have been available for some months now; the schools in the area are not able to handle
the children already living there - more children would result in severe overcrowding and increase the
ratio of students per teacher which would not benefit any children, at all; the petitioners also feel that
there are enough apartments in the area at the present time, that are not rented, such as Century 21 which
is now offering a free month's rent to entice people to rent the apartments - there are several units in
High Meadow Park and Westmorland Place - the rents in these units have been cut from $240.00 to $220.00 to
try and interest people in renting them; there was an article in the local newspaper this past week on the
front page which indicated a surplus of housing, and the petitioners do not feel that this surplus needs
to be added to; they are concerned with the water pressue, and sewerage, and hydro facilities - that they
ill not be adequate to handle the extra load heaped upon them, as the pump house has not yet even been
installed for their sub-division; one of the most serious problems they face is the drainage problem _
ith every rainstorm, lawns are flooded as well as driveways - considerable sand and silt is washed into
he catchbasins in the sub-division - as well, large puddles are accumulated at the entrance to Lomond
Court - they feel the drainage problem will be added to because of the height of the ground level where
he proposed building is to be constructed, as the ground is much higher than the yards of private homes
surrounding same; the trees are being cut down, as well - they feel that as a result of this, the run-off
from the land will be even greater as there will be nothing to prevent the water from running down over
other properties; they are concerned with the developer escalating his building - of new apartment buildings _
hen all services are not even yet complete in this sub-division - for example: there is a 20-foot right-
f-way between two homes on Bon Accord Drive - it is supposed to be a walk-way - it is composed of large
ocks, boulders and debris from construction - it is not really able to be used as a walk-way at all. Mrs.
olmes stated that they would like to see the property owners of Bon Accord Drive accorded some privileges,
in that they would like to see their sub-division maintained as a nice, clean and pleasant place to
eside. She added that one of the most important items of great concern to them is with regard to con-
struction: they would request that a pre-blast as well as a post-blast survey be conducted by the con-
ractor to assure that any possible resultant damage is noted - blasting should be controlled as much .as
ossible, and done properly. She advised that homes were purchased in this sub-division as it is a
onvenient location for business and shopping, and they feel it could be a very nice, pleasant place to
I
I
.
~
,...
--9
ob ,
live if it is not defaced. She stated, that the petitioners ask the Common Council to do something to see that
this sub-division is maintained in a condition in which it is pleasant to reside, and that they would appreciate
any effort on the part of the Council to control the situation on behalf of the taxpayers and residents, of Bon
Accord Drive.
.
I
Councillor Parfitt asked if Mrs. Holmes knew, when she bought her property at 94 Bon Accord Drive, that
the plan for the said 30-unit apartment building came in on May 6th, 1974 and that approval was given for it on
June 12th, 1974. Mrs. Holmes made negative reply. Councillor Parfitt stated that she understands that some
houses are 100 feet away from the proposed apartment building, and other houses are 130 feet, and she asked if
that has been moved closer, perhaps for soil conditions encountered, and so on. She asked if Mrs. Holmes would
estimate that the said apartment units were that distance away. In reply, Mrs. Holmes stated that her own family
were advised when they bought their land that there would be apartments constructed in Bon Accord but that they
would be at the end of Bon Accord Drive up over the hill, some distance from the one and two-family homes, and
they understood that the rest of the area in the first phase of Bon Accord would be composed of single, two-
family and townhouse units; their main complaint is the fact that most of the trees have been cut down - it is a
large, barren area and it is right up against the property line of homes along Bon Accord Drive - and there will
be a large parking lot with, she presumes, at least space for 44 cars as there are two buildings going in there _
and they feel that will devalue their properties and just create an eyesore, in general. With regard to zoning
of the land, Mrs. Holmes stated that they came in to City Hall when they bought their property and they were told
that it was one- and two-family zones with multiple-unit townhousing, which, to her, does not mean a 30-unit
I ~ ~~~ apartment building, or a 14-unit one, as well as the three 12-unit buildings that are already constructed there.
11 e., ~~ With reference to Councillor Parfitt's suggestion that perhaps the building had been moved closer, Mrs. Holmes
~Ve>~~ made negative reply, stating that the point is these residents were told it would be a distance away, over the
,(.'~~. hill, but actually it is to be on top of the hill, right behind their houses.
:l]fm #e~Q.
S"J-aiy,
'o/Bn-I?/e.
;14-
.
In reply to Councillor Pye's query as to who are the Kennebecasis Investments Ltd., /1rs. Holmes advised
that she believes it is owned by /1r. Paikowsky and Mr. Cook, the owners of the development from whom they bought
the property on which they constructed their own home, in the original - they were the owners of Bon Accord Sub-
division and they sold the lots. Councillor Pye asked if she could quote any specified distance at which the
multiple dwelling complex was supposed to be from the one- and two-family area. Mrs. Holmes stated that she
cannot - they were just told "up over the hill, on the extension of Bon Accord Drive" - it goes in back of Bon
Accord Drive, not up over the hill.
I
During discussion with Councillor Gould, Mrs. Holmes stated that they are aware of what "multiple
residential area" means, but they did not know it was zoned for that when they bought their property - they
asked, and were told single, two-family homes and townhouses. Councillor Gould stated that he is quite sure that
the area under discussion for the said apartment house was zoned for that, and the developer have a right, of
course, to build what they feel the zoning allows. Mrs. Holmes stated that they are aware of that point.
Councillor Gould, with reference to the matter of blasting, advised that that is a legal obligation and that the
property owners would have to sue the other person, and the City does not get involved with that type of thing.
Mrs. Holmes replied that the City can control a contractor or a developer, she believes, to see that he does
things properly, and the petitioners request the surveys to which her presentation made reference with regard to
blasting - she believes such survey is the responsibility of the contractor. She added that she believes that
the City can see that the blasting is done properly, and by a qualified person, and that she understands the
point made by Councillor Gould that with regard to the question of damages it is a legal case between the pro-
perty owner and the developer.
.
Councillor Pye, referring to the location of the apartment buildings in question that are being con-
structed, asked if they are within their rights or are they exceeding their authority and moving closer to the
one- and two-family area. Mr. Zides stated that they are not, as he understands it, moving closer - there are
other problems involved that have been raised here - they are certainly building within the limitations that the
City has - they are in an area where the zoning is right for them and they are placing the buildings appropriately
within the regulations. He stated that he thinks the problems are something different, that have to do with
drainage, and have to do with the fact that people did not know that buildings of that type would be permitted _
that trees are being stripped - and so on; what he is saying is, that the people who are proposing to put up the
apartment buildings are within their legal rights, under the, Zoning law. He stated that there are several points
he would like to bring out: we were hoping that they would save some trees, obviously, and asked them to do
that - one of the Planning Department staff went out and talked to the owners and, apparently, some of the
clearing at the back part allegedly (he cannot prove anything like that) took place by some of the owners of one-
or two-family homes, so he said, encroaching on his property - Mr. Zides stated that he does not think that is
important, but he thinks what is important is that this morning there was supposed to have been a few trees left
there, and a lot of the trees were originally scrub and would not be saved once you startlayfung out parking lots
and knocking down a way for vehicles and equipment to get to the building site - he has been told that there are
some trees around the building and that they are clearing only the area that is about five feet around in the
perimeter of the building, trying to save some of these trees. Councillor Gould asked if there is any way we can
assure the people in that area that their concerns with regard to water and drainage and that type of thing, can
be corrected - if, in fact, it is a problem. Mr. Zides replied that it all depends on what the water conditions
are like - if, for example, it is water coming off a street and running across somebody's property then it is a
question of curbing, he thinks, to have some control - people laying out parking area and so on should drain
those properly - he reminded the meeting of the kind of surface and sub-surface conditions we have in Saint John
and stated that it would take an underground water, let alone surface run-off - it would take a real specialist
to cope with the problems here - in fact, we have had people from the Provincial Department of the Environment
looking at certain areas in and around parts of the city and the problems are very technical to try to resolve _
all we can do is to try to get people to properly drain off the surface water. Councillor Gould asked if Mr.
Zides is saying that the City would permit them building because they are within their rights but, yet, because
of the drain-off, that the city - once they are up and they are gone, or so on - is going to be responsible then
for the problems of drainage and the cost then is borne by the taxpayers. Mr. Zides replied that he was not
saying that, and added that he thought he was saying that when the water comes off the City streets or the City's
sanitary storm sewer system, the City has a responsibility - but what he was saying is that soil conditions and
sub-ground conditions for water are .so tricky in certain parts of Saint John on the site itself - there he is
saying that the City has no responsibility. Councillor Gould asked if it would not seem sensible that if those
people were going to build in such areas as Mr. Zides had just spoke of, that that type of precaution would be
taken care of by the developer before the City would approve his development. Mr. Zides replied that it would be
an ideal world if that happened - he added that it just does not happen - it happens in some cases and, as the
Council knows from experience, it does not happen in many others. Councillor Gould asked if there is any way the
City can make sure it happens, particularly when this problem has been brought to the attention of the Planning
Department. In reply, Mr. Zides stated that he does not know how the Department can - first of all, there is not
the technical know-how in Saint John to cope with all the sub-water surface problems. Councillor Gould asked if
Mr. Zides is saying also that the City does not have any by-laws to govern that and telling people they cannot
build in those areas. Mr. Zides replied that we do not have enough laws to cover all the exigencies - there is
no question about it. Councillor MacGowan stated that she is concerned to hear Mr. Zides saying this because he
knows the problems we have had with people building up and running into other people's yards and the Councillors
receive many calls about these problems. She felt that, surely, before a building permit is given they could
insist that there be some sort of drainage, even if it is only a ditch to run it off - or should that not be part
of their drainage system. Mr. Zides replied that he sometimes feel very sorry for people in cases like that, and
I
I
.
~
560
~
:lkn /lccPJ"d
S~-/iY,
ClfJaJrfmel'd-
~/L.1"
JV5te~h ~/mes
Ca/'tJ/
/tJ'f?a/r/ck
he has had occasion to go to the Legal Department for advice. He stated that (1) our laws that we operate
under are not all that inclusive, (2) as far as the Legal Department is concerned it is none of the City's
business once we get problems on site - for example, some of the Council members are familiar at least
with several cases in Saint John where surface water has run off one lot on to the other - and the re~
course is a civil action between the parties involved. Councillor MacGowan felt that this is ridiculous,
and stated that we should be protecting our people and that we should get the law that is necessary. .Mr.
Zides replied that the City does not have as much power as some people seem to think it has - it does not
cover all exigencies and it has limited powers under which it must act when it controls development - if
it does not have a specific enabling piece of legislation to authorize it to do certain things, it just
cannot do it. The Mayor stated that he thinks this is something that the Minister mentioned when he was
down here - that we should be looking into asking the legislation to prepare such laws to give the power.
Mr. Zides noted that we have a long history of asking for legislation in the Planning Act, and getting
very little of it.
.
I
Councillor MacGowan then referred to the water pressure, sewerage and hydro question and asked
if these have been checked out - will they be adequate; there is no pumping station there - is it re-
quired - is there low pressure there, now. Mr. Zides replied that he thinks it should be understood at
the Council and the general public that when somebody proposes a development - a sub-division, like the
Bon Accord - it is not done out of focus with relation to all the City requirements, notwithstanding the
fact that we cannot require everything under the sun - but what we can require, for example, is adequate
water pressure, adequate storm and sanitary sewers - and what actually happens is that when a development
proposal comes in there are a great many City agencies that sit around and examine the proposal and each
agency's requirements are supposed to be met - so, for example, if you have a sub-division like the Bon
Accord coming in, we have a sub-division review meeting, as it is called, and at that meeting there are
people from Engineering, Power, Recreation, Fire Department - in certain cases - and so on, down the
line - there are quite a few people involved and they all bring to bear their own department's requirements
on the particular sub-divisions; so, all he can assume is that when there is a proposal for a sub-division
like the Bon Accord it is the responsibility of the Engineering and Works Department to come in and tell
us what is required, and that is what the developer has to provide. Councillor MacGowan asked that Mr.
Zides spell out what is the law with regard to blasting. Mr. Zides replied that it is a Provincial
matter - the Department of Labour has its own rules and regulations; typically, it is very difficult for
the ordinary person to be fully protected - it is awfully hard to get any of the people who are going to
be doing any blasting to come around and (a) make a preliminary survey, and (b) to accept responsibility.
Councillor MacGowan contended that if they do not accept responsibility they should not be blasting
because we have had this problem before and she thought it was looked after - we had a problem down in the
Dominion Park area and at that time she followed it through and she was assured that we would not have any
more problems - that there was a proper inspection - that they could not let off a blast unless it was
according to certain things, with so much coverage, so much power, and all the rest of it. ~tr. Zides,
during further discussion, advised that the persons who do the blasting do so through Provincial regul-
ations and that it does not come through the City at all. Councillor MacGowan stated that she wonders if
we could have a report on exactly what requirements a blasting officer would have to meet because she
thinks this is most important, because she does not think it is up to the individual home owner - she
thinks this is nonsense. Mr. Zides replied that he would be glad to attempt to bring a report in.
I
.
The Mayor asked: when they did the planning, did they consider the schools. Mr. Zides advised
that the School Board is represented at the meetings he spoke of (sub-division review meetings) and the I
Board has a different attitude of planning for schools than he thinks the general population has and he
thinks that some of it stems from the New Brunswick system of bussing school children around - which a lot
of people do not agree with although they do not fight about it; and the other point is the lack of money
control that the Department of Education has; when you get into a problem in certain areas the first
reaction of the school planners is to ask where can they take these school children, because they know
they are not going to get the money even if they would like to get a school there. He added that this is
the way the Board has been doing, and he believes they are already bussing school children from that area.
Mr. Joseph Holmes of 94 Bon Accord Drive asked for permission to speak.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that Mr. Joseph Holmes be permitted to speak.
.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion, noting that this was not an item listed
on the agenda, and the Mayor had cut him off by a majority of Council vote and it would take a majority of
Council vote to have Mr. Holmes speak.
Mr. Holmes advised that when they moved out there as the school before they started in the
summer, they had talked with the School Board staff and they said at first the children would be going to
Lakewood Heights, and the majority of people out there had children most of whom were starting in Grade
I - there is no 'sidewalk where Loch Lomond Road and Bon Accord are situated and these residents were
rather concerned about the safety of the children - it is their belief that the School Board told them
that that development was supposed to start a year ahead and they had pushed it off to wait for one more
year before they started on it and at the time Century 21 took up the lax in Champlain Heights which moved
the Bon Accord Sub-division children to Lakewood Heights (school) which was originally planned for Cham-
plain Heights. He added that their children go to Champlain Heights now, in their bus, but there is no
sidewalk out there, to begin with - this was their biggest problem right then because they were more
concerned with the children. Mr. Holmes asked !1r. Zides: when they (developers) come in and present the
plan to the City, do the Planning people check the land out. He explained that in that area there is a
considerable amount of underground springs which contribute to this problem of water running down on
everybody's property - even in the summertime dry weather, anytime, water would be running down under-
neath if the earth were dug up, and when they laid that line, it was that way.
Mrs. Carol Kilpatrick requested permission to speak.
I
I
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that Mrs. Carol Kilpatrick be granted permission to speak.
Mrs. Kilpatrick advised that she resides at 15 Lomond Court. She advised that the problem of
the petitioners is as much one of moral irresponsibility as what it is legal irresponsibility. She stated
that the developers told each and everyone of them when they bought their properties that all apartment
construction would be on the upper side of the hill (that is, on the other side of the hill from Bon
Accord Drive), and now, it is coming right in their backyards. She stated that she believes she read in
the newspaper that the Council is giving study to sub-division financing; she stated she realizes the
property developer has no legal responsibility to tell people who are buying part of the land what he is
.
.....
,....
.
I
I
:J(lJ7/JeeorL
SuJ-Pl/v.
/!Fm"e
J/~f'
. kel/lI@edi1S/s
.L I1vt?s1m6';
/d.
H/'Ja1hcix/
Sf.:;,Ie~hf.
I
~HIh!r.
I'8'p0#
:lklltf/n~
PJ;(7/fr
.5:~ 'If.~/fJ/7r.7
/IO.sp
. /ld/I?~ ~:t
I71ffr.
e(7P1F~pl'
Lea~e
0/:1 J"eep/en"t-
{~~s.e
~/Dh}
1?'$se/'t
l.IE"f~/~H/eJrt-
',(.u.
Jle"fi / 0 /'J
;:(,(11,(
I C;i'//Il~I":S.
4u-!JoJOdff
to hi"e
~()hlle/
amm. Whole
~~i:-e~.f"-
-ten;,P. 'pP$~/
.c,;nlt? ~d.
?et-Jhki.an
2,,/;';>11 $.kn.
It....
561
going to do with the rest of it - however, she feels he does have a moral responsibility - and she would appreciate
it very much if, in order to protect citizens in the future, the Council could see fit to put some sort of a
stipulation into its new sub-division ruling, stating that the developer must disclose what he intends to do with
the land, and so inform each person as he purchases the land. She explained that each and every person who
purchased amongs these petitioning group were definitely misled, and they were charged premium prices for the
lots, and they are going to end up in an area, because of this building, which is not premium at all.
Councillor MacGowan asked if Mr. MacKinnon feels that the water pressure and the sewerage will be
adequate. Mr. MacKinnon replied that the sewerage is designed to handle the volumes for the entire development -
the water pressure that presently exists has not sufficient pressure for the larger capacity - however, the
discussions with the Engineering Department have included in the design a pump which will give greatly increased
pressure in the entire sub-division; the pump is the developer's cost. As to whether there is sufficient hydro
power out there, he stated he would assume that the power requirements are the same as the other utilities - at
the sub-division review meetings, all of the utilities are present - there is another utilities co-ordinating
meeting, and they are familiar with the power requirements and he would assume that the power is available
although it may not actually be on site. Councillor MacGowan asked whether Mr. MacKinnon will make sure there is
sufficient power, in any case. Mr. MacKinnon replied that the Power Commission would look after those require-
ments. Councillor MacGowan asked if he will personally make sure that the said Commission does so. Mr. Mac-
Kinnon made affirmative reply.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to know, for the record, who are the developers of this
sub-division; the original developer. Mrs. Holmes advised that the original developer of the sub-division is
Kennebecasis Investments - he sold lots to private people to build their own homes and he also sold lots to
several contracting companies: Acadia Contractors and Lloma Construction were two of the main ones - Lloma
Construction constructed the apartment buildings at the top of the hill and left an ungodly mess allover the
place which still has not been cleaned up. The Mayor interjected during ensuing questioning by Councillor A.
Vincent, noting that the question before us is: do we approve the apartments, or do we not.
Councillor Pye stated that in view of the fact that no longer is there a great need for apartment
buildings - we know that in Century 21, for instance, there is a ten per cent vacancy and it varies anywhere from
five to ten per cent throughout the city - in view of that fact he would like to ask Mr. Clark the following
question: would it be legally correct to re-zone the land back to one- and two-family homes, as originally
planned - in view of the fact that we absolutely do not need any more apartment buildings, which fact is common
knowledge, he added. Mr. Clark stated that he understands that this project is now under way. Mrs. Holmes
replied that they are clearing the land but they have not started construction yet - they have had workmen out
there clearing the land but that is as far as it has gone - she believes they were stopped a few days ago by this
petition - they were told to stop - now they are clearing it up again. The Mayor advised that the question from
Councillor Pye is one that should be presented later when the Council is discussing the matter, and will call Mr.
Zides into the discussion as to the original plan. Councillor Pye acceded to the Mayor's suggestion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for May be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the report for June of the Division of Technical and
Inspection Services, including Plumbing, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent felt that the Provincial Government should not be permitted to put any steel
above the Regional Hospital concrete foundation without a building permit, thus receiving the same treatment as
any other citizens of this city with regard to building permits.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that by
resolution dated June 29th, 1976 authority was given to purchase a sanitary landfill compactor by the most
advantageous way, and that in the discussion on this resolution the Council asked that consideration be given to
leasing the equipment, with the Pension Fund providing the purchase price - this would be a capital investment
with the lease payments representing a combination of income plus amortization of the principal; that the lease
payments quoted by the supplier, together with the purchase option to be exercised at the conclusion of a three
and one-half year term, would provide a return on the capital investment of approximately 9 1/4% per annum - this
compares with an equivalent of around 10% per annum if invested in trustee securities - it is, accordingly, not a
particularly worthwhile investment for the Pension Fund; that his recommendation is that a lease agreement be
entered into between the City and Rosser Sales & Equipment Ltd. for the following schedule of payments:- $1,000.
plus P.S.T. on signing, $1,000. per month plus P.S.T. - July to December, 1975, $2,000. per month plus P.S.T. -
January, 1977 to December, 1979 - and further, that consideration be given to the exercising of the option to
purchase on, or after, January, 1977, as provided in the lease, depending upon the availability of funds in the
budget for the Municipal Dump 1977 -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that in
reply to the request made at the Council meeting of July 12th, 1976 that a search be made of records to see if
the City Manager has authority to hire, and recalling that the request was made during discussions on a civilian
appointment to a temporary position in tbe Police Department - the Council in Committee of the Whole in December
1975 expressed the wish that no position be filled in the City Establishment without their knowledge and consent,
and that in Committee of the Whole on February 23rd, 1976, the Council relinquished this temporary control and
the normal powers of the City Manager in this respect were re-established, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that the proper action would be for the Council to confirm, by resolution,
the hiring of the above named person to the said temporary position, and that his reason for suggesting same is
because he would like to relieve the Chief of Police and the City Manager of any ill doings, and support their
position by saying that it was alright. The Mayor stated that the Council accepts that. Referring to the copy
of the City Manager's letter to Committee of the Whole on February 23rd, 1976 which speaks of vacancies occurring
from time to time which may have to be filled, and others may be left vacant for a period, Councillor MacGowan
felt that it should be clarified what the Council's intent was (in making the above mentioned resolution that
date in Committee of the Whole) - whether it was a matter of filling vacancies or whether it was a matter of
having new positions. She stated she feels the Council was thinking of vacancies, in this regard, and she added
that, in which case, you would not need authorization. She stated that, at the same time, she has been given to
understand that the Chief of Police legally has the right to fill vacancies. She asked that Mr. Clark answer
-6')
b 0.;
{''''if /I/~r S .
CI~-t-~pJo/?!Y -{-p
A/Joe f7t!?r.sM/?e1
/ld/J11' t!'~ff ~.
J}ep.!f. ~-&. Z9
t7l' /lsd. 2Id!l-
hs;;. pit
.lM~'y' Zn5p:do;.
~S/s7fah<!e
3~d/Ylsl()J?
..3y-.I.;;/ w
$~-r//yJ.5/Dn
(!p~-t-- .s~ar/n
f7(:1I/e.~
.7J. ~.E.E.
,(~hC.;wster4 1-
.,(/,q- srdl"/-/rN1
K(II 6../76//+
/lSSt?C'.
C'hl'H-,cks (;~6:;)
2J. /I.;dff~M .I:-t7L.
S'e~/7 andhl
eo_.<~L.
;fe&'ft.~ h>M-s~
,.e j7e>rl'
r4111{..//Sh7 0
".~cre~;t>.n
~dl,.t-/es
"'f?If, ;. eye k
I1U/S.i/hc-e
that question. Mr. Clark replied that that is the Act of 1956 - the Chief of Police has that authority -
the Council sets the Establishment, the Chief makes the appointments. Councillor MacGowan noted that, in
that case, the City Manager does not make the appointments, so we are not actually abiding by the Act Mhen
we give the City Manager the authority to fill vacancies. Mr. Clark stated that he really thinks the
authority properly lies in the City Manager's hands under the new Government Act but the courts do not
agree with him. Councillor MacGowan felt that it would be wise to check it out, to make sure we are doing
it the correct way.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Acting City Manager, dated July 15th, 1976,
regarding a Deputy Building Inspector, assistance for a Building Inspector, or an Assistant Building
Inspector. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he feels this matter is so important that the Council should
table it for one week.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above named letter be laid on the table for one
week.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the majority of Council members voting "yea".
Read a letter from the Acting City Manager, recalling that by resolution of May 25th, 1976, 'the
Council resolved in part that the recommendations of the City Manager regarding the sub-division cost"
sharing policy be referred to local developers with the request that they give thei~ views on the proposed
cost~sharing changes in the Subdivision By-Law, and that the Council later requested that the schedule
laid before it to accomplish this interchange be accelerated so that a third reading of amendments to the
said 'by-law could take place early in August; and advising that the submitted information has been pre-
pared, which, together with the By-Law as it now stands, is being circulated to builders and subdividers
on their request, with July 30th, 1976 set as a time-limit for their submissions. The letter states that
it would be in order, it is understood, for the Council at this time to give first reading to the proposed
By-Law based on the said submitted material, at the same time referring Review Numbers 1 to 4 to the Legal
Department for drafting, and the whole information sheet to the Planning Advisory Committee for its
comments. The letter further states that after submissions are received from subdividers and the said
Committee, the Council may make any revisions or refinements considered desirable, and second and third
readings of the By-Law could be accomplished on August 9th, 1976, putting the programme of revision on a
schedule indicated as acceptable by Common Council. Councillor MacGowan proposed a motion for first
reading, but this motion was not seconded.
On motion of Councillor A: Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until all the ,in-
put answers are received from builders and subdividers.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor MacGowan voting "nay". She pointed
out that there were other things referred to in the above mentioned letter from the Acting City Manager in
this matter that should have been resolved, and stated that she hopes that they will carry through whether
the Council has done it or not.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that authority be granted for payment of the following
construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engineering services, regarding the following
named project that was undertaken in connection with the Department of Regional Economic Expansion pr9-
gramme:-
Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 9,
dated June 30, 1976
$ 64,948.71
$ 3,306.33
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority
be granted for payment of the following invoices, namely:-
Chitticks (1962) Ltd.
D. Hatfield, Ltd.
Stephen Construction Co. , Ltd.
30, 1976 (June 16-30, 1976)
5, 1976 (June 16-30, 1976)
2, 1976 (June 16-30, 1976)
$ 13,084.31
$ 18,636.95
$ 2,912.00
June
July
July
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the report of the Recreation and Parks Department
covering the period from April through June, 1976, be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent commented that the above is a splendid report and that the persons res-
ponsible for its preparation should be commended. Councillor Davis pointed out that this report lists
fourteen items of vandalism, and that this is sort of a let-down after reading such a great report and
discovering how many thousands of people get enjoyment and other benefits from this programme, to end up
on this pretty bad situation. He stated that he wonders if the people who are taking part in all these,
programmes are not losing all their games - we are losing to a group of people who are winning (vandals) -
they are winning the battle - there is no other way to look at it. He stated he thinks it should become a
battle between those who are getting benefit from the City's recreation facilities and those who are
destroying these facilities. He stated that he does not think it is solely the Council's part and the
part of the Police Department - he thinks that all these people should become involved and, if we have to,
we should give prizes for "squealing". He stressed that something has to be done because this is a
terrible situation. He stated that he thinks the people who are using these facilities - and all of us
are, at some time or another - should form a team and see what we can do in fighting this team of vandals.
Councillor Hodges stated that he agrees with Councillor Davis. He noted that one of the said fourteen
items refers to motor cycles, and he stated that he wonders if the Chief of Police could have some of his
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,..-
5B~3
/IJ~fll'C~o/e
J1<</.s.:#)Jce re
. /'lee/'. f.k/ I/~'
~ceJ)9t-.
I
Ildin~
0;f'f /17://'.
I
. S/m,m:/ s
fj wimh? Ifl~
'pDt>/ ~
, Si"'?5e>Pi
l'on,5/-/V.(efi
.(~d.
7J4nn.#lfiv/,s.
I ~PA7h7.
1JK/ht'/l?!1
:8r~-w
IY~/. :P1,q-
l?od€
.
I
I
.
~
pollcemen look into that situation. He added that motor cycles make noise and there are not that many motor
cycles that the Police do not know where they all are. Chief Ferguson signified that he will do as requested by
Councillor Hodges. Councillor Hodges suggested that perhaps there should be a different method of fencing in
this kind of situation, and added that he is not against brick or stone fences being used which should help allay
costs incurred by vandalism to other types of fencing. He noted that good progress is being made in the inst-
allation of lighting at Lancaster Memorial Field.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, advising that
with regard to Progress Estimate Number 15 in the amount of $1,250.00, payable to Simpson Construction Ltd. with
regard to the construction of the Simonds swimming pool, which had been laid on the table by Council resolution
of June 28th, 1976, he has been assured, through the Commissioner of Engineering and Works, by the Project
Engineer that this Estimate is the last and final payment due, and no other monies are due to either the con-
tractor or the architect -- and further advising that during the course of construction there were 17 change-
orders approved by the City's architect, resulting in net extras to the contract totalling some $14,000.00, and
that the major extra was for $11,000.00 and covered additional foundation work which became evident as necessary
when construction got underway -- and that the original contract was estimated and priced on drawings and in-
formation obtained from the construction plans of the building already erected, and that these latter plans did
not show the complete extent of work necessary for a swimming pool foundation; and further advising that in
April, 1975, when the guarantee period expired, an inspection was carried out by the City and the School Board
and a list of 6 items requiring further work was established, with the cost estimate at $1,250.00, and approval
for the release of the general hold-back was given, less the Estimate of $1,250.00 - and further advising that
these 6 items have now been satisfactorily attended to, resulting in the recommendation for the payment of
Estimate Number 15; and further advising that other problems of a construction nature have also occurred, such as
leaks, a sage in the ceiling, et cetera, but these were the responsibility of the contractor and have been
corrected by the contractor at his expense - the pool is now in operation and any further work necessary will be
of a purely maintenance nature, and will be the responsibility of the School Board -- be received and filed, and
as recommended therein, authority be granted for payment of the said construction progress certificate and
approved invoice, as follows:-
Simonds Swimming Pool
Simpson Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 15
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 15,
dated June 22, 1976
$ 319,250.00
333,389.29
Nil
332,139.29
$ 1,250.00
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by CouncIlor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising
that the Committee supports the proposed by-law now before the Common Council to amend the City's Building By-
Law, and that the Committee believes that the Council should adopt the National Building Code (1975) in lieu of
the current 1970 version and that it should be possible for a project to proceed on the basis of approvals in
part as proposed by the insertion of a new ,Section 5A (a) which corresponds to subsection 2.9.4 of the National
Building Code, be received and filed.
With regard to the said Building By-Law amendment, Councillor A. Vincent recalled that he had asked the
City Solicitor to give consideration, when we are amending this by-law, that there be specific outlays that only
a permit for phase one, two, three or four be provided, and that the City Solicitor has failed to do, he noted.
He recalled that he further asked that where a contractor takes a permit from a property owner and fails to
complete the job, for whatever reason, that the City have some recourse. He stated that he mentioned a specific
building that troubled the Building Inspector for over a year - and neither of these are in this by-law amendment.
He stated that those are two resolutions that he asked, and that his fellow Councillors assured him that the City
Solicitor, who assured him, at the time, would give consideration to - yet he does not find it in the by-law
amendment. He asked if, before giving third reading to this amendment, the Building Inspector could be asked if
it would not be to his advantage to have these two things in that amendment, which Councillor A. Vincent is
asking for, because the Building Inspector has been abused by large contractors, large corporations and bumming
contractors - finance scalpers - about which he was just talking. He stated that through his own livelihood he
knows the building game, and what he says is true, that these two things should be in the by-law to make the jobs
of the City staff a little easier. The Mayor asked if Mr. Zides could answer the question as to why this was not
included in the amendment. Mr. Zides advised that Section 5A of the proposed amendment deals with those phased
permits. Councillor A. Vincent replied that it does not say "phase 1, 2 or 3". Mr. Zides stated that he thinks
the reason it is so is because the City Solicitor was trying to use the same language that is in the National
Building Code - he added that he thinks, by reading the said amendment, that is the intent. He stated that the
other point that Councillor A. Vincent raises, has not been touched on. The Mayor asked if he feels it is of
value that it should be. Mr. Zides replied that he cannot say whether it is legal for the City to do it, or not _
he thinks there are advantages, obviously, if it can be done. The Mayor asked if Mr. Clark can answer anything
to that last question. Mr. Clark stated that he is not familiar with that second named problem. He stated that
the first problem is dealt with in the amendment - instead of "phase 1, 2 and 3" it is an overriding thing - as
they put in for it, it is covered. Councillor A. Vincent stated that with respect to that overriding aspect, it
is to the advantage of the developer, not the City, and it certainly embarrasses the City Manager, the City
Building Inspector's Department because we should be issuing phases permits, and if you say "excavation of
foundation" you should not be permitted to put anything above the foundation, and if you say "from here to the
roof" you should not be able to put the cladding on - thatis what he is saying - that is degatable. He stated
that he wanted to make it clear to Mr. Clark that there are contractors who take out a building permit, who take
a large payment from the property',uwner, who "disappear", who are permitted to take other permits - they are "con"
artists - never completed the job. He stated that he is saying there'should be some legal course of action to
protect the property owner who gets a contractor, who gets a building permit, who starts the job and he does not
finish the job. He contended that that legal identity should not be permitted to have another building permit
until he finishes that job. He stated that he does not know how to do it, but he thinks some consideration
should be given, and he will even agree to add an amendment in this regard.
Councillor Davis referred to the said Section 5A of the amendment which says, "complete plans and
specifications covering the portion of the work for which immediate approval is desired..shall be filed with the
authority..." and stated that the last big problem the City had was with an over-estimation in the cost of the
first phase and they carried two million dollars into phase two - the erection of the steel work, for which plans
were not filed, he understands. He stated that he thinks that this clause should be rigidly enforced - he added
that he thinks Section 5A (a) takes care of that - that phase two should in no way be started even though the
job was done for a lot less than anticipated - in other words, the permit was too high. Mr. Clark advised that
this follows the provision in the Building Code and should be inserted into our By-law. Councillor Davis replied
564
~
.lJu/M!/nf
:I&-A..;JW
(!/iy S(;;;(;-i/~
Jlehl'7 J:;Ij~~UIS
7((lY)~/L./. !If.Jer
/l1;'jlll/'t' 'If'fI~
~OJlut' e..~~.
C/~y 5e1//c/tf?r
1fI/J?/sle" hf~A'-
~y-S
/!/""iWC eK~"Oi
t%{y.>>//(;o/Io".
;(/~tet?,n A~:;l!'.
~/~/ eY4'.I71 s)
/J':.71.J/fHPr Ibh;.
,t''rrt'(lr 40?.I7S/h,
.2tc'.
a,~.h? W,?(l/e
/lflJ7tu'wr~8h~~
s.:r.a,'I1f~1 .As:
ftn70/'7ent (J..,.,P
7(. 'Kkh.;JM.st>h
,(":J: .(eV/he
/;".:llErvin
~d S9'.2>ev'~1'
""'t?n-e- l"e>h7.n..
(lOUI1. 2bns,
lI~e$,;p. Y/nr!'t!'I'J
that this amendment is alright - this covers it. The Mayor suggested that the present amendment be
given third reading now and that Councillor A. Vincent come in with that other idea when the City Solicitor
returns from holidays and that the Council put that in as an addition to this, at a later period.
Councillor Davis stated that the other point he wanted to make was with regard to Councillor A. Vincent's
second request, which is the expiry date. Mr. Clark pointed out that there is a six months' expiry on all
permits, anyway, under the City's present By-Law. Making another point, Councillor A. Vincent referred
to "house and furnishings", citing a case of one developer where there is two million dollars worth of
partitions and the difficulty of anybody finding out that the building had been taken out of that - his
point is that some provision should be made that when they call tenders for what is called "clad building"
(that is, a building with the four walls, and the load bearing walls, and nothing else) - then they come
back in and they move in all the partitions and everything else - that should be all charged to the
building, all these fancy walls - all the carpeting - the complete cost of the building - and he does not
think we are getting that. The Mayor stated that that is a good point.
.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled,"A By-Law to Amend a By-Law
Respecting the Construction, Repair and Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint
John", be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law Respecting the Construction, Repair and
Demolition of Buildings and Structures in The City of Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to
the adoption of the above resolution.
I
",Read a:letter from the City Solicitor, with reference to the letter received on July 12th last
from Mr. Henry J. Marquis, solicitor for Mr. Ronald J. Maber, who has had difficulty in obtaining a
building permit from the City because his parcel of land on which he intends to construct a building lies
within the proposed Airport expressway, advising that he has consulted with the Planning Department, and
has examined relevant plans, and as a result of this examination, he is satisfied that Mr. Maber's lot is
not within the path of the proposed Airport expressway, and further advising that, therefore, if Mr. Maber
can meet the ordinary requirements of the Zoning By-Law and Building By-Law, and other required regulations,
Mr. Maber is entitled to a building permit and it should be issued to him, forthwith.
.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that the Land Committee would like to have a meeting with the
Legal Department regarding the above matter because it is true that Mr. Maber's property is not on the
boundary - however, once we put that street through, he cannot get into his property.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for a week and
sent to the Land Committee and the Legal Department, and that the Land Committee be instructed to meet
with the Minister of Highways for New Brunswick to find a firm policy on how we are going to finance the
proposed expressway to the Saint John Airport.
The Mayor advised that the Land Committee at a recent meeting, felt that probably further
discussion Should take place with Mr. Maber because the land he wishes to develop is the last lot in an
area that was sub-divided some time ago, and if the proposed highway 'to the Airport is put through this
lot is cut off and it would be necessary to provide access to this one lot by means of a tunnel or an .
over-pass. Councillor Davis pointed out that, in addition to that, we are dealing not only with the
right-of-way (we can, with the Provincial assistance, acquire the right-of-way), but this particular
property is not on the right-of-way, but access to this property is destroyed if the expressway is built.
He noted that we have this problem all the time, but we have no policy towards this problem. He stated
that Mr. Maber should not be penalized, but, then, on the other hand, why should the City permit the
development of Mr. Maber' s lot to go through and then acquire the property at a greater cost, and against
his wishes. He stated that we must get a policy decision by Council.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, in reply to
Common Council resolution of July 12th last which referred to him a letter from Judge Lloyd B. Smith,
Chairman of the Liquor Licensing Board for the Province of New Brunswick in which the Chairman states that
he does not believe the Licensing Board can issue a Special Events License unless it is first approved by
Council - advising that it is his opinion that a Special Events License cannot be issued by the said Board
unless approval is granted by the Council - and advising that with respect to the issuing of a Special
Events License (Regulation 72-86 states that, "the Licensee shall obtain clearance from the Fire Marshal,
the Minister of Health, the Provincial Secretary and the Municipal Authority"), if the Council has no .
objection to the issuing of such license Council ought to authorize the Common Clerk to grant approval of
the license on behalf of the Municipal Authority - and further advising that he understands that Special
vents Licenses are mainly licenses granted by the Licensing Board to functions like the annual Beer
Gardens that take place throughout the Province during the summer months; and further advising that
Special Occasion Permits are granted by the Liquor Licensing Board to organizations for private functions,
such as parties and weddings, and these functions require no approval from the City of Saint John -- be
received and filed.
.
I
Read report of the Committee of the Whole
(as follows)
I
To the COMMON COUNCIL of the City of Saint John
The Committee of the Whole
report s
Your Committee begs leave to report that it sat on Monday, July 12th, 1976, when there were
resent Mayor Flewwelling, and Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Pye and M.
incent, and your Committee begs to submit the following report and recommendations, namely:-
That Messrs. Robert Richardson, ,Ellis J. Levine and Edwin D. Ervin be appointed to the Saint
ohn Central Business Development Corporation.
.
That Councillors Davis, Hodges and M. Vincent be appointed a liaison committee to the Market
quare civic centre project.
9th July, 1976
aint John, N. B.
Respectfully submitted,
E. A. Flewwelling,
Ch air man.
~
(sgd. )
,.....
565
. .t',.
.
W!Hh.;9,'f(i;.
. ~Uh?"'. Jj/ho/e
/ilam-ff ->1-
~Pt?~h16"
Ce.h?hI.
Il11ql"P~ ~
{!Uh7flIOK t;.
/l1'P'f6/A" [
fT(U~/~
tJn~h_ :!bY/s,
11. t/helf'hT-
ef- 0';
.
Pl:Jbh. /ldY/s.
Co.mhl.
1Ja!f'nre nt- II,
I reK frf" pub-
/, e pu~".se
/4ncttt'
.:JRh7t!'$ ,.{
7/~
'115eJ-,(/1/.
I /lS:5If'~ ro
SKb-R'/r. p,6
2kys/R'e
w; Ke~/ J?,7
~e-:Z'hh?ff
/l'l<iilh#,.d
7han,RS'.n
an$Jruel.Co
. ..(-I~
~hh. /ldlY/s.
C'f?nr__
411"411/7$_
7:.T :k17S6'h
t110Jlk -/P..."e
I
I
~
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Co~cillor Hodges
RESOLVED that section 1 of the above report be adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that section 2 of the above report be adopted, and that the
report be received and filed.
Councillor A. Vincent advised that he was not present at the July 12th last Committee of the Whole
meeting, and he noted that there was nothing on the agenda for that meeting to indicate that he was going to be
knocked off the Market Square development committee. He stated that he is a little disturbed, being a stone
mason and brick layer by craft, that the Council would see fit to knock him off that committee. The Mayor
replied that that was not the case - it was a case that a committee was to be named - this was the committee. He
advised that it has been the Council's policy, and he recalls Councillor A. Vincent suggesting it not long ago
that the Council should start making these changes as the Mayor had promised, that people would be changed around
on committees. He stated that these changes are being made, slowly, in this regard. Councillor A. Vincent
pointed out that it was called a different committee. The Mayor replied that the above named committee is a
liaison committee; Councillor A. Vincent asked whether, as a member of the other Market Square committee, he isto
hand his files over - he added that he has spent a lot of money privately (as a member of that committee) and he
does not mind that, of course. The Mayor stated that he would have to check to recall what the duties were of
the other Market Square Committee to which Councillor A. Vincent was referring. Councillor A. Vincent stated
that if the Council is opposed to him pressing for Federal Government aid for a Labour Temple and for a library
then he will gracefully get off the committee. He recalled that the Market Committee of which he was speaking
was composed of former Councillor Arthur Gould, Councillor Davis and himself, and several other citizens, and
that committee met with several people. He added that he will gracefully retire from the committee.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the
Common Council accept the sum of $1,040.00 in lieu of land for public purposes in respect of the James L. Tippett
Sub-division, and that the letter from the said Committee, advising that Mr. Tippett owns and occupies an 18,170
square foot lot on the easterly corner of Manawagonish Road and Birch Street and is requesting permission to
divide it into two lots - one lot of 10,470 square feet would contain his existing dwelling, and the other or new
lot would contain 7,400 square feet and is for sale purposes - and further advising that both lots meet the By-
Law requirements; and stating that the Property Management Branch estimates that the market value before the sub-
division of the resulting new vacant lot would be $13,000.00 (at 8% of the $13,000.00, the sum of $1,040.00 is
payable to the City) and that this money is to be deposited in the City's trust fund for the acquisition and
development of land for public purposes -- be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, whose
letter advises that Murdoch-Lingley Limited has submitted a plan showing a widening of a portion of Bayside Drive
consisting of a 25-foot-wide strip approximately 1,475 feet in length which is being severed from the Canadian
National Railways property opposite the Courtenay Avenue intersection - the Common Council assent to the sub-
division plan, with respect to the widening strip which is intended to vest in the City as part of Bayside Drive.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the application from Manford Thompson Construction Co. Ltd.
for re-zoning of the block of land on the southeasterly corner of Ocean Westway and the road to Lorneville to
permit the construction of two-family (or single family) homes on approximately 35 lots therein, be referred to
the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation, and that advertising with regard to the said
proposed re-zoning be authorized.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. and Mrs. T. J. Jensen, making application
for temporary location of a mobile home on their property on the St. Martin's Road, as shown on the submitted
sketch, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a recommendation.
Consideration was given to a letter, dated July 15th, 1976, from Dr. H. M. Watts of 194 Princess Street
with regard to the Exhibition Commttee of Common Council, the Exhibition Association and taxation of same,
information regarding the Exhibition operation, and with regard to membership on the Board of Directors of the
Exhibition Association.
The Mayor advised that at the present time there is one opening that we know of on the Board of Directors
of the above named Association, as a Director, and he suggested that the Council might ask the Exhibition people
if they would allow the Common Council to submit a name for a member to occupy that place on the Board. Refer-
ring to Dr. Watts' letter in which the Common Council resolution of September 12th, 1975 is quoted with regard to
the establishment by Council of a special committee, Councillor Gould asked whether or not the said resolution is
quoted correctly. The Common Clerk replied that a check has not been made in this regard, to determine the
wording of the Council resolution. Councillor Gould felt that this is rather important, because the Council
Committee did not do what it was supposed to do, if that is the case - at least, as he understands it. The Mayor
noted that the said resolution will be checked.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until the Council
receives the additional information referred to above.
The Mayor noted that Dr. Watts' letter is therefore tabled until Councillor M. Vincent returns to the
city.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Common Council direct a letter to the Exhibition Assoc-
566
.1;;<)/10. /f'ssoc.
rn u~~t!'".sA//
$I-e-t? I"e>r
me//~P1-S4t:N" .
'pN5tm
-<and C'e>.mh?
Fb~,,, ~/hm.
;175~c"'pr I"e..
meeer /J?C'i~~rA
~c.
.7J,;;.,tf. 0-1" ah"'~
"';:;P,P'~ $tal
P"'~/OJ7 ,,0
eJ/MKnJIO/7C- ~/~.,
:a:.17 /laco,-.d
SU'~-d'/y.
~hn<!!"kdi's';s
:z;.,J't"S~ P?t5'~.s
A-t-<<.
'P/aJ7P? /lfZ't'is.
C't?-0-'h.
e,:l~ ~;jc~,,,.
(104'-'1. /J. J;j~
iation asking if the Association would accept a nomination from the Common Council to the Association ',s
Board of Directors.
During further discussion on the above matter, the Mayor advised that he understands there are
quite a few vacancies on the above named Board of Directors.
Councillor Parfitt stated tht she was hoping, under the agenda item "Mayor's remarks" that the
Mayor would bring up the matter about which she got in touch with the Mayor on the week-end, and she asked
if the Council could have a report, from the Land Committee as to how the negotiations are going on with
the land for the medium-security prison, and she added that she would like to know the rationale behind
the thinking. The Mayor asked for a report on that subject from Councillor Davis, Chairman of the Land
Committee. Councillor Davis advised that the negotiations are still going on - there is quite a dis-
crepancy in the City's asking price and the Federal Government's offering price - he thinks that is the
only thing that is keeping the two parties apart. He added that the Land Committee expects to have a
meeting very soon with Mr. Hoyt and Mr. Moore and perhaps Mr. Bruce Angus. Councillor Parfitt asked if it
is short-term benefits the Committee is thinking of in a leasing arrangement. The Mayor pointed out that
the Land Committee is going to meet with the Federal officials again to discuss the matter. He stated
that he would trust we would do everything we can to be able to retain that prison facility in the City of
Saint John. Councillor Davis advised that the Land Committee feels that the land is worth a certain
amount of money whether it is used for a penitentiary, housing, or whatever - the Land Committee feels it
is worth that and the Federal people feel it is not worth quite that much. Councillor Parfitt felt that it
is taxpayers' money, in any case, that is involved, and she asked why the property in question could not
be sold for a certain amount and the City invest the money. Councillor Davis made note at this time of the
copies of a letter that had been supplied to the Council members with correspondence for this meeting of
Council, the letter having been written by the General Manager of the Power Commission of the City of
Saint John on July 8th, 1976 to the Assistant Deputy Minister, Field Operation Service, Department of
Consumer and Corporate Affairs which discusses the procedure under which it will be necessary for an
inspector to travel to and from Fredericton and Saint John as and when available when the Commission's
account, meter inspections and customer meter dispute cases are to receive service from the Fredericton
office of the said Department, and the fact that this arrangement would be most unsatisfactory to the
Commission and its customers, and which asks that the situation at Saint John be re-assessed and that 'at
least the present standard of service be maintained. He noted that the procedure as referred to in the
letter could be a very costly and onerous thing and that he thinks the Council should sssist the Power
Commission in any way it can in retaining this inspection in Saint John.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor A. Vincent
RESOLVED that the item referred to above by Councillor Davis be
placed on the agenda at this time.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the Common Council give every assistance to the
Power'Commission of the City of Saint John and to Mr. J. J. Donahue, General Manager of the Commission,
that Mr. Donahue asks the Council to give in the matter referred to in the above noted letter written by
Mr. Donahue to the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the petition submitted by residents of the Bon Accord
Sub-division, advising that they disagree with the construction of the thirty-unit apartment building
being constructed in the said Sub-division adjacent to the single- and two-family dwellings in the Lomond
Court and Bon Accord Drive area by Kennebecasis Investments Ltd., and submitting certain requests for the
control of this situation as referred to in the petition and in the verbal presentation by the spokesman
for the petitioners, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report to Council on the problem.
Councillor MacGowan advised that she would suggest that the Legal Department be included in
referral of the said petition and requests for a report to Council. The Mayor replied that the two
departments will work that out. Councillor A. Vincent requested that the Planning Advisory Committee
supply him with a list of the properties that changed hands out there, that the petitioners made these
statements about, because these corporations, these real estate buyers, these land developers, should be
informed that they have right to make commitments of the Saint John Town Planning Committee or of the'
Common Council as they have in the past. He pointed out that they buy property and sell it to somebody
else and they guarantee that somebody will not build a glue factory, or an ammunition factory along side
f you - but they have not got that right. He felt that it is about time that the Council took some legal
action to prevent that kind of false advertising, false propaganda - which is what it is. The Mayor
replied that this is a good point.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...
567
.
I
1
Coun//. V,M
.7Jon'"
I5sue
1 /lS?~/t
st~n
eoHdJ'l~
~..A.-td.
~,#~&
.
If~d's
1
Jbj,Ce~.et
C'077JpilJ'+;J'b've
rtpum /f7~
/975; /"76
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-sixth day
of July, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, MacGowan,
Pye, Parfitt, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, M. Zides, Commissione~ of Community
Planning and Development, A. Ellis, Building Inspector, D. Buck,
Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services of the Community
Planning and Development Department, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer
of Operations, J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of Administration
and Supply, and C. Sullivan, Senior Project Engineer, of the
Engineering and Works Department, E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police,
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, and P. Clark,
Fire Chief
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on July 12th
last, be confirmed.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that at the said Council meeting he had requested certain changes in the
descriptive material that was prepared regarding the City of Saint John in connection with the calling for bids
for debentures from investment dealers, and he noted that several of the changes have not been made. Mr. Park
outlined the changes made in the said brochure prior to printing of same.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on July 19th
last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
granted
asphalt
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority be
for payment of the invoice from Stephen Construction Co. Ltd., in the amount of $51,842.42 for supplying
to the Works Department during the period July 2nd to 15th, 1976.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the report of the Water and Sewerage Division of the
Works Department for the month of June be received and filed,
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report of the Works Branch of the Engineering and
Works Department for the month of May be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the comparative report of the Police Department for the
months of January to June for the years 1974, 1975 and 1976, be received and filed.
Discussion ensued with Chief Ferguson on various aspects of the said comparative report and Chief
Ferguson was commended for an excellent report.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager, dated July
19~/)?~~tfJf 22nd, 1976, advising that funds have been provided in the 1976 Capital Budget to which will be added financial
1?,1.,r. aid through a stimulation grant for the construction of the Willie Avenue Standpipe; that a component of this
/7_ . J' - structure is a 500,000 I.G. water tank and that rather than draw up specifications it was felt that it would be
I' ~/~I' an advantage in ascertaining what is available from suppliers in this respect, and proposals were therefore
~~e~ called for the said water tank and replies were received as noted in the said letter; further advising that the
/J/'~' ~ low proposal, namely, that of Horton C.B.I. Ltd. of Montreal for the supply of a steel plated tank to be erected
~/~/e r7YtP. on the site at a cost of $112,610.00, will require painting which has been estimated by the said firm at $22,785.00.
~~J.1~)9/~ however, it is felt this could be done for less cost locally, and it is proposed to call tenders for the necessary
zl~~;f painting at the same time tenders are called for the access road and the construction of the required watermain,
Jtfo~ ~~ and it is therefore recommended that the said proposal of Horton C.B.I. Ltd., which is good up to and including
~~ . . July 30th, 1976, be accepted and authority granted to enter into a contract with the firm before that date, be
~ec~. received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
~...,d'e?S to
c.w//
. ~,....,-i-"h5
~
In reply to a query, Mr. Barfoot advised that the above cost includes installation, and that the
difference in price between a steel tank and a Gunite tank was considered by staff and that the City has both
ypes in service at the moment, and it has been found that steel tanks have to be painted about once every ten
ears on the outside and this will of course increase the cost, but Gunite tanks have sometimes developed other
roblems which have been more difficult to correct, and he believes that the Gunite tank over the long period is
cheaper in maintenance costs, but the savings realized with the maintenance are not sufficient to overcome the
568
~
21<<ffL J?$~t.
oil $.S/5r-.nce" or
/lsd:Jj/~ Lh~/
~9.7.:lJIay.JhS/
\ AeiJ?K ~hJ'.h1-
C!./ltJl/ ~)"cE.
/Yew .,L;ir~ Slf.n.
if~ahd;-ad.
,(~
"(4I-lh?e,, /ak
e6/p.I'/he f?/8n
Mhh I7fJPi{?-
(/,?~/) AM.
t?1/~;//e
.Je~ e~-
H7 pJ;,Ht-
/l.J).I ~~~
J}.7?FL
1-18~eh a&ef
S~,lQfe~~ 1.
men-r ~Hr
~o,( ff,o/
/l.s.9OCI;wlI5"~
.,(-t-tL
$ 578,579.00
300,412.64
43,519.80
162,048.84
3,
$ 94,844.00
$ 17,810.00 .
18,685.45
15,882.70
3 (Final)
$ 2,802.75
initial price differential. Councillor A. Vincent asked how many hours of labour are involved in the.
erection of the steel tank compared to a Gunite tank, and Mr. Barfoot replied that he could not give ~n
answer at this time to that question. Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels that this should be con-
sidered, and he proposed a motion, which was not seconded, that this matter be tabled for one week and
that the City Manager submit to Council some facts and figures in this regard.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
Consideration was given to the letter from the Acting City Manager, dated July 15th, 1976,
regarding a Deputy Building Inspector, assistance for a Building Inspector, or an Assistant Building
Inspector, which had been tabled by Council at its July 19th meeting.
Councillor A. Vincent proposed a motion that the City Manager be instructed to seek an Assistant
Building Inspector due to the heavy workload of the Building Inspection Department and due to the fact
that, in his opinion, the Building Inspector and the Council can be sued personally for work that is not
inspected. Councillor MacGowan stated she was prepared to second this motion as she feels we would not
have an Assistant Building Inspector for more than five months due to the retirement of the Building
Inspector in the near future, and she feels the cost of consultants as recommended in the said letter from
the Acting City Manager, would be much higher. During further discussion on where funds would come from
for this position, Mr. Park noted that we are getting added revenue from increased building permit fees,
however, when the budget for this year was considered, this position was deleted from the budget. During
further discussion on how this position could be created, Mr. Barfoot noted that there are already several
Assistant Building Inspectors in the Building Inspection Department. Councillor A. Vincent, with the
consent of the seconder, withdrew his previously proposed motion, and thereupon moved that the position of
Deputy Building Inspector be created. Councillor MacGowan stated she was prepared to second the said
motion. Considerable discussion ensued on the hiring of an additional person to carry out inspections on
large projects, and on the recommendation of the Acting City Manager that consultants be hired when
necessary, on a fee basis.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for input from
staff on what the title of a new position in the Building Inspection Department would be to carry out the
work required, and for a job description of such position.
Councillors Gould and MacGowan voted "nay" to the above motion.
In reply to a suggestion from Councillor A. Vincent that the City Manager meet with the Com~
munity Planning and Development (Land) Committee for input in this matter, the Mayor stated that the City
Manager would be invited to meet with the said Committee in this regard.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority
be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for
engineering services regarding the following named capital projects:-
1.
Fire Station - Carmarthen Street & Leinster Street
Rocca Construction Ltd.
Construction of new fire station
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated July 7, 1976
2.
Latimer Lake Chlorine Plant
John Flood & Sons (1961) Limited
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3 (Final)
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated July 19, 1976
3.
Millid~eville Sewerage Treatment Plant
(a) A.D.I. Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated May 31, 1976
6,019.39
3,050.65
$
$
(b) A.D.I. Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 4,
dated June 30, 1976
$
$
9,070. 04
3,055.95
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority
be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for
engineering services regarding projects that have been undertaken in connection with the Department of
Regional Economic Expansion programme:-
Hazen Creek Sewerage Treatment Plant
Godfrey Associates Limited
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 38,
dated June 30, 1976
$
$
39,052.59
722.91
.
1
I
.
I
I
I
.
~
,..-
569.
J).7r',F.k. 2.
~;,e.R.sler
~j""PJ7 .4:,t"r
~n.
S/~p.son t1q-
s~rlfc-t-. ./"-#4'.
/J1/"'etntt, f!i-c.
I C'b// S'el#er
6?..!i'$,Pt? a~-
S~rlL.~. ./M.
I
/kl/Y/~
Ct~ IIJffr.
'.
I
.41!'~Sa1t-h"01'
'2>.7. &dler
/11 'lies Sid-,/;;
tp,pte~
Sef#f!l!:il5e
~-,.(~w
he, iieIe~'iI-
$ewe' ,{;,Ier.;l!s
1t'~hJ.h;
Il'lf/- .I4~D.
~
!VfI/J-{/17/0J?
'nJ;:/opoS
sJlkl'7 's
I'.e//I?j'
laW?~~
Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station
Simpson Construction Limited
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 5
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated July 9, 1976
$ ... _\\
582:, (100.\ QO
293,312.00
41,673.75
180,374.25
5,
$ 71,264.00
3.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer
Gaspe Construction Limited
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 12
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 12,
dated July 16, 1976
$1,463,230.25
1,417,543.23
68,359.56
1,046,001. 55
$ 303,182.12
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Acting City Manager with regard to the
the letter from Mr. D. I. Adler on behalf of residents of the Myles Subdivision, with regard to the increase of
fees for laterals under the Water and Sewerage By-Law, advising that residents of the area were all aware in 1975
that a fee of $100.00 was required but many deferred the payment awaiting actual start of the work - some who
wished to make payment and approached the Works Department after December 17, 1975 were told that work
could not proceed because of weather conditions, and that fees of $100.00 were accepted from fifteen applicants
after June 7, 1976, the date of the third reading'of the By-Law,and the fee charged was changed to $200.00 when
notification of the By-Law change was passed to the Permit Section of the Water and Sewerage Department; further
advising that because of the discussion at the Council meeting of June 28, 1986, payment of $100.00 was accepted
from twelve applicants on June 29th as payment on account with the understanding that an additional $100.00 might
have to be paid later before the installation would be made, and that the significant factor is that a lateral
costs well in excess of $200.00, depending upon ground conditions, and this is the reason for the By-Law increase
from $100.00 to $200.00, and recommending that the new fees for water and sewer laterals be applied from the date
the By-Law amendment was passed, namely, June 7th, 1976, but that no additional charges be made now from ap-
plicants who had made payment prior to June 7th, 1976, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
In .reply to a query from Councillor Higgins, Mr. Barfoot stated that the City does not attempt to
contact everyone who may apply for a permit, although there is usually quite a bit of publicity on such changes,
and once the Council passed third reading of the By-Law amendment the new fees go into effect. Councillor
Higgins suggested that if a project is substantially completed, or if the project was started prior to June 7th,
the date of the by-law amendment, everyone on that street should pay the same fee, and any projects started after
June 7th, the fee is $200.00, and that he would have to vote against the said motion. Councillor M. Vincent
stated that he too will have to vote against the motion because of the reasons mentioned by Councillor Higgins,
and also because of the fact that Council was told by the delegation that appeared on June 28th that they made
effort to pay the fee as early as last year and the money was not accepted. Councillor Gould stated that each
hook-up is an individual project and he suggested that in the future an effective date for changes in by-laws
should be included in any amendment, and he does not see how legally the City can charge the old rate. Mr.
Barfoot stated that as he understands the situation, this is a project, part of which was done last year, and
some people delayed until after December 17th last year to make application to connect their sewer, and then
there is another group for which Council authorized a new project this year who want to also get in under the
previous water and sewer rate, and that unless a date is set for implementation of such changes in advance this
problem will arise, and even then the situation could occur. Councillor Gould stated that according to the
presentation that was made by the delegation to Council, some had asked to pay their fee prior to June 7th and
the City would not accept the fee. Mr. Barfoot replied that this is probably because the main sewer was not
installed. Councillor MacGowan asked for the City Solicitor's comments on whether the City can legally charge
under the old rate after June 7th. Mr. Rodgers replied that he would have to examine this question to see if
what is proposed is valid or not.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the matter be laid on the table for one week pending a
report from the City Solicitor on the legality of charging the old fee for water and sewer laterals after June
7th, 1976, which is the date the said fee was raised to $200.00.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
dated July 23rd, 1976, regarding the Anti-Inflation Board ruling on non-Union employees salaries, be referred to
legal session.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would like to move that the said letter be tabled for one week and that
he be supplied with a copy of the submission of the City to the said Board, and that he would like to see copies
of the forms sent to the Anti-Inflation Board in this regard. Mr. Barfoot stated he believes that the information
requested by Councillor A. Vincent could be provided. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he is against this
matter being discussed in legal session and that if Council is going to back its employees it should do so in
public. In reply to a query from Councillor M. Vincent if this matter can be considered in legal session, Mr.
Rodgers replied that the matter can be considered in legal session if the City Manager wishes to advise Council
of something it is not aware of, and then it can be decided if it is a proper item or not. Mr. Barfoot stated
that he has information he wishes to advise Council of in legal session.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
.~, Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
(JVJt' ./"fPA i~ _ RESOLVED that the letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification
C~~. Committee, advising that at a recent meeting of the Committeee concern was again expressed over the problems
~~t$-~~~,I.~ encountered by City staff in properly cleaning our City streets of debris, as well as clearing of snow from the
~u streets during the winter months, and suggesting that consideration be given to alternate parking on all City
~ ~IJO~C'()~ streets which would make the staff's work much easier as well as being to the advantage of the citizens in having
19/~~~e their streets cleaned properly of debris and snow, be referred to the Works Department for a report and recom-
~rJf/~ mendation.
.Eo/'Y- -;f. /f'orK.s
~
~
I '
-70
,b .
~
~ --- Seconded by Councillor Green
/"/C-l~~. ~ RESOLVED that the letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification
:3f?.:JJt,r. C'",mm. Committee, advising that the Committee is greatly concerned with the lack of maintenance of City-owned
C t ~ r.' properties, particularly Fort Howe, Reversing Falls and Fisher Lakes areas and that due to budget cut~
, '.7 ;Dr'..' 'I' /ifS backs the staff has been reduced in this area and it is impossible for the present staff to maintain these
.m~/J?~".n~e areas as they have been in the past; further advising that Saint John is privileged to have so many "green
areas" within its boundaries, however, if they are not properly maintained they are a discredit to our
community, and that considerable monies have been spent in the past in making these sites attractive and
it is imperative that ,additional staff be hired immediately to improve the appearance of these sites, .and
further requesting that in future, adequate funds be allotted in the appropriate budgets to maintain these
areas, be received and filed and authority be granted for the transfer of funds from the budget of the
Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee for the hiring of casual staff to work on the areas referred
to by the Committee, and that in future adequate funds be allotted in the appropriate budgets to maintain
these areas.
hd //owe
;r?el/fU's/>>.:J reii//s
.., ,.e<ii
h:ster "I.;;kd"'s
.:/req/ /PoCK,.,.t?
~I"k
2J~;:;Cf'er
/rdJr!/r? ~
C'd~h,.
CAe:;k!f J}r.
7'<<'$-t;.i~17 h'
MntOY"'/
O(!ed'7..$'h/."..
t4m.-I",acr. ~-t-d'.
J),., I/. At. W,;;H&
COUJ? 7t~
COb?mitlt!?e Pe
/N/OIH1/c 1Ya#-1
h/'iJ!-I-ion
ei-t!f ~/"d-l"
h/,,.,,,":.f iO/7
/ls.spc-.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
.
I
Councillor MacGowan advised that the cost of hiring such casual help will be approximately
$1,500.00 which will provide two men for three weeks.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
I
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the Traffic and Safety Committee
advising that a motion was carried at a meeting of the Committee ,held on July 20,1976 that the pedestrian
signal at Ocean Steel on Chesley Drive is in the wrong place, is of no value and should, therefore, be
removed, and the Committee recommends removal of the signal in the interests of traffic and safety, be
eceived and filed.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with a majority of the Council members present
voting in favour of the motion.
Consideration was given to a letter, dated July 15th, 1976, from Dr. H. M. Watts of 194 Princess
Street with regard to the Exhibition Committee of Common Council, the Exhibition Association and taxation
of same, information regarding the Exhibition operation, and with regard to membership on the Board of
Directors of the Exhibition Association, which had been tabled at the last Council meeting.
.
A letter was also read from Councillor Pye, dated July 23rd, 1976, which advises that he would
like to discuss the origin and the abolition of the Council-appointed Atlantic National Exhibition Com-
mittee.
Councillor M. Vincent, who was Chairman of the said Atlantic National Exhibition Committee,
stated he wished to make a few comments on the above matter before a motion is made in this regard. He
stated that this matter reached the newspaper level and he thinks the report he submitted to Council on
behalf of the said Committee a few week~~'b~ught the Council up to date on what has happened, however,
Dr. Watts, who was a member of the Commi tt'ee, has made a couple of comments which he feels he (Councillor
M. Vincent) must comment to Council on. He stated he is concerned with the third paragraph of the letter
from Dr. Watts in which an allegation is made that Councillor M. Vincent had made erroneous and misleading
statements respecting the work and duties of the Committee - Council will recall that about midway through
the life span of the Committee the Committee was having difficulty in getting the nine persons appointed
by Council to attend Committee meetings and at the time he said in open session of Council that if the
members of the Committee who agreed to serve on the Committee did not attend the meetings there was no
purpose in having them. Also, Cou~cillor M. Vincent stated at that time that if we did not have those
people at the meetings, the Committee could not function and carry out the task for which it was des-
igned - if that is construed as erroneous and misleading statements then he is lost as to what the intent
of that word means. He stated that as far as he is concerned the statement of Dr. Watts to this effect is
completely incorrect. With reference to the chairmanship of the Committee referred to by Dr. Watts,
Councillor M. Vincent stated that people can judge that on their own merits. With regard to the allegations
of Dr. Watts of meetings held between Councillor M. Vincent as Chairman of the Committee and any members
of the Exhibition Association, he stated that Council will recall that in Committee of the Whole Council
requested representation from the Council to meet with the Association for the purpose of obtaining
information and at that time he, Mayor Flewwelling and the City Solicitor arranged and attended such a
meeting and that is the only meeting that he is aware of with Association officials. He stated that the
third area of this letter from Dr. Watts that he is concerned about is regarding reporting to Council, and
he noted that the only report the Committee instructed him as Chairman to give to Council was the report
received by Council two weeks ago, which advised that the Committee had found, and had been legally
advised, that each member of Council by virtue of the office they hold, is a member of the Exhibition
Association. He advised that throughout the last two months of the Committee's operation a number of
items had been presented by one member of the Committee which had been completely scanned and proofread by
the Committee itself and because of the assertions which the Committee could not prove or could not
verify, they were not brought to Council but were referred to the City Solicitor for legal study, and that
one of those items happened to be the fact that the Council might very well be members of the Association.
In examining those items which the Committee had given to the City Solicitor, who attended one of the
Committee's meetings, the results of the City Solicitor's legal search was that the Council were in fact
members of the Association' and it was the wish of the Committee at that time that the matter be brought to
Council, and it was also the legal advice of Mr. Rodgers that Council should know about this matter
immediately. Following an emergency meeting of the Committee at which this matter was dealt with in
detail and at which he was instructed as Chairman to submit a report to Council, and such report was
submitted to Council and the Council, on the legal advice of the City Solicitor, abolished such committee.
He stated he is annoyed and disturbed over the fact that this matter has reached the level that it has as
he feels it was completely unnecessary and that in itself did not help to accomplish any of the items that
are contained in the Council resolution of Council dated September 15th, 1975, which sets out th~ terms of
reference of the Committee. Councillor M. Vincent read the said Council resolution of September 15th,
1975 and stated that he does not believe that any committee made up of citizens or elected representatives
can beneficially serve the purpose it was intended and designed for if it is not going to follow explicity
the rules that are laid down, and the Committee did not accomplish the role of making recommendations on
ways and means on how the Exhibition can be improved, however, it must be realized that the Committee was
legally advised that once it was established that the Council members are by virtue of their office
members of the Association, that the Committee' could no. longer continue with that particular Committee,
and the Committee was dissolved on legal advice of the City Solicitor. Discussion ensued on the terms of
reference of the Exhibition Committee and on the membership of the Exhibition Association.
I
.
I
I
.
The Mayor advised that a letter has been received this date from Mr. Roy M. Lawson, President of
the Exhibition Association.
~
,...
.
I
I!:Kh/bi-flrm
IlsStJC'.
I
.]}r.I/.M. ~
18~'-iPI7+
/t1Qn;~i!'Pshi~
k"l<h/:I#/on
115$pt:".
.
COU'h.1}e
lJt~hl/o
/Yen 1.
~1<1;/bHipJ?
I
-<CJJ?d 6.P1Jn.
JJr./l.~.
:Pt?hPV'OJJ?
LucJ MPr'~
.~kP~,k~
~N~eft'y
/Ire i'1slQQ.
oq p/~~.
7?espf4./ UJ'!
-=il171t?nLt!',tl
I
I
~l1'liJ1~S
('.rrect'ed by
fJ 3'&'5' -6A/s
:J3()(JJ.
7f?4't/~n JOe
(1f'e'~; on "
.~'5tle - $t.
/l ",,{MfU 5
C'~"//hf Ck~
a~J>1. C'ohi"'t<./t.
7Ji4IJI1.+ JJeve/.
c::{.~ So//&/",..
~~/eI'trI' 7b~ee
.....
571
n motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above letter be added to the agenda at this time.
Read a letter from Mr. Roy M. Lawson, President of the Atlantic National Exhibition, dated July 26th,
1976, advising that the members of the Exhibition Association of the City of Saint John are annoyed and disturbed
over the controversy regarding the Exhibition and that the improper and misleading insinuations by some will not
be tolerated by the Association, and the Association is therefore insisting that an immediate meeting be held
between the Association and the Mayor and members of Council to clarify all situations and prevent this type of
thing from occurring again, and the Association will provide the meeting place and asks the Council for a meeting
next week.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above letter be received and filed and the Council
agree to meet with the Exhibition Association, and that such meeting be held on Tuesday, August 3rd, 1976, if
possible.
Councillor A. Vincent voted "nay" to the above motion, stating he could not agree to meet with the
Association unless the meeting was held in City Hall.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Dr. H. M. Watts of 194 Princess Street,
dated July 15th, 1976, with regard to the Exhibition Committee of Common Council, tbe Exhibition Association and
taxation of same, information regarding the Exhibition operation, and with regard to membership on the Board of
Directors of the Exhibition Association, which had been tabled at Council's meeting on July 19th, 1976, be taken
from the table and filed.
At this time, Councillor Pye read a prepared statement regarding the appointment of the Atlantic
National Exhibition Committee. The Mayor interrupted Councillor Pye and advised that the Committee referred to
has been dissolved. Councillor Pye then read a portion of his prepared statement which stated that despite the
efforts of the Committee a great deal yet remains to be achieved, and he is certain that it is evident to Council
that the dissolution of the Committee was ill-advised and he would strongly suggest that Common Council submit a
letter of profound apology to Dr. Watts for its unwise decision and request that Dr. Watts again serve this
community as chairman of a new A.N.E. committee. Councillor Pye stated he sincerely hopes that his fellow
Councillors will adhere to his request because this entire affair has reeked of deception. Several Council
members expressed their opposition and resentment to the remarks of Councillor Pye and Councillor MacGowan stated
it was Council policy that items must be submitted in writing and she feels the remarks of Councillor Pye should
be withdrawn, and that if such remarks had been submitted in writing, she is sure that the City Solicitor would
have had them withdrawn from the agenda.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that discussion on this matter cease.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, dated July 22nd, 1976,
advising that on January 5th, 1976 the Land Committee resolved that the Legal 'Department contact Dr. A. L.
Donovan and advise him that the City will arrange for fire insurance, etc. on the building purchased from him on
the Second Loch Lomond Lake and should the building burn it would be replaced and that Dr. and Mrs. Donovan will
be considered tenants of the property as long as they live, or until such time as the City is notified in writing
that Dr. Donovan and/or his wife wish to relinquish their right of tenancy, and recommending that Common Council
resolution of April 14th, 1975, which authorized purchase of the said property from Dr. Donovan, be amended to
provide that the City would pay insurance on the property and that if the building is destroyed or damaged during
the Donovan's tenancy, the insurance proceeds would be expended to replace or repair as would be appropriate, be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Consideration was given to a petition from residents of Dufferin Avenue protesting the way that the
Thistle-St. Andrews Curling Club is now operating and requesting to kriow if this area was re-zoned for commercial
enterprise, as the Curling Club is now being used for commercial purposes, examples of which are cited in the
said petition; advising that the residents of Dufferin Avenue have appealed to the Planning Advisory Committee
regarding the landscaping of the grounds around the Club - the City grass plots and sidewalks have been covered
with gravel and the residents were told when the Curling Club was being re-built that it would be beautifully
landscapped with trees and grass, however, the trees and grass have now turned into gravel; and further advising
that the no parking in effect on the west side of Dufferin Avenue has been utterly disregarded by all patrons of
the Curling Club - the patrons have blocked driveways, the fire lane and also driven on the lawns of the re-
sidents.
~In reply to a query, Mr. Zides advised that the area in question was zoned especially for the Curling
Club, which means that the property can be used for a curling club period and anything that is legitimately part
of the curling club operations and in his opinion would not include the uses referred to in the petition. Mr.
Zides stated that one of the conditions of the re-zoning was that there would be landscaping directly between the
building and the street line and that he had written to the Club pointing out that gravel had been deposited in
this area, however, no reply was received'to this letter. The Planning Advisory Committee then discussed this
matter and it was'referred to civic administration for action and the City Solicitor has written the Curling Club
a letter about this point, but he is not aware of what has transpired since then. In reply to a query from Mayor
FleW>lelling, Mr. Zides stated that the Planning Advisory Committee knew there would be some parking on the site
and that the zoning was conditional on an arrangement by the Club with the Royal Bank to have parking and that
arrangement was made. Councillor MacGowan stated that such parking is not being used.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the said petition be referred to the Commissioner of Com-
munity Planning and Development, the City Solicitor and the Chief of Police for a report as to what action is
being taken with regard to the matters raised in the said petition.
Councillor Green stated he is sure that the problems outlined in the said petition can be solved with
the co-operation of the executive of the said Curling Club.
-7')
\) ...
~
('/7(('h.1I14~
/(,fhlUaf/ ~,7
Imf',.,~me~ :;
51'11:5 Pq h/?-
WCiYS (fL~MI/I71'
Sd/I'I't' .7i?bh)
7ekr/s/ol1 l1a-
w'l',fs lacA- of!
N;:;N'~ce t-1P
SCii/7f-;T;hn I"e
WL4M~1" I"e~
LEGAL
/VPJ1- t4lo'l
eH/f'ft:,yt!'~s
11171/- / n-f'W/o
~al"d
Sd/a~!f
I"f?/I- 'bacK$ ."..
paff-b-C.k$
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor MacGowan outlining the need
to improve Highway Number 7 between Saint John and Fredericton immediately; the lack of signing on Pro-
vincial highways in New Brunswick to indicate direction to Saint John; and omission of reference to the
City of Saint John from national television networks during weather reports broadcasts, and recommending
that Council approach the proper authorities with the intent that steps be taken immediately to correct
these serious problems, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
The Mayor noted that on Thursday, July 29th next at 2.30 p.m., the Council will meet to open
tenders for the 1976 debenture issue.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the meeting continue, in legal session.
Consideration was given to a letter from Mr. R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, dated July 23rd,
1976, enclosing three letters received on July 23rd from the Anti-Inflation Board, confirming information
given by telephone on July 20th, 1976 regarding the decision of the said Board that the increases in
compensation for the City's non-Union empployees are larger than can be accepted under the Anti-Inflation
Program and as a result, the Board is of the opinion that the program of restraint should be implemented
by providing compensation increases as provided in the said letters, and that such decision takes effect
from January 1st, 1975 and if there has been any overpayment it is to be recovered. Mr. Park noted that
the Board's decisions deal with compensation increases on a group basis and the effect on individuals
within each group will be calculated by application of the decisions to payrolls records, and when this
has been completed it will be submitted to Common Council by the City Manager. The said letters from the
Anti-Inflation Board request that the City report imple_ mentation of the Board's decisions within thirty
days.
During discussion of the above-noted decisions of the Anti-Inflation Board, Mr. Barfoot advised
Council that Messrs. Clark, Ferguson and MacKinnon, who were present at this meeting, have been appointed
a committee by the non-Union employees to act on behalf of this group of employees in this matter, and
that these decisions of the Board will upset the complete organizational structure of this City - it pays
a District Fire Chief less than first class firefighters, it pays Deputy Chiefs of Police less than a
Detective Sergeant, and so on - and he believes it undermines the whole operation of the City. Mr.
Barfoot stated he would like to distribute at this time a recommendation in the form of a resolution,
which was prepared in consultation with the City Solicitor for Council's consideration. Mr. Rodgers
advised that the recommended resolution is for adoption, or rejection, by Council and he believes there is
nothing wrong with Council seeing the recommended resolution, and having discussion from that, before
making a decision. Copies of the said recommended resolution were distributed to the Council members at
this time. Mr. Barfoot stated that the said proposed resolution is his recommendation that the Council
should take action to authorize the City Solicitor to obtain the necessary legal counsel to seek to have
this decision of the Anti-Inflation Board reversed and the original Council decision upheld. Mr. Barfoot
cited several examples of the effect of the Board's decision on various employees in the Police and Fire
Department. He noted that the relationship between the positions noted are not historical relationships -
this is a line relationship, and a Deputy Chief should make more than those he supervises and staff
believes that the Board has not read the case which the City submitted, because all these things were
explained, and therefore in law they should definitely reconsider their decision. Mr. Rodgers stated that
Council will recall that contained in the City's submission to the Board was a two-page report, outlining
that the City did not believe that it was caught by the Act or the regulations, and that it was not a
proper matt~r for the Board to decide on, based on decisions made by Council, based on negotiations that
were taking place, and based on the very informal and skimpy information they were using themselves to
make decisions; for instance, in the Fire Department, the contract was not ratified until October 14th,
the decision Council made on October 8th which was not ratified until October 20th dealing with a few' non-
union employees - was enough for the Board to say that some of the non-union employees salaries were
settled, but apparently the Board turned around and relied very heavily on October 20th. He stated that
on that basis he is of the opinion that it is not a matter for the Board and the Board was without juris-
diction in dealing with the matter. Further, Mr. Rodgers stated the other point was some of the questions
that have come back, the answers being already in the report, looks as if the Board did not give very
serious consideration to the report, for what reason he does know, but certainly the matter being dealt
with affects people's pocketbooks and he does not care what guidelines are set up, there is such a thing
as natural justice, and they have to live within those guidelines. They can't daily change the rules to
suit themselves in Ottawa in respect to how they feel, and on that basis he has said that they made a
mistake in law. He stated that he has spoken with a solicitor in Toronto who represented the teachers who
are controlled by a municipality in Metropolitan Toronto as opposed to the Province, who went before the
Anti-Inflation Board to have an arbitration board decision upheld and he said said it was amazing how,the
Board juggled figures and scales and everything else to say it was a aries it was not a rollback at all.
He further stated that the said solicitor advised him how important it was to have informal discussions
with these people and he is suggesting that while it is necessary to appeal from a formal viewpoint, that
the appropriate people, in particular, the Commissioner of Finance, have an immediate meeting with Mr;
Pepin, Chairman of the Board, in Ottawa to see if he can reverse his decision to stop the appeal. The
said solicitor further advised that Mr. Pepin is in very close contact Mr. Rodgers stated that if Council
adopts the proposed resolution he believes it has to automatically follow that there is going to be, of
necessity, a trip to Ottawa involving members of senior staff and representatives of the non-union group.
He stated that the legal counsel he has in mind on the local basis to commence action in this matter is
Mr. D. M. Gillis, and that there are other legal questions apart from the appeal, and one is the question
of how binding is the order, i~ it just an opinion and the Administrator's order is what is binding -
there is some difference of opinion on this question and it should be resolved as soon as possible, and
that Council should be guided by that advice at this stage. Mr. Rodgers pointed out that this is an
uphill struggle and he believes Council's role is to make a decision to show that it is supporting the
non-union group and after that decision is made, the non-union group cannot expect anything else of
Council, and he does not believe Council's role is getting involved in travelling to Ottawa at this
stage - it is only a decision whether to appeal the decision or not. He noted that any expenses involved
would be a Council expense, once an appeal is authorized.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he understands the City has not yet received an Order from the
Board and Mr. Barfoot stated that what the City has received is the ruling of the Anti-Inflation Board,
and not the Order of the Administrator which is a subsequent stage.
Mr. Clark stated that the solicitor that has been engaged by the non-union group has informed
them that what has been received by the City is not an Order, it is an opinion of the Anti-Inflation Board
and the City has thirty days to indicate to the Board how it will comply with the Board's opinion. If in
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,....
.
I
I
.
57:'3
the event the City does not comply, the Administrator will hand down the Order. Mr. Clark, speaking on behalf of
the non-union group, stated he would like to preface his remarks in this matter by saying that the group in no
way wants the Council to misconstrue the concern or the efforts of the non-union employees in what they are
attempting to do with regard to the Board's opinion - the group is not attempting to circumvent the efforts of
the Council, and is not attempting to tell the Council what to do - but to afford Council the opportunity of the
information the group has obtained from various sources. The committee has been directed by the non-union
employees group (which committee was appointed by the said employees on July 21st) to attempt to resolve the
problem facing the non-union employees. The committee is suggesting that the Council consider initiating a
meeting with the Board's case officer, if necessary, or any other individual or party of the Federal Government
in an attempt to negotiate an improvement as it relates to the opinion of the Board; failing this, that the City
submit the formal application for an appeal. The committee wishes to point out to Council that the non-union
employees were concerned with the results of the opinion handed down by the Board, and perhaps that the City did
not invest enough effort on behalf of the employees to have a better ruling from the Board. Since then the
committee has had an opportunity to read the brief prepared by the City to the Board and the committee feels that
the author or authors of this brief are to be commended in regard to the information contained therein. The
committee views with alarm the opinion handed down by the Board, if in fact they did read the brief. Mr. Clark
stated he can assure the Council that if the City fails in negotiating a resolve to the problem, if the non-union
employees fail in assisting the City to negotiate a resolve to this problem, then there will be real problems.
He outlined to the Council the problems that would occur in the Fire Department alone and he noted that there are
very few people today who are prepared to accept more responsibilities at a lower rate of pay then their sub-
ordinates - and that is exactly what will take place. He stated that this can be said of all other departments
in the City as well. In closing he stated that it is not the rollback and payback that is going to destroy the
departments in the City of Saint John - it will drastically affect the individuals - his prior concern is not how
this decision is going to affect him as a person but how it is going to affect the Saint John Fire Department.
Mr. Clark advised that the language contained in the proposed resolution is exactly what the non-union
group is requesting of the Council - that Council initiate the action to resolve the problem which may have to be
done by further negotiations with the case officer or the Chairman of the Board, and failing this, that the City
submit the formal request for an appeal. If there is a question of law, the committee understands there is a
tribunal established by the Federal Government, then the City would go to the tribunal, supported by information
provided for and from the non-union group.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS Common Council has been given notice by the Anti-Inflation Board, under the provisions of the
/Ye,>>- a' Anti-Inflation Act and the regulations issued thereunder, that, pursuant to a confirming Common Council res-
/ ~/O)? olution of October 20th, 1975 adopting a compensation scale for a group of employees of the City of Saint John
l?~)p/OJf~~~ identified as the Non-Union Group, for the years 1975-1976 inclusive, the Anti-Inflation Board has ordered a
roll-back and pay-back of compensation to a scale and within the time limit and under such conditions as is more
particularly set out in the notice of the Anti-Inflation Board dated July 21st, 1976;
S.;vk.l'Y
M//-"at:~4
I~P~.fs ,
111?1/-Jn.ffra-
-I; t?'7 ':liJ~
Ci-ty JPhe~/'
/epl t!"~H~t!?
.
I
1,{~Y2/;'$~
~!fS
.J>t?~S M:
~e.a~I'.s:
:7>/q.t!?a-
a/ltlc/e :
bP~l1d e.?,P1
"k'~at7. .;
-<t? /
.... 11n'il!?I'/a.ws"
AND WHEREAS Common Council verily and truly believes that the Anti-Inflation Board has, by its decision,
made a grave and serious mistake in law and otherwise, the result of which will be inequitable, leading to
disparities of salaries and wages amongst City staff which will adversely affect the operation of City business:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be authorized to seek such legal counsel, as he
may deem it necessary, for the purpose of engaging legal counsel to institute and carry out in the name of the
City, to its ultimate conclusion, an appeal against the decision of the Anti-Inflation Board, and for a decision
accepting the scale of compensation as proposed and adopted by Common Council."
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above resolution be reported publicly at the open session
to be held immediately following this legal session of Common Council.
Mr. Clark stated he understands that the above action of Council affords the non-union employee repre-
sentatives input into whatever the City is going to do, either in Saint John or in Ottawa. This understanding
was confirmed by the Mayor.
Councillor A. Vincent stated he feels the Mayor should appointR a small, strong committee of Councillors
to present the City's case on their behalf in Ottawa, Councillor Higgins stated that he is sure the employees'
group will provide the input, and exactly what is the best move now, and who they want and what they want to do.
Mr. Rodgers stated he hopes the action of Council at this meeting also authorizes the necessary City staff to go
to Ottawa if necessary, without the resolution containing such specific authorization. It was the concensus of
the Council members present that the Council agrees to whatever action is necessary in this regard.
The Council members at this time agreed that the meeting now be held in open session of Common Council,
when there were present Mayor Flewwelling and Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, MacGowan, Pye,
Parfitt and M. Vincent.
The Mayor advised of the resolution that was adopted by Common Council this date, in legal session,
with respect to the Anti-Inflation Board ruling on non-Union employee salaries.
A company of ladies and gentlemen (members of the Loyalist Days Committee), representing members of
original Loyalist families of Saint John and attired in costumes of the 1783 period, were conducted into the
Council Chamber by Chief of Police E. Ferguson, Marshal of the City of Saint John. Mayor Flewwelling welcomed
the delegation, which had been presented to the Mayor and Councillors by Chief Ferguson.
Mr. Alexander P. Gregory, representing Governor Thomas Carleton, first Governor of the Province of New
Brunswick, presented an address and requested that the Council proclaim the dates of July 28th to August 1st,
inclusive, "Loyalist Days" and that the City be turned over to the Loyalist Days Committee under the patronage of
Governor Carleton and Mayor Ludlow, to greet the citizens of Saint John with fun and mirth, and to celebrate the
occasion of the founding of this great Loyalist City. Mr. Murray A. Beesley, portraying Coloniel Gabriel George
Ludlow, first Mayor of the City of Saint John, addressed the Council and endorsed the request advanced by Governor
Carleton.
Mr. Douglas How, former managing editor of the Reader's Digest, was introduced by Mr. Gregory, and Mr.
Howat this time presented Mayor Flewwelling with two bound copies of an article written by him entitled "King
George III's Loyal Americans" which appeared in the July 1976 edition of the Reader's Digest, and asked that the
Mayor present one copy to Premier Hatfield on his behalf. The Mayor thanked Mr. Howe for this presentation.
574
~
Prc:t:'/dP7.iiJ-/ / ().
/oY.//S-C-
7J~.!>
:BPJ?pt'
.Is~Ke
Mhaer
.dd:"e~
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that this Common Council issue a proclamation that the
days of 28th to August 1st inclusive be known as "Loyalist Days":
AND FURTHER that this proclamation shall be made in the form and style consistent with the
wording, and phraseology used in the 1780's, as follows:-
"To all to whom these presents shall come or whom the same in any way concern,
Greetings.
WHEREAS our Loyalist Days Committee, on behalf of our citizens, have caused to appear before us
a 'Goodly Company of Loyalists' under the leadership of His Excellency, Thomas Carleton, first Governor of
New Brunswick, and His Worship, Gabriel Ludlow, the first Mayor of the City of Saint John;
.
I
AND WHEREAS these august personages from our past have assured us that the citizens of our good
City have diligently pursued their trades, talents and toils with vigour and stamina during the past
twelve months, and find them richly deserving of a holiday from their labours;
AND FURTHER having reminded us of the rich heritage handed down to us by the Loyalist Founding I
Fathers of our City:
KNOW YE THAT WE, the City of Saint John, in Common Council, by virtue of the rights and powers
,in us vested, do hereby create, constitute and proclaim that those days falling in the latter week of the
month of July designated July 28th to August 1st inclusive shall be known as "Loyalist Days", and the same
shall be celebrated throughout the length and breadth of our municipality:
AND FURTHER that the keeping of the City of Saint John be entrusted in the hands of His Ex-
cellency, Governor Thomas Carleton and His Worship, Gabriel Ludlow, for the celebration of these Loyalist
Days.
Given under our hand, and the Great Seal of the City of Saint John, this 26th day of July, in
the year of our Lord 1976."
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
l7!:;.c:.?!J ~'."k
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Thursday, the
twenty-ninth day of July, A. D. 1976, at 2.30 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Gould, Green, Hodges, MacGowan, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, and R. Park, Commissioner of Finance
The Mayor advised that the meeting was convened for the purpose of opening tenders received
for purchase of the current City of Saint John debenture issue.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named tenders be opened at this time.
.
I
.
I
The Common Clerk thereupon opened the five tenders that had been received, namely:- syndicate
managers Walwyn, Stodgell and Gairdner Ltd.; Wood Gundy Limited; Nesbitt Thomson Securities Limited and
the Bank of Montreal (Co-Managers); Bell, Gouinlock and Company, Limited; A. E. Ames and Company Limited.
Mr. Park, having been asked to examine the said tenders and to submit a recommendation, advised I
that he would recommend the acceptance of the highest of the five bids received, whicb is a bid of ,
$99.099 per $100.00 debenture, from the syndicate manager by Walwyn, Stodgell and Gairdner Ltd.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the City of Saint John accept the offer dated
July 29th, 1976 received from a syndicate of investment dealers and banks and managed by the firm of
Walwyn, Stodgell and Gairdner Ltd., to buy the serial bonds amounting to $6,000,000.00 to be dated
September 1, 1976 at the price of $99.099 per $100.00 debenture, and that for the purpose of record the
participating members of the syndicate are:- Walwyn, Stodgell and Gairdner Ltd.; Toronto-Dominion Bank;
The Bank of Nova Scotia; The Provincial Bank of eanada; Levesque Beaubien Inc.; Crang and Ostiguy Inc,;
Midland Osler Ltd.; Scotia Bond Ltd.; Mead and Co.; and the terms of the issue are:- .
.
~
,..-
.
I.L. "~//5t>_.
Va~s-~
/(i n.J.. S~. IY
7r.;a'#/C
P'e,jH/..:diOh.5
I
.
I
.....{f'y" /r5~
w:DD1YS ::The.
IV P-#l~e e:r/?
/IJ~/ on
/J1cJ?r
I
I
.
~
575
$1,800,000.00
$1,800,000.00
$2,400,000.00
$6,000,000.00
9 3/4%
10%
10 1,/2%
1 - 5 years
6 - 10 years
11 20 rea,l'?.,
$360,000.00 each year
$360"Ppo.cOO each year
$240, oao, QQ each year
Councillor A. Vincent advised that with regard to the section of street at North King Square that has
been closed for the Loyalist Lane during the 1976 Loyalist Days, he would ask that he be permitted to place an
item on the agenda of this meeting, namely:- the request that this Mall be retained until 12.00 o'clock midnight
on Monday, August 2nd to give those who participated in the booths a period of time in which to remove them, in
view of the fact that it would be costly to dismantle them on Saturday night, the date on which the mall was to
be discontinued, as referred to in Common Council resolution of May 10th last; ahd, also, because Monday, August
2nd, is a public holiday and would be beneficial to the dismantling operations.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the closure of North King Square to vehicular traffic be
extended to 12.00 o'clock midnight on Monday, August 2nd, 1976, to permit the dismantling of booths used in
Loyalist Lane during the current Loyalist Days during the said period of extension of time.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
,~~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Tuesday, the third day of
August, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, M. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck, Deputy
Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services of the Community Planning
and Development Department, P. Clark, Fire Chief, and E. Ferguson,
Chief of Police
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
Mayor Flewwelling, on behalf of the Common Council and citizens of Saint John, expressed appreciation
and thanks to the Loyalist Days Committee who carried out the duties known as Loyalist Days 1976, noting that
the Committee's excellent efforts resulted in a very successful civic festival that was a credit to our City.
The Mayor gave the following Notice of Motion, asking that the Common Council act on the proposed
motion at the next meeting of Common Council:-
"To Common C01lllcil:
While the City, now has a legal staff of a City Solicitor and three assistant lawyers, as well as an
independent Counsel, who is deemed to be an employee of the City, nevertheless, from time to time it is found
advisable to secure the services of lawyers who are not employees of the City, for specific projects.
An examination and questions by Councillors of recent hirings of such laywers and their accounts
indicates that there is no pattern or consistency with regards to rates, charges, fees or accounts.
I am informed that both the Federal and Provincial Governments have prepared scales or tariffs of
remuneration with explicit instructions to lawyers who are engaged by them, that accounts are to be prepared in
detail setting forth time spent and individual charges. In addition, I am informed that the Provincial Legal
Aid Programme operated by the Barristers Society, requires accounts to be prepared on a time and service basis,
and fees are those set forth in a schedule.
It appears that if a client wants an account questioned he may apply to the Registrar of the Supreme
Court to review the account by a process called taxation. In such cases itemized accounts are necessary for
such taxation.
It would appear to be in the interest of the City that we should follow the same pattern as the
Province of New Brunswick and the Federal Government, in having standards established for fees and methods of
billing the City for services.
It would further appear, that in any case where arawye~ feels that he is not prepared to work in
accordance with such tariff of fees, that he should then only be retained by direct resolution of the Common
Council in open session.
I therefore, give Notice of Motion that at the next meeting of Common Council I will ask for the
following resolution:
576
~
1Vf?f;-/~~ ff
/I'J~-/(7n
So//~hfpl"S
-hut::; s~~daH.
C/ -&-!f S"hc~r
;7J.4n...? ,4a!J//s.
(?f?.m,.." .
We-~f?J?/ /7)
.#~h/c~1
7J/d/J? :JJ!f-~
S/.rd~~~~-
lI1eQr"'lfe.i'/~
-<~L
/I1e /7/ lis tt!'1" 2r.
5-t-.
if/!?- .zP'7/J'lff
~e'-;2.f? J?/l7f
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare a Fee Schedule or Tariff, for charges
by solicitors who are not employees of the City; that such schedule be prepared after study of the
schedules of the Legal Aid Programme of the Barristers Society of New Brunswick, the Provincial Govern-
ment Scale of Fees and the Federal Government scale of fees for solicitors.
RESOLVED that no further engagement of lawyers who are not employees of the City be undertaken,
until such fee schedule or tariff has been submitted to and approved by Council.
RESOLVED that for all future accounts rendered by lawyers already engaged by the City, such'
lawyers be requested when rendering their accounts to present an account, itemizing the service, time and
rate of' charge."
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed, with respect to the Slattery
property on the south side of Grandview Avenue immediately west of the Technical Institute for (a)
amending the Municipal Development Plan by changing the property land use classification from light
industrial to low density residential, and (b) re-zoning the property from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family'
Suburban Residential and "RF" Rural to "R-IB" One-Family Residential classification to permit the er-
ection of single family housing. He further advised that no written objections had been received in this
regard, and that a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, recommends that Schedule 2A, the Future
Land Use Plan of the Municipal Development Plan be amended to reclassify the said property from Light
Industrial to Low Density Residential, and that the said parcel of land be re-zoned from "RS-2" and "RF"
classifications to "R-lB" classification. The Committee's letter advises that the developers, Slattery
Management & Realty Limited are proposing a sub-division tentatively showing 97 building lots, with
development in three phases (Phase I consisting of 15 lots is to be serviced to Grandview Avenue, while
Phases II and III consisting respectively of 39 and 43 lots, will require lift stations and force mains -
the company would like to start Phase I as soon as possible and Phases II and III in late fall or next
spring); that the proposal is to build houses under the Assisted Home Ownership Programme and it is
likely that the company would use prefabricated homes varying in size from 960 to 1,000 square feet - the
sale price would fall under the approximately $35,000.00 A.H.O.P. limited; that the Committee believes
that the proposed location of McAllister Drive Extension south of Grandview Avenue which is to the west
of the proposed new development would be the ultimate logical boundary line between industrial develop-
ment and residential so that everything easterly of the proposed McAllister Drive Extension might be used
for residential purposes - however, it was felt that a more definite decision on the location of the road
extension and other considerations which it might wish to study later on would be required before a
recommendation would be made to Common Council in these respects.
It was noted that no person was present to speak to the said proposed amendments, either pro or
con.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal
Plan By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing
from a Light Industrial area and placing in a Low Density Residential area the property consisting of 40
acres, more or less, being the northern part of Lot 4 of the sub-division of lots laid out by the late
Honourable Ward Chipman, and lying on the south side of Grandview Avenue immediately west of the Saint
John Institute of Technology, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law".
On motion of Councillor Cave
,
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal
Plan By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing
from a Light Industrial area and placing in a Low Density Residential area the property consisting of'40
acres, more or less, being the northern part of Lot 4 of the sub-division of lots laid out by the late
Honourable Ward Chipman, and lying on the south side of Grandview Avenue immediately west of the Saint
John Institute of Technology, be read a second time.
Noting the reference in the Planning Advisory Committee's letter to the proposed location of
McAllister Drive Extension south of Grandview Avenue, Councillor M. Vincent raised the question as to
whether the Council would be passing this by-law amendment in advance without actually having a recom~
mendation from the Committee on the location of the road extension and other considerations which it
might wish to study later on. Mr. Zides replied that the present recommendation would be in keeping with
a later one: what the Committee is saying is that it believes that once there is a firm line on the
commitment to McAllister Drive Extension it will probably recommend some additional changes to the
Municipal Development Plan and zoning in that vicinity, but it will not affect the property with which
the Council is dealing at this time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law".
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns rezoning the property
consisting of 40 acres, more or less, being the northern part of Lot 4 of the sub-division of lots laid
out by the late Honourable Ward Chipman, and lying on the south side of Grandview Avenue immediately west
of the Saint John Institute of Technology, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential and "RF"
Rural districts to "R-IB" One-Family Residential district, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the property
consisting of 40 acres, more or less, being the northern part of Lot 4 of the sub-division of lots laid
out by the late Honourable Ward Chipman, and lying on the south side of Grandview Avenue immediately west
.
I
I
.
I
.
1
I
.
~
,..-
.~,4"A,,9e:4 '
~mm,
I
1
/1/,c~e;t #
23r/en
;1?t?-~Ph;'
.~UI7/~/
'P/.ah :zJy-~
?~)m.,4d'.ws:
C'Oh'7h7.
'/?;}scon
:2J",enI?(7)',$
Co. ~hL
1 J?e-A,n/175
/J1/A.nk/p
'fJlan :g~-,4
';::;"/e ?eeA(,
t;;.C
.
~/OVH?~I/'$.
~~..-n.
..(,C'~/ .5t7,z.
Iht# .7Jro-
-i-JU?l"hd6'4 d
1 ok/. U/or,fepS'
111/",,/;,,1"'/
PIa"., 7J.!j
Sonier
Or/')Plme~
J;.l?h ~-f:.;{
.
;p,11fA&
;'e~J'lT
~
-"'i7
~4 .
of the Saint
districts to
John Institute of Technology, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential and "RF" Rural
"R-lB" One-Family Residential district, be read a second time:
tu,D FURTHER that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory Committee be received and filed.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
The Common Clerk advised that with regard to the proposed amending of the Municipal Development Plan,
with respect to property on the east side of Sea Street between residence Numbers 483 and 509, which property is
owned by Pas con Brothers Co. Ltd., by changing the property land use classification to light industrial from low
density residential classification, and to the proposed re-zoning of the said property from "R-2" One- and Two-
Family Residential to "I-I" Light Industrial classification, the necessary advertising took place, and no written
objections were received. He advised that a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated July 29th, 1976,
advises that the Committee is still attempting to obtain more information on which to base its decision and
expects to be able to report to Common CoUncil following the Committee's August 10th, 1976 meeting, and the
Committee therefore requests an extension of time in which to report on the application by the above named
company for a change in the Municipal Development Plan and re-zoning to permit the company to construct a ware-
house and to operate a masonry business or industry next to 483 Sea Street.
No person was present to offer objection to the said proposed amendments.
Mr. Alfred H. Brien, solicitor for Pascon Brothers Co. Ltd., was present and stated that although this
was the date set for hearing presentations in the above named matter, and although he was prepared to make his
presentation on 'behalf of his clients at this time, he wondered whether the views of his clients regarding the
application should be reserved until the Council receives the anticipated report from the Planning Advisory
Committee. He felt that it would probably be more apropos if the Council first had the Planning Advisory Com-
mittee's recommendation in the matter, at which time his clients could then make their remarks. He stated that
he wished to be on the record as wishing to partake at a subsequent hearing if the Council was prepared to grant
the extension.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the public hearing in the above matter be adjourned:
AND FURTHER that the above noted letter from the Planning Advisory Committee be received and filed.
The Council members agreed that Mr. Brien's presentation be heard in two weeks' time, when the Planning
Advisory Committee's report is considered.
The Common Clerk stated that the necessary advertising was completed regarding the property situate on
Ludlow Street between Tower and St. George Streets (the former car barns site), on which Local 502, International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers propose to construct a Union building for offices and meetings, which would
involve (a) amending the Municipal Development Plan by changing the property land use classification from
low density residential to sub-central commercial, and (b) re-zoning the property from "R-2" One- and Two-Family
Residential to "B-2" General Business classification. He added that no written objections had been received.
No person was present to speak in objection to the said proposed amendments.
Appearing on behalf of the Unions concerned, primarily the said I.B.E.W., Mr. Eric Teed, Q. C. advised
that he had not received the formal advice from the Planning Advisory Committee to Council, but Mr. Zides had
acquainted him with the gist of it. He stated that there are some things in the letter from the said Committee
to Council that his clients would like to dispute or refute. He stated that he was wondering if this matter
could be set over so the Council could continue the public hearing. He stated that he has not had time to get
his clients to go through the said letter from the Committee, and, unfortunately, Mr. MacPherson had another
commitment and could not be present at this Council meeting, and that he would appreciate it if the Council could
set the public hearing over.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the public hearing in the above matter be adjourned:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated July 26th, 1976, with regard to
the said proposed by-law amendments, be laid on the table for two weeks.
The Council members agreed that Mr. Teed's presentation be heard in two weeks' time, after he has been
able to study the above named letter to Council from the said Committee.
The Common Clerk stated that advertising was made regarding the proposed amending of the Municipal
Development Plan by changing the land use classification of the Sonier property at the end of Simms Street from
low density residential to light industrial, to permit an expansion of a non-conforming use and various mis-
cellaneous improvements. He advised that there were no written objections received.
No person was present to speak to the said proposed amendment.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-
Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing from a Low
Density Residential area and placing in a Light Industrial area the Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd. plant site on
imms Street, West, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law".
(Councillor Higgins entered the meeting)
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report of the Fire Department for the month of June last,
e received and filed.
Seconded by Councillor Cave
~ RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be given
<!1J/'-u..I~,fs( /:t..:<. for payment of the following invoices:-
SiepJt?h a175 ,Chitticks (1962) Ltd.
~.~~~ Stephen Construction Co. Ltd.
?) // .L/9'. /./ // D. Hatfield Ltd.
...v'rrQi1~IIt/;c An, D. Hatfield Ltd.
111~~~ ~~ Norman Donovan Rentals
\g~ /. Norman Donovan Rentals
rrel7~_/s
578
H';;a/?c/;';'/
~.:iit-eJ??e qtS
{'~!:I .-0/'.1'....,
h'7ce
:lJ0l !:Is/d'e.2Jr.
$~~'I?/ :8L
(}q'p/~q/ ?I'f? '
/lioen~s
ifo~~.;;1 ah:s-l~
.,{-6d',
llioel?aS
/an./SC'HP/>>f
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the month of June
last, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that with
regard to the request from the School Board for a fence to be erected on the top of a sheer rock face on
Bayside Drive which has been left by the widening of the street at this point, which request was referred
to staff and the Land Committee at the Common Council meeting of July 5th, 1976, the Commissioner of
Engineering and Works has arranged for this fence to be added to the contract on this portion of Bayside
Drive, be received and filed and the said School Board be notified that the fence will be installed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
anager, authority be granted for payment of the following named construction progress certificate and
approved invoice for engineering services, with regard to the following named capital project:-
1.
Saint John Community Arenas
Rocca Construction Limited
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 14
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated July 13, 1976
$ 2,913,949.00
2,963,004.80
79,378.80
2,868,762.93
14,
$ 14,863.07
Councillor M. Vincent asked if there are any plans to do landscaping work at any of the City
arenas this year, over and above what has already been done. Mr. Barfoot replied that there is some
included in the capital budget, and he asked that Mr. MacKinnon give the details of the work. Mr. Mac-
Kinnon advised that tenders were opened for three paving jobs in this regard, just a few days ago, and he
believes they would be awarded shortly and the paving would commence - he does not believe that the tender
has been awarded as yet; that work would be for the paving and curbing of the three arenas, as well as
landscaping included; he also believes that there are some storm sewer lines also included with that; it
will include the paving of the parking lots.
On motion of Councillor Gould
- dated
- dated
- dated
- dated
- dated
- dated
20, 1976 (July 1-15, 1976)
16, 1976 (July 2-15, 1976)
19, 1976 (July 1-15, 1976)
5, 1976 (Jun~ 16-30, 1976)
2-15, 1976
16-30, 1976
$ 9,015.95
$ 2,676.00
$18,712.05
$10,192.90
$ 5,976.00
$ 9,360.00
July
July
July
July
July
June
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, whose letter of July 30th, 1976 advises that the supervisory control equipment for the original
~~~. ~' four pumping stations on the Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector System was purchased from Bristol Co. of
~'/' ,Canada Ltd. in 1973 and that, subsequently, the design of the System was changed to include another
CI?d. '/ o/U/jl- pumping station, Pump Station "B" on Dwyer Road, and that a quotation has now been received from the
~e~~ Bristol Co. of Canada Ltd. for the cost of supplying additional supervisory control equipment for Pump
.:J)~J'> If"L Station "B" in the amount of $4,311.00, F.O.B. Toronto, plus tax, and that the unit cost of the said
/J1/ ~, ~t-C'.~ quipment is higher than in 1973 in part because of the modifications which have to be made to accommodate
the additional pumping station, and that the delivery is expected to take six to eight weeks -- the
~~~I' ~~zf~~ quotation for the said equipment!rom Bristol Co. of Canada Ltd. in the amount of $4,311.00 F.O.B. Toronto,
"D .L /? plus tax, be accepted.
..o,,/.sC&>. (,0. t:?
C.-n_6 L~L On motion of Councillor Gould
Of/erhe44
/l;!Wi!?,/' /1J7e
b!,,~~W",e
S~.I-d'/v.
$~el/a /lye.
lb"t?;> ~q...,. s.
A'::B. IS/ ~, .(r.
FUI7,ir ~~k,.hv'
S,;u -Ih k"n ~
:Block /f?
,o"'frsOJ/.S ,..e.
deV(/J/t> ?h7el7~
Sf7t.f ~h knd'
:/)et/t? 10;:; m ehr-
l?0.J?,P.
,,(ease
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation in the joint
letter from the City Manager and the Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, approval be given
for backlot aerial services (an over-head pole line) for the proposed sub-division comprising proposed
lots 66, 67, 68 and 69 on the southerly side of Sheila Avenue in the Greenwood Sub-division, as shown on
the submitted print and in accordance with the recommendation from Mr. J. B. Eldridge, P. Eng., who acts
as utilities Co-ordinator for the Power Commission of the City of Saint John, the New Brunswick Telephone
Company, Limited and Cable Television.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter dated July 30th, 1976 from the City Manager,
advising that the proposals for the development of Block 10 in the South End area, which were opened at a
meeting of Common Council on July 5th last and referred to staff for a report, have been discussed by,
staff with the Saint John Housing Commission also; that proposals were received from (a) South End Devel-
opment Corporation, a non-profit organization comprised of a broad cross-section of citizens of the South
End, and (b) Shamrock Realty, a construction and development company - Mr. B. Elliot, President - and
submitting a copy of a review of the proposals received, and recommendations, as prepared by Mr. Donald
Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal; and recommending that the development proposal for the
development of Block 10 in the South End from the South End Development Corporation be accepted, subject
to the further recommendations in the said report from Mr. Buck - but further that the amount of the
ground lease for Block 10 be subject to further negotiation and that proceeds from the lease be applied
towards purchase of other lands required for this project - and that information on the amount, period,
~
.
I
1
.
I
.
I
I
.
...i
,...
.
I
1
.
$.1. ~~~
SUf#~~~
.1V,ck /17
'"~~~r
~~~n~
I~~~/l
~P".P-
579
and purposes of interim financing be supplied by the Corporation before the City supplies any guarantees -- be
received and filed and the recommendation contained therein adopted.
'f-
Councillor Parfitt felt that the Council needs to receive more knowledge about the above named matter,
and that the Council should have another meeting or so to really get all the knowledge the Council members
require on this subject, regarding the interim financing in particular. The Mayor replied that the matter has
been looked over and checked into not only by members of the City staff but also by the Housing Commission.
Councillor Gould stated that it was his understanding that at one time we required three- and four-bedroom
apartments in this area, and he noted that the proposal that has been recommended to Council does not have as
many as the proposal that was not,~and he asked if there is any reason for that, and if there has been a change
of thought. He noted that the proposal of the recommended developer has 12 three-bedroom apartments and 4 four-
bedroom apartments in Phase I, and that the proposal of Shamrock Realty has 14 four-bedroom apartments and 30
three-bedroom apartments, and that it was his understanding at one time that we required the larger number of
bedrooms; he asked if there has been a change in that. Mr. Buck replied that the over-all break-down of units
for the project of both projects are the same - approximately the same number of one-, two-, three- and four-
bedroom units; the only thing is that the South End Development Corporation's proposal is providing a percentage
of these with each phase of the programme, whereas the Shamrock Realty proposal provides the smaller units in a
later phase of the project; so, the over-all plan will be approximately the same; the need for the sizes of units
has remained a constant with both projects. Councillor M. Vincent. stated that there have been some fears ex-
pressed by some of the citizens in that area that the development of Block 10 might spread to affect the nursing
home or senior citizens home and also the loss of the fairly good-sized playground area in the South End. He
asked if Mr. Buck can either confirm or allay those fears of those people. Mr. Buck replied that there is a
recreation area on Block 10 now and the total development plan for the South End provides for the replacement of
this recreation area and the enlargement of recreational facilities in the South End. He added that the project
put forward by the South End Development Corporation does incorporate into it a fairly substantial amount of open
and recreational space - this is one of the reasons for recommending it. In reply to Councillor MacGowan's query
as to whether these are to be brick buildings, I~. Buck stated that he cannot answer that question at this time,
and he further stated that the plans that were submitted by the South End Development Corporation do not go into
details of materials to be used, but they are very conscious of the need to keep maintenance costs at a minimum,
and the unit price that they quote would, he thinks, give the opportunity for brick treatment - but whether they
will actually do this or not will depend upon the ultimate bids. Councillor MacGowan asked if the Fire Department
should have some in-put into it. Making affirmative reply, Mr. Buck stated that this is the sort of thing when
the recommendation is meant that all the City agencies co-operate to the fullest ~ this is the kind of in-put
that we were thinking of. Councillor MacGowan commented that we are trying to build houses for the future, not
for a short time, so she would think that the brick might stand up better and longer, and be safer. Mr. Buck
agreed that, generally, this is true.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission
advising that the Commission has reviewed the development proposal for the Block 10 area, South End, submitted by
Shamrock Realty Ltd. and the South End Development Corporation and on the basis of the information contained in
the proposals the Commission prefers the proposal of the South End Development Corporation, be received and
filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, advising that he has
considered the matters referred to him by Council from the meetings of June 28th, 1976 and July 26th, 1976, both
atters concerning the sewer connection fee of $200.00 as set out in the Water and Sewerage By-Law, as amended
by by-law on June 7th, 1976, and noting that on June 24th, 1976 Mr. D. I. Adler on behalf of a number of residents
of the Myles Sub-division, petitioned Common Council for what is, in effect, the right to pay a connection fee of
$100.00, and that this connection fee of $100.00 was in the previous by-law which was in effect until June 7th,
1976, and that the amending by-law changed the connection fee from $100.00 to $200.00 and became effective on
une 7th, 1976, and that a request to Council came when the residents were led to believe that the amending by-
law would not become effective until July 1st, 1976; and further noting that on July 24th, 1976, Mr. William H.
Dupuis, by his petition claimed the same right for the reason "it is therefore felt that had the work been
performed when promised the rate of a hookup would be $100.00 not $200.00"; and advising that it is his opinion
that on and from June 7th, 1976 the City cannot charge any other sum than the sum of $200.00 for each connection
permit, as set out in the By-Law; and pointing out that permits issued prior to June 7th are only subject to the
~~~~)" $100.00 connection fee, and that permits issued after June 7th are subject to the $200.00 fee, and any permits
~17?JtI~1 issued after June 7th in which only a $100.00 fee was collected leaves the applicant owing the City a balance of
$100.00 by virtue of the June 7th enactment to the Water and Sewerage By-Law -- be received and filed and Mr.
Adler and Mr. Dupuis be notified:
(? rrp'?'ci
CPa&eI'<tI-
$Sfll/ttl"idfe'
~-~'WH
SeWdPJ? e"
-zf/(7~ t?f?
I?i!f/~$ SUfJ-
. <<'I'V.
t?c6/I7~C'
??1,,9'r.
1
I
'7fca1117./ldv/s
Cbhtn?
/l:5Stl'J?-c ~(7
GJ?6d/1 U/(Ud
SU~-d/v,
p/a~
. S~"'//O} /1v
...
AND FURTHER that the report from the Acting City Manager on the same subject, which was laid on the
table on July 26th last, be taken from the table and filed.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if there were, in fact, any permits issued to those people who raised the
point prior to June 7th, even though the work was not ,done. Mr. Barfoot replied that he has not got that in-
formation prior to June 7th. He added that Mr. Park has just informed him that on previous reports it showed
that some, in fact, were issued last December - that is, some permits, he believes. Councillor M. Vincent
commented that if that is the case, then it would appear that the City Solicitor is telling the Council that
those people who had permits issued prior to June 7th last, even though the work had not been done,
they are only obligated to pay the $100.00. He asked if that is correct. In reply, Mr. Rodgers stated that
applications made and permits issued prior to June 7th, 1976 were issued under the previous by-law and only
$100.00 was required at that time.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the Common
Council assent to the sub-division plan shown on the submitted photo reduction with respect to Sheila Avenue in
the Greenwood Sub-division, and that the Committee's letter of July 29th, 1976, advising that Hughes Surveys Ltd.
has submitted for approval a sub-division plan showing a portion of the said Sub-division which received tentative
approval in 1969, and that it consists of ten lots along a new street named Sheila Avenue which extends 470 feet
to the east of Karen Street, and that land for public purposes for the sub-division was supplied in 1969, and
plans for an expansion of the existing sewage treatment plant to accommodate this proposal have been approved by
the Province and the City - and a sub-division agreement and performance bond are involved but there will no City
cost-sharing, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter dated July 29th, 1976 from the
580
~
7/-1711./I,{Y/$.
Cbn. M.
Ils.s~d,t'
c,/e?n/;"/ 19~;>es
S"b-d/'r; p4n
~h~~rc~2
/}fo"n.;1 .:7),..
:&7I?~e// :z;,...
#'~/~ hf?me
tlfr.<I- ~rs: T.T
.Jensen
Zt7I7/l?1f{ ~- /-
dhM?J?;emdhr ,.c
/o~S;~6'S
'P~!P't9hts ; n
//eu IY-r ,P"~/tc
'pu./'I'pose /ah4.
Planning Advisory Committee, the Common Council assent to the proposed sub-division plan for Colonial'
Acres Sub-division which is situated at Morna on the westerly side of the Westfield Road, opposite its
intersection with the Belmont Road, and which extends to the Canadian Pacific Railways right-of-way, and
that the said letter, which advises that the proposal consist of 44 lots averaging approximately 13,000
square feet, 3,200 feet of new streets and six parcels of land totalling 144,587 square feet in area for
vesting in the City as land for public purposes (four of these parcels are orientated so that they encompass
an existing stream and provide a continuous belt of green area or open space through the sub-division _
another parcel is to be used with the adjoining Ketepec Elementary School - the largest parcel, PL 5, will
contain the sewage treatment plant) - that the proposed water and sewer systems have been approved by the
Provincial Department of Fisheries and Environment and servicing plans have been submitted and in general
are satisfactory to the Engineering and Works Department (a problem regarding the sewage effluent outflow
pipe is still to be resolved), and that no City cost-sharing is involved - and which also advises that the
said Committee has approved the street names Morna Drive (for an extension of the existing Morna Drive)
and Bonnell Drive as shown on the submitted plan, and the land for public purposes and the Committee
therefore recommends to Common Council the location of the streets and land for public purposes as shown
on the said submitted print and the assent to the sub-division plan -- be received and filed.
.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with
regard to the application made by Mr. and Mrs. T. J. Jensen for the temporary placement of a mobile home
on a lot on the southerly side of the St. Martin's Road, perhaps a ~uarter of a mile west of the City
boundary, which property is a triangle shape and has a frontage of 506 feet along the road and with its
maximum depth about 125 feet - advising that there is an old small dwelling on the property which the
Jensens would use as an accessory building to house furniture and other belongings which they have, and
their intentions are to construct a house on the property in a year or so and then to remove the mobile
home to another location- and recommending that Mr. and Mrs. Jensen be given temporary permission for the
placement of a mobile home on their said lot for a period not exceeding one year at the end of which time
the mobile home is to be removed, and that the approval is to be contingent on their obtaining a permit
from the Building Inspector and on their meeting the usual requirements of the Provincial Department of
Health -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with
~eference to the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law regarding minimum sizes of the lots to be used
for on-site sewage disposal so as to bring these in line with new Provincial standards, which proposed
amendment is to be considered at the meeting of Common Council to be held August 16th next, advising that
the Committee has reviewed its recommendation and feels that the following wording for proposed Section 21
(3) should be substituted for the Committee's previously submitted wording for the said sub-section (3):-
"(3) The lot sizes mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (1) may be reduced to lot widths of at
least 75 feet and lot areas of at least 7,000 feet and lot widths of at least 100 feet and lot, areas of at
least 10,000 square feet respectively, with respect to a sub-division of land which in itself or together
with one or more adjoining sub-divisions will contain a minimum of 40 lots serviced by municipal water and
sewer systems or by other public water and sewer systems approved under the Health Act or the Water
Act." - the reason for this change of recommendation being that the Committee feels that its first pro-
posal might be somewhat restrictive and the present proposal is in line with past practices; and further
advising that the Committee is also requesting that the words "or a mobile home" be deleted from proposed
Section 184 (2) of the proposed amendment because mobile homes are not permitted in "p" Park zones -- and
recommending that the above named sub-section (3) be substituted for the earlier recommended sub-section
(3) of Section 21 and that the words "or a mobile home" be deleted from proposed Section 184 (2) -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee,
approval be granted for the City to accept the following sums of money in lieu of land for public purposes
with respect to the two following sub-divisions, which sums are to be deposited in the City's trust fund
for the acquisition and development of land for public purposes:-
.
from David M. Lawson, s-14 - the sum of $560.00 (Mr. Lawson's proposal is to create a 58,560 square foot
~~&'/.~ ~~~~ lot on the north side of the Loch Lomond Road just east of the Desmond Sub-division - the Property Management
tranch has appraised this property at $7,000.00 which means that the money payable to the City, at 8% of
the appraisal, would be $560.00);
from Arthur Belyea Sub-division, C-I07 - the sum of $1,440.00 (the Arthur Belyea sub-division is situated
~ ~ ~~ ~ on the northerly side of Thornbrough Street and begins about 70 feet westerly of the Sandy Point Road
I"~ ~f? ~/~ intersection; this property was re-zoned by Common Council for Document Enterprises on August 25th, 1975 _
~~~-~'b'. at that time, the applicants thought that they would erect two 12-unit apartment buildings; Common Council's
August 5th, 1975 meeting requested the Planning Advisory Committee to recommend as to whether this land is
not developed within a reasonable amount of time should it revert to the zoning which applied at the time
of the application - the Committee felt that the proposed re-zoning was not unreasonable in this area and
that the proposal as such was not important enough to warrant making such a recommendation; 14r. Belyea is
now proposing to sub-divide this property into five lots, all of which are possible under the "RM-l" '
Multiple Family Residential zoning - four of the lots would have 60 foot frontages with a depth of just
over 100 feet - these could be used for either a one or two family two-storey dwelling under existing'
regulations and there is some chance that the lots would be used for some form of co-operative housing _
the fifth lot would contain 14,668 square feet and could be used for a small apartment building, townhouses
?r, for that matter, a one or two family home as so desired; an appraisal from the Property Management
Branch places a value of $18,000.00 on the sub-division and this means that $1,440.00 is the amount
payable'to the City in lieu of land for public purposes).
gCoL6
'f On the /6b~ect of land that the Council accepts money for from time to time in lieu of land for
public purposes, ~uncillor M. Vincent asked if one of the intended uses of that land is for recreational
development. Mr. Zides replied that the way the legislation reads is that it is for the acquisition and
development of land for public purposes; he pointed out that in regard to the report on this meeting's
agenda with regard to the policy on land for public purposes in sub-divisions and possible future
amendments to the Community Planning Act, it will be seen that there is potentially more than recreation
involved; recreation could be one of the uses of such land. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he has'
noticed that in a lot of the sub-divisions that have come up in the past couple of years, land is set
aside for public purposes or for recreational development, but the development goes ahead building-wise
but the green area or recreational ~ea never seems to develop - there are a number of such areas in the
city where there are just barren pieces of land. He asked what obligation or reponsibility are we putting
I
I
.
~
JI"'"
58:1
.
P/aJ?-'7. hld6'l
Cb J??,... .
7Ju bl/i!> /,"/'7 -
'pose ~nA
117 Sub -d/v.
:Dep~ /llJuh.
1 /J-F?-/',;> II's
~p~)??4t~/'t:~ Seconded by Councillor Hodges
'Hahn, I'9cE RESOLVED that the report from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated July
30th, 1976, in reply to the petition received by Common Council on July 19th last from residents of the Bon
~~/'~,'~n I" Accord Sub-division who are objecting to the construction of a thirty-unit apartment building by Kennebecasis
~~en~ Investments Limited in the said Sub-division adjacent to the single- and two-family dwellings in the Lomond Court
~/~~. /'" ~" and Bon Accord Drive area, and advising that the said company has made various points as referred to in the
A7~p~ report, be received and filed and a copy of the said report be sent to Mrs. Kathy Holmes, spokesman for the said
1fe1717~J.Ge~/ petitioners.
II"I/~'77Q
~ ~ Councillor Cave stated that it is happening quite often that SOme people appear before the Planning
/?,1,..:;. ~~~~ Advisory Committee with certain promises and certain' obligations, and just before the building is completed they
// /~Q ~ sell to someone else and the person who buys does not fail to carry out the obligation that was entered into in
r7~/~e?~ the first instance. He noted that there is a case on Forest City Street where they promised the residents at
that particular time they would put a fence up around an apartment house - the said apartment house is occupied
and there is no fence up. He asked whether any action has been taken to ask the new purchaser to erect the
fence. Mr. Zides, relating this subject with the subject of the Bon Accord residents' petition, replied that the
subject raised by Councillor Cave is still unresolved and that he has had telephone calls on it as late as this
date and he has written a letter to the City Manager about it (which the City Manager has not seen as yet). He
stated that he thinks it all stems from the fact that the City has rot carried Section 39 (of the Community
Planning Act) to its ultimate implementation; there are two things that have to be done ,when we put these con-
ditions on - first of all, before they get any permits, there has to be an agreement which specifies the con-
ditions and once that agreement is signed a copy of the agreement is filed in the Registry Office and then it
inds the successive owners, as well - to enforce that agreement, like any other agreement, you have to go to
law, but the machinery is there. Councillor Cave related an instance he has in mind in this regard, namely, that
.
I
:Jb17.;J1d F
/I'I.;Ja bVUIOln
2kh'Je-fNS
1 :l3ou.ntOl/Ol
.
I
Fence ,.e
d~.ntfl/8h~
p/q.; h
C/t~ 5-e-.
.
~
on the developer to develop those recreational areas, rather than just letting them lie dormant. Mr. Zides
replied that the only authority that we have at the moment is to require the developer to give us a certain
percentage of land in the sub-division - we have no obligation, for example, of making the area recreational -
there are places that do have that authority - we do not appear to have - he added that that is also covered in
the report to which he referred, on this meeting's agenda. He explained that the City cannot make the developer
convert the said land into a recreational facility for the City on a time or any basis, at the moment - it
becomes a City responsibility to make that into a recreational area if the City sees that as the appropriate use.
He added that he believes what the other said report on this meeting's agenda is really saying is that in the
absence of the City's authority to require a developer to convert this land to recreational area it is a decision
that is made by the City as to when and to what extent it uses this area for recreational purposes - what he is
really saying is that you cannot make a developer develop it for recreation - all you can do is make him vest
that land in the City and become City property for development.
Mr. Donald F. MacGowan, Barrister, of Clark, Drurnmie & Company, was present on behalf of Mr. Demetris
Bountalas, the owner of property at 23 St. Anne Street, who requests permission to add a one-bedroom or bachelor
apartment in the basement of the six-unit dwelling under construction at the said property, for the purpose of
providing this additional apartment to Mr. Bountalas' mother-in-law, who is a widow on a low income. Mr. Mac-
Gowan's letter dated July 28th, 1976 advises that this property is made up of two lots and has a total frontage
of 100 feet and depth, including a portion of a fire lane, of 107 feet, and that Mr. Bountalas also owns the
adjacent lot, fronting on the corner of St. Anne Street and McLeod Street, which has a frontage of 50 feet on St.
Anne Street and 107 feet on McLeod Street and that his original intention with regard to the said building was to
have no basement, but, however, he has found that the topography of the land necessitates a full basement, one-
half of which is to be used for laundry, electrical room, storage room, et cetera, and the other half of the
basement would lend itself very well to the said proposed additional apartment, which apartment, because of the
slope of the land, would be at ground level in the rear. The letter notes that plenty of off-street parking
space is available on the said properties of Mr. Bountalas. The letter states that it is understood that the
Council in 1975 granted a Mr. Roberts permission to construct a seven-unit apartment house on the lot adjacent to
that of Mr. Bountalas, and it is understood that the construction plans of Mr. Bountalas provide for more living
space that is available in the Roberts house. The letter advises that the Building Inspector's dpeartmerit and
the Community Planning Branch have considered Mr. Bountalas's request for an additional apartment in the said
building but because of the present zoning, they had to deny him permission and referred him to the Common
Counc il.
Mr. MacGowan advised that his client purchased the above named property in 1975 and the Council re-
zoned that property in 1975 to an "RM-l" district and placed a condition on the development of that property that
it be a maximum of three storeys and contain no more than six dwelling units. He advised that his client has
started construction of a three-storey building - each storey is to contain two dwelling units of two bedrooms
each. Noting that there is a very sharp bank coming down off St. Anne Street towards the back end of the pro-
perty, Mr. MacGowan explained that his client, when he started construction, found that it was too expensive to
place fill in there and avoid a basement, so he did go into a very deep basement, as described in the above named
letter, which provides space he had not anticipated when he first purchased and planned the property development.
He stated that Mr. Bountalas is asking for, preferably, a one-bedroom apartment in this basement. He stated that
he is asking for either a re-zoning of this property, or a variance, and added that he would think a variance
would be appropriate in this matter. The City Solicitor was asked by Council as to whether or not the Council
has the authority to grant a variance, and he replied that the only variance authority that he is aware of rests
in the Planning Advisory Committee. He noted that according to Mr. MacGowan's letter the said Committee has
considered the matter, but he does not know the merits of the case and he does not know if the Committee has
considered it from the point of view of variance, or not. Mr. MacGowan stated that he does not believe so. He
added that the Council placed a condition upon this property (in 1975) and the Council, accordingly, it seems to
him, would have authority to vary that condition. Mr. Rodgers replied that it is not a variance problem, then _
he asked if it is a previous re-zoning tied to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, with a special con-
dition, and that they are asking for the condition to be varied. Making affirmative reply, Mr. MacGowan stated
that it is the condition that he has already mentioned, that was placed by this Council. He stated that the
zoning is actually appropriate for more units than are required here - it is a multiple unit district. He stated
that the reason the Community Planning Branch and the Building Inspector's department denied his client's re-
quest, was because they had no authority - they took it on that basis. He added that the structure is to be 60
feet long and 30 feet deep, and the basement is of the same measurements. The Mayor advised that the Council
would render a decision later in the meeting regarding this application.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee submitting
a report that has been prepared to inform Common Council of City policies, legal requirements and various problem
areas relating to land for public purposes in new sub-divisions, and recommending that the Common Council submit
this report to the Provincial Department of Municipal Affairs with a request that it be studied for possible
future amendments to the Community Planning Act designed to overcome some of the apparent weaknesses or defic-
iencies in current related legislation - be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
On motion of Councillor Gould
-8")
b,...
~
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that in
August of 1975 the City planned to lay a sewer on Crescent Avenue across land owned by Mr. and Mrs. Robert
. Jeffries on Loch Lomond Road and permission was received from the Jeffries for the City to carry out
this work, pending a formal easement being arranged and negotiations resulted in an agreed sum of money
for the easement; that the work was actually carried out late in the year, by Sunrise Contractors Ltd.,
~ ~ $ Mr. Dante Foriere, President, and as a result Mr. and Mrs. Jeffries claimed that the contractor had caused
"/~'~ ~. considerable damage beyond the easement area for which they wanted compensation; that the Land Committee
i?<?~d'~~~~' considered this claim beginning in January, 1976 and have since then held numerous meetings with all ~he
~,,,u)9~,:-1f/"J7 people involved; that at its last meeting, on July 19th last, the Land Committee reluctantly recommended
, that Mr. and Mrs. Jeffries be contacted and advised that the Committee was unable to solve the problem of
restoration and compensation'for work carried out outside the working easement and not arranged by Eng-
ineering and Works Department, and that the City, however, is prepared to make restoration of land within
the. easement area and to pay the figure previously agreed for this easement area; that this being unac~
c~ptable to the Jeffries, the Land Committee recommends that expropriation proceedings commence to acquire
~he necessary easement; and further advising that, arising out of this and similar situations, the Com-
mittee is concerned over the position of the citizen in this type of situation and has asked the Legal
Department to prepare a clause that could be added to future contracts making the contractor responsible
for damages during the construction period and while employed by the City, and that this clause will be
/1 ~ / considered by the Land Committee at a future meeting be received and filed and the City Solicitor be
~/~~~,,/,~~t' authorized to file the necessary Notice of Intention to Expropriate with the Expropriation Advisory Board.
S. :T~"K/J1~ . ,
7_1"A-;J7~ .we~
~-AdW
Jlh'J~M/77'hr
1~f',uJ.,L/h~
1I<Z/1/~k.;1
~/tfl. .5QJ;c/i-<?J'1
t.'~/~if tff" 'a/I'
/lhl7N.3/ /P~ftt-
/"7!T ~OIV(9"
(lOAIIf 1$$/f7n
..(anlit' Cbm/?7.
Sew(?I' ea::6'J4!?
Cre:Jed'hr- /lll'e.
when the oil refinery expansion started the Irving interests got permission to put houses on Lee's Cor~
ner - the people objected to it but he assured them that he would either move them or purchase their homes
within two years - but he has done neither. He stated that he suggested to one of the ladies who resides
there that she come before Council because she is quite upset about a bunch of shacks up in the back field
in this regard. Councillor MacGowan discussed with Mr. Zides the question of commitment on the part of
successive owners of these developments in relation to maintaining and enhancing property values in the
area of such developments and in relation to the length of time owners will retain ownership in the
developments, and the question of retention of existing trees in sub-divisions and developments. Councillor
MacGowan suggested that perhaps the City should be doing something about the retention of such trees.
With regard to the said Bon Accord Sub-division, the Mayor advised that the developers told him that the
people who first moved in to this sub-division did not realize or did not pay attention to what was going
on behind them and they decided to extend their land just for use only (not for ownership) and they went
,
back and cut some of the trees that did not belong to them and then when development took place behind
them they complained about the trees being cut down, yet they were the ones who cut them down, not real-
izing that the trees were going to be a buffer between them and the next housing.
.
I
Councillor M. Vincent noted that the petitioners had stated that they feel there are enough
apartments here at the present time that are not rented, and that in the response from the Planning
Advisory Committee, the Committee felt that the City should not attempt to interfere with market forces
that may result in lower rents for apartment dwellers. He stated that he agrees that the City should not
become involved in that, but he would ask whether it would not be a concern of the Planning people to
ensure that we have not got a number of vacant apartments allover the city that have been created because
developers are able to get levels of funding and build them, and then leave them vacant, which is going to
place the Fire Chief and the Chief of Police in a problem area of supervising empty apartment buildings.
Mr. Zides felt that it is a philosophy that could be discussed at great length - for example, when we'
really needed housing, we could not get the financing. He stated that it may well be that this fall or
next spring we may not be able to get more financing again. He stated that he thinks, from the indications,
there is going to be a real surplus of rental accommodation housing for a while, but everybody expects the
market to really tighten up again-in the fall, and then you might be in the same position again, for
another period of time from now - he does not know that, but this is the way that people see it.
I
Councillor Higgins noted that Mr. Zides had stated that the machinery is available and he
asked:- when a deed is filed in the Registry Office that conditions imposed by the Planning Advisory
Committee or by the Common Council may be placed there with the deed - or are they placed there with the
deed. Mr. Zides replied that this is a little different: this has to do with a re-zoning when you are
tying the re-zoning to the fulfillment of certain conditions that Council imposes - what we refer to is
Section 39 which is the authority in the Community Planning Act - and when you have set out one of those
conditions you can go beyond what we have been doing - you can actually have a contract, an agreement _
and once that agreement is filed in the Registry Office it becomes more enforceable and not only that, but
it runs with the land. Councillor Higgins asked: is that being done now, or is that in the Planning
Advisory Committee's proposal that this is something that should be done. Mr. Zides replied that they
have been talking with both the City Solicitor and Common Clerk about it and they are proposing to do more
of it.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Parking Commission
recommending that the Parking Meter By-Law be amended by adding to Section 12 (2) thereof the words, "and
all unpaid meter tickets", thereby reading, "(2). If a vehicle is parked in violation of this by-law any
police constable of the City of Saint John may take such vehicle or cause it to be impounded in a suitable
place and all unpaid meter tickets, all costs and charges for removal, care or storage of the said vehicle
shall constitute a lien upon such vehicle.", be referred to the Legal Department and to the Chief of
Police for a report and recommendation.
1
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the annual report of the Power Commission
of the City of Saint John for the year 1975, be received and filed.
.
On motion of Councillor Green
I
I
Councillor MacGowan expressed regret that the above matter has come up on the Council agenda,
because it is the old story of a case where the contractor goes in and takes more land than the City
supplies for an easement, and destroys the land, and it has happened so many times. She stated that she
is glad to see that the Land Committee has referred this problem to the Legal Department so the contractor
possibly will be responsible - she thinks it is about time that the contractor is responsible for any
damages, and if the contractor needs a certain easement he should say he needs a certain easement, not
half that amount and then destroy the land, and she thinks this is most unfortunate. Councillor Cave
stated that he has argued right along that when the City asks for easements it is not asking for yide
enough portions, and he cautioned that this is a matter that the City must watch.
.
....1
,....
58~3
~hA am"",.
.At/,1~.1'e
~f?P7h7eJrC'/a/
/O~
1
iW?-~bh/~
~~i:
/~Q~"",~ w
+-J'16'3(h~
~a.
1
S:J: /lsff'
, co",,_.
-#er/?lS ff
refl>M#ee
Ceo.l'f'le F
. 0 'CPQ~t9//
u4lte r
:Ekc/(E>#- '
CPP?j?I'i?Jd'hSl
ahJP7t& b/ty
~17
I /J1/A.I'J/~/
7>/an .1!J!/-
, ..(.;:IvV
.
1
I
.
~
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that at its
meeting held on July 19th last, the Committee considered four bids for the City-owned land at Millidge Avenue (a
commercial site) and none of the bids submitted were acceptable to the Committee, and further advising that the
Committee will be reconsidering this matter at a future meeting, be received and filed.
In reply to Councillor Kipping's query as to the location of the above named commercial site, the Mayor
stated that he believes it is on the other side of the Irving service station on Millidge Avenue, opposite the
City-owned recreational land.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee to whom had been referred
by Council resolution of June 21st, 1976 the application for re-zoning by Slattery Management for approximately
40 acres of land on, Grandview Avenue, advising that the Committee considered this matter at its meeting held on
July 19th, 1976, and has no objection to the said re-zoning, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Housing Commission, advising
that at a meeting of the Commission held on July 12th, 1976, it was requested that a copy of Clause 9 and Clause
10 (1) of the Terms of Reference of the said Commission be forwarded to each member of the Common Council for
their information and file, be received and filed and the Housing Commission be thanked for this material.
Read a letter from Mr. George F. O'Connell, solicitor for Mr. Walter Beckett, advising that as the
result of a recent meeting with the Director of Town Planning and at the 'said Director's suggestion, the letter
is requesting that the Community Plan be amended as necessary to permit the development of the Beckett property
at the intersection of the Acamac Backland Road and the Martinon By-Pass, and that it is Mr. Zides' view that as
the Provincial Planning Act requires that the Zoning By-Law be brought into line with the Municipal Plan and not
vice versa and the sub-division design must be based upon the Zoning By-Law, no attempt should be made to design
a sub-division so as to designate areas of the Beckett land into various zones until such time as the Development
Plan has been amended or the Common Council has expressed its intention to have the plan amended to permit that
development - and that Mr. Zides suggests that zoning and sub-division should follow the Municipal Plan. The
letter adds that while it is Mr. O'Connell's view that all of the land lying between the Gault Road and the City
boundary at Martinon should be available for development under the Municipal Plan, his immediate concern is of
course the Beckett property. The letter states that Mr. O'Connell requests therefore that the Council take the
steps necessary to amend the Municipal Plan, his immediate concern is of course the Beckett property. The letter
states that Mr. O'Connell requests therefore that the council take the steps necessary to amend the Municipal
Plan to enable them to proceed with an application for re-zoning of the Beckett property.
In reply to a query put by the Mayor, Mr. Zides gave information regarding development of land in
accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Development Plan, and noted that the subject is rather compre-
hensive and would really almost require a "teach-in" to explain the policy. Councillor MacGowan asked how this
proposed Beckett development ties in with the medium security prison if it goes ahead in that area. Mr. Zides
replied that a lot depends on City policies because, typically, we have quite an argument by people in the city
that the prison should not be anywhere near housing or anything else, it should be removed from built-up areas.
He stated that you could have a reversal here but it would be a conscious City policy and it would be quite a
shake-up to that Comprehensive Community Plan - by that, he mans that it would not be simply a matter of doing
something small that we are doing here, as was done at this meeting, but it would be a matter of shaking up our
premises and the very structure on which the Plan rests; he eels about the matter that if, for example, you
permitted something out there then why stop anything else anywhere else in the city, provided the developer
services it? - so, what you would endup with is a kind of scatteration that you now have, only even worse.
Councillor MacGowan stated that her question is: if we change our Plan to provide for housing, the housing may
not go through, but the prison may - do we have to it again for the prison - is a decision at this meeting of
Council premature? She added that, so it is premature, so it should be tabled until the Council finds out where
it going from here? Mr. Zides advised that he thinks that the impact of this on the Plan, either the Plan falls
if this changes - and if it does not fall, it has to be changed properly which means a very thorough examination
and a revision of the very basic policies on which the Plan was developed. Councillor MacGowan noted that the
matter has to be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee, and Mr. Zides confirmed same.
In reply to Councillor Cave's query, Mr. Zides explained that the reference in the letter from Mr.
O'Connell to the Zoning By-Law being brought into line with the Municipal Plan, he thinks, is taken out of
contents of a meeting during which time Mr. O'Connell was attempting to have the Planning staff approve in
principle or modify a sub-division plan that might be approved in principle, and Mr. Zides kept saying to him
that this is not the issue - the issue is the Plan itself; he advised the meeting that right now, you could not
approve something out there with, the most beautiful sub-division in the world - and Mr. Beckett's is not - so, he
thinks that the gist was that he said to Mr. O'Connell in the covering letter that he has to convince and justify
to Council the need to change that Plan and then everything follows from there if Council is convinced.
Councillor Kipping raised the question of whether the amending of the Municipal Plan in this matter
would open the door to "sprawl" developments elsewhere, or whether it would just apply to this one development.
In reply, Mr. Zides stated he thinks that there are policies and some logical approaches and bases on which you
deal with the Plan - it just was not pulled out of content - and if, for example, you took the premise that
anybody could develop a plan provided it was a certain size and provided he gave you the'services, then, as far
as Mr. Zides is concerned, you have no plan because he (Mr. Zides) is dealing all the time with people who come
in on a lesser scale than Mr. Beckett's in remote corners of the municipality and he has to tell them the same
thing he has been telling Mr. O'Connell or Mr. Beckett: that, at the moment, that it would be possible to develop
in the long run and he has tried to explain to them why, and the bases are all set out in the Plan. In reply to
the question as to whether the Plan if amended, would open the door to anything and everything then, that may
come in from any end of the city, say - Mr. Zides stated that he believes that on the basis of what it is being
proposed, that it is. He stated that he does not want to give the impression that you cannot amend the Plan at
all - it is only a legal document or a tool the City uses to guide development, but there are bases on which that
Plan was prepared and to amend the Plan by extending, for example a particular type of zone or district a little
further is a pretty small issue, but the issue that we try to work in the city, and we gave the Council today the
opportunity to discuss several different alternative forms of grwoth, and one of the forms of growth was to try
as much as possible to grow along servicing lines that the City could extend and to have growth as contiguous as
possible and ultimately in more or less equidistant from the city centre and on services which are trunks, not
isolated little pockets which by-pass other vacant lands. Councillor Kipping noted that, in other words, there
are implications if the Council does amend the Plan.
Councillor M. Vincent commented that he does not see any new information that would make Council change
its minds from its previous refusals of Mr. Beckett's proposed development.
584
Gep'Ye~ i?"~
tf/d/-kr ..k-..f.
P4vJh,19d'WS.
c;N"'P?
!1W77/~I?/
.7i!l-~ClW
Grcud~
/l#/adA: lYed 7
,gA'b.L~
I/ol"st!" "s~ow
fCPI7I)P?/~ ~
lI1e~~:c-
.JQ~n G? ~~
:lIi?~ JJu..//iCen"
.<rd
S<<b-~'v.. eod-
S~"/I1'f
/f1e~PI~h~ .
...&//~K S~.
C}t-f/ /II~r.
C/-E~ 5d/l6rtf?l"
//~/t'f?J?~'c6'hS1
:lit/. : kn'l'lii!::fe
~&?P1 ;;~Ul);o
//NJ75e
.(.s;aEn~
.<-h;{.
.:lb~ /: ~
:IJ-,e75" /s
.Lhud..;//OI$
'P/Clhh.lJIII'ns.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. O'Connell be referred to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a report regarding the implications of the request contained therein, and
for a recommendation from the Committee.
Councillor Higgins stated that the reason he wants the above matter referred to the Planning
Advisory Committee is that this is possibly the plainest, most direct approach he has seen ~~. O'Connell
take thus far. He stated that in the report requested from the Planning Advisory Committee he would like
to be informed as to how the Council goes about amending the Municipal Plan, what section, what does it
say, what are the implications, are there readings involved, what is Council's obligations - then, if ~he
COcillcil amends it, does that mean that ~IT. O'Connell goes back to the Planning Advisory Committee and
advertising starts and we go through the procedure - he wants to know exactly what that implies to Common
Counc il.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Hodges, Gould, Cave and M. Vincent
voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as requested in the letter from the Chairman of the
Atlantic National Exhibition Light Horse Show, the City of Saint John grant the sum of $300.00 to be used
as prize monies for the 1976 Light Horse Show, and that this sum be taken from the budget of the Economic
Development Department.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. John G. Kelly, Barrister, of
Kelly, Sherwood & Company, on behalf of Best Builders Ltd., with regard to the desire of that company that
the City of Saint John cost-share in the provision of services for the development of the remaining
portion of Meadowbank Avenue and Bullock Street, which matter was laid on the table by resolution of
Common Council on July 5th, 1976, be referred to the City Manager and to the City Solicitor for a re-
commendation and a report.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Liquor Licensing Board
advising that L. S. O. Enterprises Ltd. has made application for a beverage room license for premises
located at 9 Sydney Street, Saint John, N. B. and that this application will be heard at a public hearing
of the Board on August 6th, 1976 commencing at 11.00 a.m. in the Hearing Room, Liquor Licensing Board,
Prospect Place, Fredericton, N. B., be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
,
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the application made by Mr. Donald F. MacGowan,
solicitor for Mr. Demetris Bountalas, that Mr. Bountalas be permitted to provide for a one-bedroom or
achelor apartment in the basement of his structure under construction at 23 St. Anne Street in addition
to the permitted six dwelling units in the said building, be referred to the Planning Advisory Committee
for the Committee's views before the Council makes a deci?ion in this matter.
The Mayor noted that the City has a report on the decision of the Arbitration Board in the
dispute with Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.U.P.E. regarding Article 6 (1)
19~/~~tl0).7~ of the Working Agreement with respect to the Chief of Police instructing employees to attend courses
~. outside the boundaries of the City of Saint John. He stated that the City Solicitor has suggested that
a(~ ~/OJ? the Council has two choices: either the Council can hear the matter at this meeting, or the City Solicitor
~~~/ltp~~:f would have a written submission prepared on this matter for the Council's agenda correspondence for
71~d-ive II~ Council's next meeting.
L~/ IYO,b
C1o/ SP.h~/~p
kffs;tJte :Z;r.
7Ju S-C- 'Ie-USa.
..{/'Uel" pl'&>Jkn,
..(/~r CP~/i;e.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor place the above named item on the
agenda for the next meeting of the Common Council.
Councillor M. Vincent asked for permission to place a very short item on the agenda, dealing
with the condition of Bayside Drive, there being a tremendous amount of dust that comes off the road and
when vehicles go by there they are affecting the properties that exist on that street, mainly the entire
length of it, particularly between Kane's Corner and Park Avenue. He asked if there is anything the City
department can do about this situation during this particular stage of construction of the said road.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above named item that has been introduced by
Councillor M. Vincent, be placed on the agenda of this meeting.
Mr. MacKinnon reported that having viewed Bayside Drive this afternoon he gave instruction to
the Works Department to send the flusher over both lanes to dampen down the roadway so that the dust would
not be a problem - however, the problem moves from place to place and in order to completely alleviate the
dust problems we would have to put a flusher there almost constantly - however, it is a problem and we are
cognizant of it. Councillor M. Vincent thanked Mr. MacKinnon for his prompt attention to this problem.
Councillor Cave advised that on Bayside Drive there is a store on the corner that used to be the
drug store, and the City had a programme of placing barrels at stores to stop children from dropping paper
allover the place, but the City has done away with that practice. He stated that there is a take-out
restaurant there, and there is a great litter of paper over by Stella Maris Church and up in the field
where the park is. He stated that he has asked for a City litter barrel there and the restaurant owners
will dump the barrel. He stated that he would ask that the City of Saint John please give the said re-
staurant a litter barrel, and he noted that the City will thus save a lot of money by avoiding the picking
~
.
I
1
.
1
.
1
I
.
....1
,..-
585
.
I
I
.
I
{louI7c'11
/11/n<<-6es
Clol"reo1fed
~-?;1f/ tPn
~.,e(d>,I'P/J?
. /It/e. or
~'s~/e -
St. t"71'16raeu
C(,('p~n.fc%
1
I Cdy ~m;/,
~-6-~
~5 spm
S~Nke
.
~
up of littering paper. Mr. MacKinnon replied that the instructions have already been given to place a barrel
there and that the owners would look after the dumping of the contents.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~~.
, Common ~'
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the ninth day of
August, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Davis, Gould, Green, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan, Parfitt,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer o~ Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commissioner of
Administration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, D. Buck,
Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services of the Community
Planning and Development Department, C. E. Nicolle, Director of
Recreation and Parks, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
P. Clark, Fire Chief, and E. Ferguson, Chief of Police
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend L. J. Galey, rector of St. Luke's
Church.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on July 26th
last, be confirmed.
Councillor MacGowan referred in the above named Council minutes to discussion which ensued therein
resulting from consideration to a petition from residents of Dufferin Avenue in relation to the way the Thistle _
St. Andrews Curling Club is now operating, and noted that the minutes read, "In reply to a query from Mayor
Flewwelling, Mr. Zides stated that the Planning Advisory Committee knew there would be some parking on the site
and that the zoning was conditional on an arrangement by the Club with the Royal Bank to have parking and that
arrangement was made. Councillor MacGowan stated that such parking is not being used.". She stated that she
feels there should be a question there, because she was asking if it was being used, and she was told that it was
not being used - she did not say it, because she did not know. The Mayor noted that this item in the said
minutes will be corrected.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on July 29th
last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on August 3rd
last, be confirmed.
The Mayor stated that he understands there was a group present at this meeting representing the bus
drivers (Of City Transit Limited), and that the Council understands - the Council just understands - that there
is a strike that the Council does not know anything about, so there were not any comments that he could make. He
stated that there was nothing (about the matter) on the agenda of the Council meeting that he had before him
because the Council has not been informed - only from what it has heard from the media. He stated that the
Council trusts that if their strike is for the benefit of the good of the City - good luck; if it is a strike to
get more wages in times that are difficult, he thinks he would have to say "tough" - but, anyway, it was nice of
the group to turn out and he was sorry the Council could not do any more for them than that because the Council
does not have any particulars on why the group is out, what their aim is, or in what way they think the Council
can help - the Council does not have anything on that - and until the Council gets something we can talk about
the Council cannot put it on the agenda - the Council has to have something that it can discuss and have time for
different Council members to be able to study it. He stated that he was sorry that the group came out, thinking
that something would happen and nothing is gained for them. Councillor Parfitt asked if the Mayor does not think
that a meeting should be arranged between the Council, the company, and the men. She noted that, certainly it is
an illegal strike - a "wild-cat strike" and so on - but the Council just cannot hide away from it and not do
something - the travelling public are being affected - she made some enquiries this morning, especially those who
b..,-.
586
~
Crl-y S.?t'll-fft
Sol/~/'Ipr$ /'ee
at:~u/e
..tep/ ..JA!y/.5t:J1'.
f/J/I1'hde~
,?,.f)g 7 )
have people working for them in their stores and so on. She felt that the Council should find out
how long the people are going to be inconvenienced. The Mayor replied that as soon as the Council gets
something - he does not care whether it comes "from the Union or whether it comes from the owners of the
transportation system - but one or ther other, to tell the Council what is going on - the Council does
not even know anything about it; he was just bringing the matter up as remarks - he was sorry that was
all the Council could do right now for them - and whatever way it turns out, he hopes that, win or lose,
they will take it as an effort they tried to do something about, in their own conscience.
.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare a Fee
Schedule or Tarriff, for charges by solicitors who are not employees of the City; that such schedule be
prepared after study of the schedules of the Legal Aid Programme of the Barristers Society of New Brunswick,
the Provincial Government Scale of Fees and the Federal Government scale of fees for solicitors:
I
AND FURTHER RESOLVED that no further engagement of lawyers who are not employees of the City be
undertaken, until such fee schedule or tariff has been submitted to and approved by Council:
AND FURTHER RESOLVED that for all future accounts rendered by lawyers already engaged by the
City, such lawyers be requested when rendering their accounts to present an account, itemizing the ser-
vice, time and rate of charge.
1
Councillor Kipping referred to the second paragraph of the above resolution, stating he rather
thinks the Council should perahps put a time limit on the submission of the fee schedule because otherwise
we are tying up our legal processes in a way which could work against the City's best interests. The
Mayor noted that this would not change the procedure that has been followed in the past, namely, the City
Solicitor presenting the problem to Council and suggesting that the Council authorize the hiring of a
legal aid - he understands that this procedure would be automatic once they get the fee schedule set up,
and then, the City Solicitor can go ahead and hire people. Councillor Kipping stated the view that the
Council should say that the fee schedule shall be produced within such and such a time. The Mayor replied
that he was prepared to accept whatever is suggested, as long as it accomplishes the purpose. Councillor
Kipping pointed out that the way the said paragraph reads we cannot hire a lawyer until the fee schedule
has been submitted and approved by Council - so he felt that the Council should say that this fee schedule
or tariff should be submitted and approved by, say, two weeks' time. Mr. Rodgers was asked for his
comments, in the event there was something in the above motion that would cause some difficulties to the
Legal Department in the light of Councillor Kipping's remarks. Mr. Rodgers, speaking to the second
paragraph in the said motion, stated that it is difficult to say because the first part of the resolution
talks about the Legal Aid Programme, and the Provincial Government scale of fees, and the Federal Govern-
ment scale of fees - he has already had sent to him the Provincial Crown tariff with respect to lawyers
and the comment made by the Deputy Minister that these fees are, under review - there were set more than
three years ago and are under review and will be up-dated shortly - so, therefore, if the City is going to
use that as a guide we will be saying we should wait and see what their new fee structure is - he does not
know how long that will take - and on that basis, the said second paragraph in the resolution he thinks
becomes very important because anything could develop where expert advice is required in the labour
relations field, in the income tax field, or in the mechanics' lien area, where it is very technical and
you just will not get the legal advice the Corporation of the City of Saint John requires if we are tied
to that schedule of tariffs; now, that is looking ahead to the point of even adopting the tariff in that
area - and the way this is worded, it assumes it is going to be approved (in the said second paragraph),
and he does not believe even the tariff fee that the Provincial Government has at the present time covers
all areas - it covers the area of real estate transactions and title searching - which is handled by the
Legal Department, anyway - and Crown prosecuting; it is difficult to talk about the tariff covering every
detail that legal services might be needed. The Mayor noted that there is a place he wrote in there that
if anyone does not agree with the fees that their name can be brought before Council who can make the
decision on the urgency or the requirement - and he would think that would cover the City Solicitor during
the period in which he was establishing any type of tariffs or fees. Councillor Kipping asked if Mr.
Rodgers was saying that it will take him so long to prepare the schedule that something else should be
done, or was he saying that schedules are subject to change - therefore he would wait until the changes
take place. He stated he feels that if schedules exist we should have them brought in and use, but
otherwise he thinks we really do need a time limit - either that, or we should probably drop the said
second paragraph altogether although he realizes that the intent of the motion was to have some kind of
control there. The Mayor replied that the basis of the said second paragraph is that "it would further,
that in any case where a lawyer feels that he is not prepared to work in accordance with such tariff of
fees, that he should then only be retained by direct resolution of the Common Council in open session", as
contained in the preamble to the motion, in the Notice of Motion; so, during this period he is just
presented to Common Council and the Council continues to hire, as required. He added that he can see the
problem. He stated that "during this period" means the period in which the City Solicitor is coming up
with his cost - after that, if they retain within that tariff then he can hire them as he sees fit to meet
the tariff. Councillor MacGowan noted that the motion is that we have the existing scale of fees, and she
stated she should think that they could be compiled very rapidly - possibly for the next Council meeting _
and then, if there are any changes the Council can make the changes. Councillor Kipping asked if there
are schedules existing that can be just pulled in, for different types of work - although not maybe all.
Mr. Rodgers in reply stated that there are - he has seen the Provincial one, and with respect to property
transactions, title searching, there is one existing - it is $25.00 per hour - however, that is not relevant
to this resolution because that work is done in the Legal Department. Councillor Kipping noted that this
motion deals with solicitors hired from outside, however. The Mayor asked if the Provincial Government
hires outside lawyers. Mr. Rodgers made affirmative reply. Councillor Kipping noted that the lawyers who
operate in private law firms have schedule - and he asked if that is so. Mr. Rodgers replied: a minimum
tariff - yes. Councillor Kipping noted it is a minimum tariff for different types of work. Mr. Rodgers
pointed out that what the Council is discussing with reference to the above motion is a minimum tariff
that the Governments have set down with respect to what they will pay lawyers when they are hired to do
work - the lawyer takes the work on with that knowledge. Councillor Kipping asked if the City comes under
the general title of "government" in that case for this purposes. Mr. Rodgers made negative reply, adding
that the City would have to adopt its own. Councillor Kipping replied that that is exactly why he says
the Council should put a time limit on the compilation of this because, otherwise, the said second para-
graph of the motion is going to make it so that if the Council adopts it, it cannot hire a lawyer - and he
pointed out that the City may need one very badly in the interim whilst the City staff is compiling the
tariff of fees -so, it seems to him that the Council has got to do something about the said paragraph in
the motion. The Mayor pointed out that until that comes in, the Council works on the same system it is
operating on now - namely, the City Solicitor brings in the name and tells Council the Legal Department
wants to hire a lawyer and the reason they want it and the Council approves that being done. Councillor
Davis stated that he feels as does Councillor Kipping - that the second paragraph is still prohibiting,
and prohibiting even what the Mayor has pointed out as procedure that is followed in engaging a lawyer who
is not an employee of the City. He added that he does not think that paragraph number 2 of the motion is
necessary - he thinks that before the City engages outside legal help the Council approves it - therefore,
it is not necessary to say that we not engage outside legal help until we approve a fee schedule _ so, in
.
1
..
I
I
.
~
"""
581
.
C/if.
jZ/~pr
~e/zf-o.l"S'
I :s S6'~
I
/l<<&'~/f?n/
~ stajP/<<s
C}l?'5
matlPJ?/a.6-
.
~/:t-~I Y-
Jee~t-
S~NJek
"ffirA-
I a/<<tlle#$!
tf/,~A1-/&
"(~d.
7e'1~/; ../
c:fee4~~
'JJd;;1?'A"04'YJ?~
~~?'!l, /Pifs
~N) tbh.
. t'/PI7 ..(~d.
-<.;}n~scCil'p -
/h,7
I
I
.
~
his opinion, that paragraph is certainly not necessary; the Council still has to approve any engagement of outside
consultants.
Moved in amendment by Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor be directed to prepare a Fee Schedule
or Tariff, for charges by solicitors who are not employees of the City; that such schedule be prepared after
study of the schedules of the Legal Aid Programme of the Barristers Society of New Brunswick, the Provincial
Government Scale of Fees and the Federal Government scale of fees for solicitors:
AND FURTHER RESOLVED that for all future accounts rendered by lawyers already engaged by the City, such
lawyers be requested when rendering their accounts to present an account, itemizing the service, time and rate of
charge.
Councillor MacGowan suggested that the motion also include provlslon that the Council be provided also
with a list of what the different lawyers charge per hour, for the Council's information, to learn the range in
fees.
Question being taken, the amendment to the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager, advising-that the
auction of surplus City-owned materials was held at the Simonds Centennial Arena on July 27th last and that 27
pieces of automotive equipment were sold for some $27,000.00 as well as hundreds of small surplus items ranging
in a bid value of $1.00 to $150.00, and that total sales were $30,297.00 which sum has been deposited in the
General Revenue of the City - Sale of Used Equipment; and advising that it is regrettable that it was found
necessary to withdraw the advertised bicycles from the auction to allow time for further investigation on own-
ership, which was undertaken by the Police Department; and recommending that this method of disposing of used
assets be used periodically when accumulation dictates, and also recommending that approval be granted by Council
for payment to Mr. Tim Isaac, the Auctioneer, of his fee of ten per cent, namely, $3,029.70 -- be received and
filed and the recommendations adopted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
payment
capital
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the
of the following construction progress certificate and approved
budget: - i-6eh?
City Manager, authority be granted for
invoice regarding the following named
1.
Athletic Facilities - Shamrock Park
W. E. Kelly Limited
Construction of Athletic Facilities Building
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention'
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated July 6, 1976
$ 221,900.00
16,915.15
2,537.27
Nil
1
$ 14,377.88
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that Metro Con-
struction Limited submitted the lower of two bids received for paving of the Community Arenas parking lots
(Recreation Capital - 1976), the City's estimate for this project is $74,117.00, and both tenders were in com-
pliance with the Insturctions to Bidders and Tendering Procedures, and recommending that the tender of Metro
onstruction Limited, Saint John, N. B. in the amount of $74,015.50 for the said work, be accepted -- be received
and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Councillor MacGowan stated that according to the minutes the above tendering work includes landscaping,
and she asked if this is correct, or is such work another call for tenders. Mr. MacKinnon replied that the
landscaping involves a separate tender which has not been called yet. The Mayor commented that he wishes that
the above sum for paving of the arenas parking lots was being used for City streets paving, and he added that he
feels that gravelled parking areas at existing rinks in the city and in other communities are very effective and
do the job and keep the cars out of the mud - he added that the sum of $74,000.00 would do a lot of paving work
on the City streets, and that he is bothered by that thought. Councillor Gould commented that if the City is
going to build a structure, such as the arena, it behooves the City to make it appealing to be placed in a
residential area (as is the case in regard to the Arena at Millidgevillel, ~d that was one of the reasons the
Council increased the price of the Arenas to include a brick exterior because the Council wished them to have a
good appearance and decided it was important to keep certain areas, particularly those areas around the rinks,
appropriately paved and appropriately bricked - and he thinks it is well worth the City's money. The Mayor
eplied that he believes the arenas should be attractive, but he believes crushed stone gives the same effect, if
it is well looked after, for the time being until the City gets enough money ahead (for paving work on these
arking areas) which it does not have, today. Councillor MacGowan asked if chipsealing of these parking areas
ould be satisfactory, and adequate, and she noted that it is considerably cheaper and looks nice, and then you
ight get the landscaping done, too. Mr. MacKinnon advised that the unit cost of chipsealing is lower _ however,
his was in a construction area, and the preparation of the base involved besides the asphalting that would be
equired to provide the base for chipsealing, would end up costing the same amount of money as putting the hot-
ix in; he is not familiar with the particular specifications, but he would think that there will be less asphalt
han required for a City street - however, there would be quite a bit of preparation that would be required in
rder to put a chipsealed base down. Councillor Parfitt noted that apparently these paved areas will lie vacant
11 summer, and she asked if there is any way they could be utilized or rented out for parking space to the area
esidents. The Mayor replied that it is our hope in the future that in some way we will be able to utilize those
ink facilities for the good of the young people during the summer months.
The Mayor voted "nay" to the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Green
oices:-
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that authority be granted for payment of the following named in-
588
~
,1/dn DhstlwC-
7f/~h .L~tIt'.
StspfeJ'1 ahS6
-t-/~n Cbj~..
~~/'p/I7en7!
reJ?(f..,1
11. :b.T ~~,t.
/J1;/I/~ev///e
dJl'eO/ w~.s-&e
w~-b!,. QJ/~'O
-i'NJ?armeh~
:)>.7(..F: ~
~Y5/a!e :ZJr.
l'et:!onSt-ruct-/oh 1.
~ eden.s /Q~
IY/eh..o ans~
.,<-bL.
Metro Construction Limited - June 28 - July 9, 1976 (dated July 19, 1976)
Stephen Construction Company Limited - July 16-30, 1976 (dated August 3, 1976)
$ 5,190.68
$ 66,219.55
Councillor M. Vincent noted that the invoice from Metro Construction Limited has in each item
charged an amount called "payroll burden 20%", and he asked for an explanation. Mr. Barfoot replied that
it is a standard amount as an overhead on the company's payroll of the operator of the piece of equipment
the City rented; this is not a regular equipment rental contract item - this is a special item, not a
contract item and the, operator is charged separately his hourly rate and then the extra, what is called
the payroll burden - a cost plus, sort of, item; the City was aware of that when it rented this piece of
equipment, which is a ripper and on which the City does not have a regular tender. Mr. MacKinnon ex-
plained that this equipment is a D-8 dozer with ripper, and that the object of getting it was that it
included the ripper, and it was used to excavate the Westmorland Road job. He estimated that it would
probably save a substantial amount of money by ripping the road surface out rather than using other
means; it is not a regular contracted piece of equipment; we have attempted, year by year, to add all the
additional pieces of equipment to the tender that we can - however, we do not always include every piece
of equipment that we may rent during the year; he would think there may be two or three rippers in this
city, and he would suspect that they hired the one that was available.
Councillor MacGowan proposed a motion, that was not seconded, that this portion of the
above motion be tabled until the Council finds out what the price would be for this piece of rented
equipment from other companies; to obtain a comparison price, with the 20% on top of that - because the
Council does not know what the 20% means, really. Councillor Kipping stated that the hourly rate for a
dozer and a ripper is supposed to COver the rental of a dozer plus ripper - at least, that is the way it
was always done - he would like to know how long the payroll burden 20% has been a standard item, and
exactly what does it mean. Mr. Barfoot reiterated the information already given by him at this meeting
in this regard, and noted that it is rented on a different basis from the normal rental charges - normal
rental charges do not include item such as labour, or overtime, or payroll burden - this is equivalent to
a cost plus item where you add additional charges such as that. Councillor Kipping noted that the hourly
rate covers the 'ripper rental, but the payroll burden 20% is something over and above the rental of the
machine - it is administrative overhead and that kind of thing, that Mr. Barfoot is talking about. He
stated that it still seems an odd item. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he still has not really found
out what that 20% payroll burden is for - he knows where it comes from - it is 20% of the operator hour
charge - but he wants to know why we are paying 20%. Mr. Barfoot replied that it is a regular charge
(over and above the hourly charge for the operator) for fringes such as holidays, vacations, Unemployment
Insurance, Workmen's Compensation, and that if the City rents a piece of its equipment to another person
we have to allow for that overhead in our rental charge. The Mayor asked if the City, when it rented
this piece of equipment, knew all this was going to be attached to the rental arrangement. ~IT. MacKinnon
made affirmative reply, noting that normally the negotiations or agreement to rent ,a piece of equipment
by the City are all done over the telephone - we need a piece of equipment, they have the piece of
equipment and City does not have it - normally, what you would see as far as the cost - the company here
has broken it down into the dozer and ripper as one item, the operator as another item, and the payroll
burden as a third itme - however, if they had tendered it, you would see one price and the accumulative
figure would not alter any - instead of a figure of $55.00 an hour, they would have a figure there which
would cover the dozer ripper, plus the operator, plus their overhead burden, and you would have one
figure. Councillor Davis pointed out that in most circumstances, they would have charged us $9.00 an
hour - we would not see the 20% mark-up - it would have been $18.00 an hour for premium time - here, it
is $14.78 for premium time plus 20% - but this is one way of doing it - he does not recall the last time,
though - it is a long time since we have had a billing like this; but they would normally have charged a
rate including everything.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he also sees on this job "premium time", and he asked if the
City is paying the contractor whose equipment the City is renting extra money for use at certain key
times in the day or evening. In reply, Mr. MacKinnon stated that for any overtime figures, the City
would pay the premium time to the contractor - the City's definition is overtime and time and a half or
double time whereas the contractor's definition is premium time, or at least, that is what he calls it
and he pays a bonus for, the overtime worked. Councillor M. Vincent asked: when is the premium times, to
this particular company. He stated that he can get that additional information for Councillor M. Vincent.
Councillor Gould noted from the copies of the invoices that were supplied to the Councillors that the
answer to this question has been answered.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors M. Vincent and MacGowan voting
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the Interim Report on Waste Water Collection and
Treatment Millidgeville Area, Saint John, N. B., dated July, 1976 and prepared by A D I Limited, be
received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the covering letter from the City Manager, advising that much further work
needs to be done before recommendations can be made on the actual works to be done and the timing of the
works, regarding the above named matter, be received and filed.
y.
Councillor A. Vincent asked when the Council can have a meeting with the City Manager before
the above named project costs the City a million dollars - he added that it is going to cost the City
about four million dollars, but let us try to save a million dollars. He stated that he has been asking
for this and got the first one, and that he would like to have ameeting with some of his fellow Councillors
and the City Manager to see if we could not save the City some money. The Mayor noted that such a
briefing meeting can be arranged. Councillor A. Vincent asked if such a meeting can be within two weeks,
before they go too much farther regarding the project. Mr. Barfoot asked whether Councillor A. Vincerit
wished A D I Limited to be present~at such meeting for this briefing. Councillor A. Vincent noted that
we are talking about a little over six million dollars, and that the said consultants should be present
if they are going to collect a fee on it.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for en-
gineering services regarding projects that were undertaken under the Department of Regional Economic
Expansion programme:-
be
Bayside Drive Reconstruction
Metro Construction Limited
Total value of contract
and Extension - Phase IV
$ 652,187.00
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"..
589
...&.~.s/,;.,t'e
ff4v?~/a
~ eKkn.
e4//~n
Cbn-/7
,,( .
I
e/ly ~r.
Cd-skr/n.
I;;.J-~Y/s/Qp
.
I
$<<6-"'/1/.
L!Y-....<~w
..Jml!?)7-< Io/l?
.
I
I
.
.....
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention 15%
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
147,532.46
22,122.87
39_,855,89.c
$ 85,545.70
approved,
payment,
Progress Estimate Number 2
2.
Bayside Drive Reconstruction and Extension - Phase II
Callaghan Contracting Limited
Total value of contract
Total work Done, Estimate Number 13
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 13
$ 247,404.00
274,425.60
Nil
260,704.32
$ 13,721. 28
Consideration was given to the letter, dated August 5th, 1976, from the City Manager with
regard to proposed cost-sharing changes in the Subdivision By-Law and the invitation extended to local
developers for receipt of their views in this regard by July 30th last, advising that by the said closing
date only three written replies were received and these contained little in the way of constructive criticism,
but in the main, objected to the City withdrawing its subsidization in the supplying of water and sewer mat-
erials, and generally requested that more time be given for consideration - and further advising that telephone
calls were received through the Planning Office and the City Manager's Office, the general tenor of which
expressed disappointment that the withdrawal of assistance was being considered; and further advising that
because he believes that it is important that the private sector be fully considered in changes of this nature,
he would suggest an extension of time for submissions to be permitted up to September 5th, 1976. The letter
advises that, in the meantime, sub-division plans are in the process of being approved, which process requires a
sub-division agreement to be finalized (there are about one dozen of these currently being discussed; two
proposed cost-sharing agreements have been tabled by Council, and a third, Northland Acres, is -ready for sub-
mission to Council); and further advises that at the Council meeting of July 19th, 1976 a report from the Acting
City Manager recommending first reading of the amendments to the By-Law, together with proper drafting of these
amendments, with a view to passing third reading the first part of August was tabled until all the input answers
are received from builders and sub~dividers. The letter states that in the'light of the foregoing, the City
Manager recommends as an interim approach the following :- (1) that an extension of time to September 15th, 1976
be allowed for developers to complete their input on the matter of changes in the sub-division policy; (2) that
the City confirm that it will not be entering into any further cost-sharing arrangements in sub-division agree-
ments, at least until such time as the By-Law is amended; (3) that City staff report to Council in further
detail as soon as possible after September 15th, 1976 concerning this matter. The proposed revisions contem-
plated in the said By-Law and changes contemplated in administration policy regarding this matter, were attached
to and submitted with the said letter from the City Manager.
Councillor Gould asked whether the City can confirm that it will not be entering into any further
cost-sharing arrangements in sub-division agreements, at least until such time as the By-Law is amended (this
being the second recommendation in the said letter from the City Manager). In reply, Mr. Rodgers stated that it
is not a simple answer to that question: for example, the By-Law sets up a cost-sharing arrangement and the
Council has no authority to enter into an agreement where the City assumes all the financial liability without
coming back to amend the By-Law. He stated that before he gives a firm opinion to that, he would like to
examine the question as to whether the reverse is true. He added that the By-Law at present sets up two schedules,
one schedule is with respect to cost-sharing - one for the developer's portion and one for the City's portion.
He stated that if the Council wishes the question posed by Councillor Gould to be answered, he would recommend
that the Council refer it to the City Solicitor for an opinion.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that thp by-l a'" entit:'.ed, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate
the Subdivision of Land Within the City of Saint John", be read a first time.
Councillor Gould stated that with respect to the third recommendation for revision in the said By-Law,
"That the City assist developers for a stated time before the change-over to the new policy by funding a portion
of completed development costs and holding as security some of the lots which will be serviced in the sub-
division", he is not happy with this recommendation and if it is not changed by the time third reading of the
by-law changes comes around he will disapprove of it - he stated that when the new policy comes into effect he
expects that it will come into effect and effective as of the date of the third reading - or at least have the
date specified in it when it will come into effect. He stated that he objects to the fourth recommendation for
revisions in the by-law, "That the City contribute to the attractiveness and saleability of sub-divisions within
a preferred development area by contributing to the cost of better finish services, such as concrete curbing,
sidewalks and boulevards. Conversely, in areas outside this preferred development area, the City would not
contribute to this work." - he is not against the City contributing to the attractiveness and saleability of
sub-divisions, but he is opposed to "within preferred development areas" because he thinks we should have all'
areas of the city "preferred development areas", thus eliminating the possibility of discrimination, prejudice
or bias - he feels that the term "preferred development area" is being biased. Mr. Barfoot replied that "pre-
ferred" is the wrong word because it gives the wrong impression. He explained that there is an area of the City
which is called the "phase one development area" in which City services are available or can be maqe available
by a reasonable extension of services and it is within this area now that the Council has, to date, cost-shared
in sub-division improvements - and this is what is referred to as the "preferred development area" - it should
be called, maybe, the "phase one development area". Councillor Gould stated that if the City is going to
contribute to the cost of better finish services in sub-divisions, such as concrete curbing, sidewalks and
boulevards, in one area of the city it is his opinion that it would only be fair to do it in all areas of the
city and not to select areas throughout the city to do that - he pointed out that he feels there is still bias
or prejudice in there, somehow. Mr. Barfoot replied that this is a City policy to encourage development within
the area which the City is prepared to service, and to discourage developments outside a serviced area - it is a
planning control method and has been adopted previously by Council as policy. Councillor Gould stated that on
those grounds, as long as it is not what he interpreted it as being, he will agree to it.
Councillor M. Vincent asked if the developers are being stopped completely, pending a decision from
the Council to either carryon with or to eliminate cost-sharing. Mr. Barfoot replied that there are about a
dozen sub-divisions in various process, two applications that have come to Council have been tabled - a third
one, Northland Acres, is on his desk, and there are other sub-divisions which are in various stages of going
through the various planning processes, but none other is yet ready for cost-sharing calculations. Councillor
M. Vincent asked if any delays or hold-backs by Council on this cost-sharing policy item is bringing any develop-
ers into bards hip to have to wait. Mr. Barfoot replied that at the present time, it is only affecting three
developments in any way, as yet. Councillor M. Vincent asked: what happens if any of the developers wish to
proceed with their development now because of the season of the year and be treated accordingly depending on
what action the Council takes in relation to cost-sharing at a later date - can they now get their development
put through City staff? Mr. Barfoot replied that it can go to a certain stage but there is also a stage require-
d where the Development Officer has to be satisfied that proper provision has been made for installation of
services and this is a stage where up unti~ now we have had sub-division agreements. Councillor M. Vincent
590
..,
commented that the Council has really stopped the system, then. Mr. Barfoot replied that this is kind of
a "klinker" in the system. Councillor M. Vincent commented that no developer can create or establish a
development until Council decides what it is going to do with this policy of cost-sharing, that is, they
cannot proceed. He asked if that is correct. Mr. Barfoot replied that there may be a problem at this
point, here, and that is why the cost-sharing policy should be decided as fast as possible. Councillor M.
Vincent asked: are the developers allowed to proceed now or are we stopping them? He added that it seems
to him that we are stopping them. Mr. Zides, in reply, stated that at the moment the Council has a legal
opinion that says that the City does not have to cost-share in the sub-division - this does not prevent a
developer from going ahead if he wants to assume the whole cost, obviously, but at the moment, we have not
had that happen, either. Mr. Rodgers stated that as an additional part to that which is correct: the
Council then has to have a resolution in each particular case saying that the City cannot provide the
services within the foreseeable future (because the City just cannot afford it).
Councillor Green stated that as he sees it, the saving that developers realize through the City
cost-sharing in sub-divisions is not passed along to the purchase of the home in the sub-division, and he
added that he is concerned about that fact, namely, that the taxpayers are subsidizing the developers and
yet those who purchase the homes are not getting the benefit of it - that is why he supports Councillor
MacGowan's view that action commence to effect the changes in the cost-sharing policy.
CI?5~- s,l~~/ I7f
,.~ 5ab-d'/VS
Councillor Davis expressed the view that if it is the mood of the majority of the Council that
the Council is going to change the By-Law in any case, no matter what the private sector says about it or
the neighbouring communities, then the Council should go ahead and change the By-Law - or, if the Council
wants to compromise, perhaps it should allow an extension of time for submissions from the private sector
to August 30th, 1976 rather than the suggested September 15th - but, if it is the mood of the majority of
the Council that we do not want to cost-share any further, then the Council will be regarded by
the private sector in a bad light - but, if it is just a gesture the Council wants to make, to wait for
them and to listen to them and then reject their pleas, he feels the Council may as well do it, right now.
The Mayor expressed his agreement with this viewpoint, stating he feels it should be cut off at a certain
determined,date.
$~~--r.:b'y/s/on
4--/~ w
Councillor MacGowan asked if, as it stands now under the By-Law, the City is permitted to cost-
share and is not, of necessity, bound to cost-share. Mr. Rodgers replied that that question has not been
answered, and that is the item that has been referred to the Legal Department because of the fact that,
certainly, the Council could not without changing the By-Law agree to put one hundred per cent of the cost
into the development at no cost to the developer - on that basis, he wants to examine the matter to see if
the reverse is also true. Councillor MacGowan noted that Mr. Zides at this meeting advised that he was
under the impression that the City was not committed to cost-share, and she recalled that Mr. Barfoot ,used
the word "permitted". She noted that the Council started talking about revising the cost-sharing policy
two or three years ago, and now finally has something before it to consider, and the Council has given
extensions of time for considering it, and stated that she does not think the money is in the budget, ,so
the City cannot afford to do it - so she urged that the Council be realistic and give this policy change
the first and second reading and then, if it is found there is any change the Council can leave the third
reading for two weeks, if it wishes.
Councillor Kipping stated that after considering the matter, he has come up with a proposed re-
draft of the second recommendation contained in the August 5th, 1976 letter from the City Manager because
it certainly looks as if the City Manager was taking for granted that the by-law is going to be amended,
according to the second paragraph in the said letter. He stated that he felt the said recommendation
could say, instead of "until such time as the By-Law is amended", "until such time as the matter is
decided by Council following which the policy adopted will apply to all applications submitted since the
revisions were first proposed". He felt that in that way, if we can allow contractors to go ahead with
their work now, which concern has been expressed - because if we are holding them up now, it seems to him
the Council is doing a very wrong thing by holding them up now; if we can allow them to go ahead now on
the understanding that whatever decision the Council comes to will be sort of retroactive - in other
words, if the Council says, "you are going to pay for everything" then that is retroactive, and if the
Council says, "you will pay for nothing" then that is also retroactive - at least, they can go to work and
continue working during our short enough construction season. With regard to whether or not the Council
should give first reading, he stated that he thinks the Council should do so, in order to save at least
one week when the decision is made; so, he would like to see an amendment. He stated that he would like
to propose the amendment that he had just read, at this time. The Mayor felt that the said proposed
amendment should first be checked with the City Solicitor to determine how it fills the gap that we are
looking for. Mr. Rodgers replied that the first reading has got to be based on some type of an amendment.
He asked if the City Manager is ready to recommend what his amendments will be, even though they can be
changed later, what first reading is tied to right now, if the Council gives first reading. He asked what
the Council is giving first reading to; where are the items that the Council is giving first reading to.
Councillor MacGowan replied that it is Supplement "A" that was submitted with the City Manager r s letter of
August 5th, 1976: the revisions (4 in number) contemplated in the by-law, and the changes (3 in number)
contemplated in administration policy. The Council members noted that even if first reading is given at
this time the Council can change the draft amendment at any time up to the third reading.
Councillor Parfitt stated that she would like to know particulars regarding the one dozen or so
sub-division plans that are in the process of being approved and currently being discussed and that are
spoken of in the above named letter from the City Manager; noting that they may have been discussed for
quite some time, she stated she would like to know just what they are and who they are and if all their
figures are based on the fact that the City had the previous policy. She felt that if there is any cut-
off, it should be right there - but consider these one dozen sub-division plans, and not accept any more
from then on. Mr. Barfoot noted that these dozen are in various stages of approval. ne asked that Mr.
Zides to comment regarding maybe the difference between the ones which are ready and the ones which are in
process. Mr. Zides advised that he cannot be specific on who they are and what they are, at the moment _
perhaps that is fortunate because some of these things are a considerable time away from reaching a point
of agreement; there are three proposed sub-divisions that are being deferred by Council deciding that the
City cannot cost-share with them at the moment; there are possibly maybe three more that might if the
proponents speeded things up on their end, get to Council for cost-sharing proposals; the other half-dozen
or so that are kicking around - and there are more than the list he gave to the City Manager on August 6th
because he has found two or three others since that time, so a supplementary list is coming to the City
anager - are at the stage where people are talking a sub-division but they have not got anywhere near
ith their design of services - they have not got any approval on those, they have no idea of the costing
themselves and some of them are probably months off. He stated that, apropos to the point made by Coun-
cillor Parfitt, some of these things have been kicking around a long time and probably will be kicking
around a long time simply because of the pace of developers - for example a developer who is working with
two or three sub-divisions is not breaking his back on next year's work or that of the year afterwards _
or has not been, so far, unless the Council wants to cut him off and give him a chance to get in before
the dead-line.
Councillor A. Vincent made the point that the City has two different by-laws regarding paying
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
....4
,...
59J
.
I
I
.
I
~'-t~ /11,7 Y'.
~~-~~/.
f>e s~-t7I';v.
.
I
S~-//v,
I ~-Aw
ah1el7dmOh
C'/-b-!f S,;hi:1/
/i1u11 k(fj11
'J>~J? ~M
-Sf7I7/i!?r ~1h1-
-11?t?h-/-pl1/"017
-<-c-,c.
~
for costs of services: one is with reference to local improvement taxing of half of the costs over a period of
twenty years by which the property owners pays the City and receives a separate tax bill for same (he stated that
he has been given to understand by Mr. Park that the only area in the city in which the local improvement pro-
gramme has been instituted is Millidgeville); the other is this cost-sharing which he thinks is one-third (he
stated he thinks Saint John is the only city'in Canada that has continued this out-dated cost-sharing system).
He stated that the reason he is opposing the said second named cost-sharing system is because the purchaser is
not getting the benefit from same, and he wants this system changed.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend a By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision of Land
Within the City of Saint John".
At this time, Councillor MacGowan moved the second reading, and Councillor Hodges seconded the motion.
Councillor Gould asked for an explanation as to what Mr. Zides means by "changes in the sub-division policy", in
the first recommendation contained in the City Manager's letter of August 5th, 1976, and in Supplement "A",
change number one regarding administration policy, "That the City take advantage of imposing an improvement
charge against abutting properties benefited by the extension of City services to new areas, as provided for in
Section 45 of the Community Planning Act". Mr. Zides replied that there are countless instances of a person
being required by his municipality to do certain works for his sub-division which benefit adjoining property
owners - for example, putting in a sewer in order to service his sub-division or putting in a road that actually
abuts somebody else's land - and after he has spent the money for this the adjoining property owner can go in and
take advantage of those services without any cost-sharing whatsoever - and apparently some of the municipalities
in New Brunswick approached the Province a couple of years ago to complain about this inequity, as they saw it _
the Province put legislation in saying that after the coming into force of the present Act you could make arrange-
ments for the city to charge the abutting property owner and pay back to the original developer, if need be, or
make some other similar arrangement - that is in the Planning Act. He pointed out that it only applies in a case
of a sub-division; if you were opening up a couple of lots on the other side of the street from a lot that was
being provided with water and sewerage, as referred to by Councillor Gould, there would be a payment to the owner
of that one lot, if you use this technique.
Mr. Rodgers noted that it normally follows after first reading that the by-law is then prepared and
submitted back to Council for second and third readings, and if the Council has given first reading to the
reVlSlons contemplated in the by-law, he finds it difficult to draft revisions 3 and 4 - that is, to know what to
draft; revisions 1 and 2 are clear as to what the Council wants drafted for second and third readings and now
that the Council has given first reading to it, but he needs clarification as to revisions 3 and 4. The Mayor
replied that he feels the intent of the Council is to cut that off as soon as possible. Councillor Kipping felt
that that seems contradictory to the second recommendation of the City Manager, as well, and that the City
Manager is saying in his letter that the City should confirm that it will not be entering into any further cost-
sharing arrangements - whereas, the proposed revision to the by-law says that the City assist developers for a
stated time before the change-over. The Mayor noted that Mr. Rodgers is saying that the Council should not have
second reading until the Council has received the City Solicitor's opinion and draft of the proposed by-law
revision. Mr. Barfoot explained that the idea of the third proposed revision is that this is a transitional
provision to assist developers and to make the change-over from the old financing to their new financing a little
bit easier by allowing the City to be involved in a little bit of "bridge" financing itself, and this, he thinks,
could be written into the by-law as a provision which might be in effect for a year or some period such as that,
before we entirely, withdraw from any financing of the sub-division. Mr. Rodgers advised that with regard to
revision number 3, stated time has to be determined, and with regard to revision number 4, it has to be deter-
mined what the City is to contribute - and that until that is decided, the by-law cannot be drafted. Councillors
MacGowan and Hodges at this time withdrew the said proposed motion for second reading.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as suggested in the letter dated August 5th, 1976 from the City
Manager, an extension of time for submissions regarding the proposed new sub-division cost-sharing policy from
the private sector be permitted up to September 15th, 1976.
Councillor MacGowan stated that September 15th is too long a time and that she would vote against the
above motion.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors MacGowan, Green and Gould voting "nay".
Mr. Barfoot, referring to revision number 4 that is proposed, stated the recommendation in that revision
is that the City continue to share in concrete curbing, sidewalks and boulevards. Councillor Davis recalled that
when the sub-division cost-sharing policy revisions went before the Land Committee the Committee approved all
these things, and the Council subsequently approved all ,these recommendations. He stated he thinks that the
problem has been the lack of reaction from the private sector - they have been very slow in reacting - they have
said a lot of things; but the Council at one time or another has agreed that the City should not be the only
municipality probably on the continent that contributes as much as it does to housing. He noted that it has not
done anything for the development of housing in this city until this past year, and for that reason the Council
adopted these various resolutions - if there is fault to be found in the wording of those resolutions that should
be corrected; he personally feels that by the time September 15th rolls around we should be all ready for third
reading on this matter, and get it over with. He added that he does not think it is going to cause any hardship
to anyone except that it may add a few cents to the price of a house, that is all - and that money will be
realized in lower taxes.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the revised wording of revision number 4, as given by the
City Manager at this meeting regarding changes to the sub-division cost-sharing policy be referred to the City
Solicitor for drafting in the proper legal language and second and third readings of the By-Law amendment in this
regard.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-
Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing from a Low
Density Residential area and placing in a Light Industrial area the Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd. plant site on
Simms Street, West, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law".
-9')
b ,"'"'
;1/~/~/'p;l/ ~~,.,
~-~.01N
SObl,r a~
I;.on ~-t-d.
Ife-~~J?/J?f
S&>J?~I" t7r.
-' 1"e1J? /~L
~<<17/~/?/ ?.bJ,
:lJ'y-/~w
S~H6>1'o/
hJ6~-&~ ife~ ~
A-t-L
J?e-:z ph /J?ff
SbHel77.
h1~dqt.IF~.A::r
A-c-L
t}~ SPh'c/CP.
Ilrb/II'...?-e-/Oh
rLe~/:S/pn
s.X'P~~~~h;
7f~tfl!!C~/ve &s.
(7r/eY<iiil.I?Ce re
~U/'1$eS t?Ufs;
~~.f
{!,~!J A1..t~ <if'"
Ch/e-P'iblt'c?e
l(;'h:J $r. '
piJn;(szfaM
rep//'1S
c"f,/ /?.f-r'.
/l. 2J.r -;{ 6L
~'v,,~ .L""'p"oll'e-
hfe~~U:~/./f':
Cbm~.
~
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the, by-law entitled "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan
By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing from a
Low Density Residential area and placing in a Light Industrial area the Sonier Ornamental Iron Ltd. plant
ite on Simms Street, West, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed there-
to.
.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law", was read in its entirety prior
to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Green
I
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the Sonier Ornamental
Iron Ltd. plant site on, Simms Street, West, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family district to "I-I" Light Industrial
district, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
f The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the Sonier Ornamental
Iron Ltd. plant site on Simms Street, West, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family district to "I-I" Light In-
dustrial district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments .
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan
By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing from a
Light Industrial area and placing in a Low Density Residential area the property consisting of 40 acres,
more or less, being the northern part of Lot 4 of the sub-division of lots laid out by the late Honourable
Ward Chipman, and lying on the south side of Grandview Avenue immediately west of the Saint John Institute
of Technology, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law", was read in its entirety prior
to the adoption of the above resolution.
I
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the property consisting
of 40 acres, more or less, being the northern part of Lot 4 of the sub-division of lots laid out by the
late Honourable Ward Chipman, and lying on the south side of Grandview Avenue immediately west of the
Saint John Institute of Technology, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential and "RF" Rural
districts to "R-IB" One-Family Residential district, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate
Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
.
During consideration of the above named third reading, Councillor M. Vincent asked: if there was
an airport expressway to be developed in that area of the city, will the re-zoning of this piece of
property in any way affect the possible site or location for an airport expressway? Mr. Barfoot replied
that, as he recalls, this particular re-zoning was not affected by the airport expressway alignments.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that with regard to the letter from the City Solicitor,
submitting for Council's information the Decision of the Arbitration Board in the matter between The Saint
John POlicemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, C.D.P.E, and the City of Saint John with respect to
Article 6 (1) of the Working Agreement of 1975-76, and noting that the Order of the Board states, "The
Grievance is rejected and the Board affirms the absolute necessity of the Chief of Police to give orders
instructing grievor members to attend courses outside the boundaries of the City of Saint John and to do
all things to maintain order, discipline, and efficiency and to supervise and administer the affairs of
the Police Force of the City of Saint John.", and that the Board went on to make four recommendations
which the Council might like to consider and discuss with the Chief of Police and the City Manager, the
said letter and Decision be received and filed and the said four recommendations contained in the said
Decision be turned over to City staff for their consideration. III
Read a letter from the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee, recalling that by resolution
of Common Council on July 15th, 1974 the Committee's request that the Council take appropriate action to
ensure that the required repairs are undertaken at the earliest possible time to the deteriorated band-
stand in King Square was referred to staff for a report - and recommending that the City Manager be asked
to investigate the cost of restoring the said bandstand to a safe and usable condition and report his
findings to Council. Mr. Barfoot advised that an investigation was carried out of the bandstand - A D I
Limited were hired to carry out an examination of the steel work of this structure. He stated that he
will be reporting in full on the results of that investigation with a recommendation for Council's con-
sideration, within a week.
I
On motion of Councillor Davis
.
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Civic Improvement
~
,....
.
Aal1L C'ow/.J?
7i'a~.A
//!.-C~h
I
JaIn&? ~~
#It"' ~Jl'A;;/~
<>: cSu#-d/v.
v14/rJY1?/6- :ZX;..
I JJa~//~ pt.1"
f?t7se /iilhd
.kuu{ Cp/J?
PlaiN? #/V1S
t!f?P1m.
.
Ill"te J1.;1S
,,{.-mt Se.,;J J1I.'
LEG A L
I
tJo/ s;,~e/
~/ :z;~
.~.I'/c~
;7/e?~~n
I
I
.
~
59~3
and Beautification Committee be received and filed and the City Manager be requested to provide the above men-
tioned report for the next meeting of Council.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land Committee
whose letter of August 9th, 1976 advises that four bids were considered for the purchase of the City-owned Lot 14
at Charlotte Street and Market Place, Saint John West, the offer of Mr. Ralph MacDougall in the amount of
$8,100.00 for the purchase of the said lot (which contains approximately 9,440 square feet), be accepted.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. John G. Riley, Barrister, of Riley,
Mosher & Stanton, with regard to the decision of the Planning Advisory Committee on March 30th, 1976 in respect
of land in the McNamara Sub-division, Lakewood Heights, for public purposes on Summit Drive, advising that his
client, Mr. McNamara, has been advised that the said Committee has approved in principle the reconveyance of the
land for public purposes on Summit Drive to Mr. McNamara on condition that he provide land for public purposes on
the south side of Willie Avenue and the presently proposed sub-division and that, also, the land for public
purposes presently proposed in that sub-division is to be brought to a standard acceptable to the City, and
further advising that Mr. McNamara has made provision to meet the standards required by the said Committee and,
therefore, asks upon compliance that the City re-convey the land for public purposes in the previously approved
sub-division on Summit Drive -- be referred to the Land Committee for a report and recommendation.
With reference to the statement in the above letter that the Planning Advisory Committee has approved
in principle the reconveyance of the land for public purposes, Mr. Zides advised that there will be a recom-
mendation, and that the matter is not as clear-cut as mentioned in the said letter.
Councillor MacGowan noted that the minutes of the Council meeting of August 3rd, 1976, which refer to
the matter of landscaping and paving work at the City arenas this year, state, "Mr. MacKinnon..... does not
believe that the tender has been awarded as yet; that work would be for the paving and curbing of the three
arenas, as well as landscaping included. ..", which would make it sound as though the three things (paving,
curbing and landscaping of the three arenas) were included in the call for tenders. She added that Mr. MacKinnon
said that is not so - so either the said minutes should be corrected or the Council should have a clarification,
again. In clarification, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the question was asked at the said August 3rd meeting and
that he was in error by indicating that the landscaping was part of that tender - he added that it is to be done
separately.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Mr. Rodgers advised that he was asking for authority to make the same offer to Mr. F. A. Morgan on the
same terms and conditions, to engage him for an additional nine months for Legal Department work, based on a
couple of points:- (1) the new solicitor with the Department, Mr. James Moase, is involved in by-law prosecutions _
the City Solicitor is trying to arrange that there are no prosecutions and in this regard he has arranged a
meeting with Mr. Moase and Mr. Zides and with the Plumbing and Building Inspectors - he does not want to take Mr.
Moase away from by-law prosecutions now, but he would have to do so, if Mr. Morgan left at this time - Mr. Morgan
is doing the type of work that requires someone to be doing it in the sense of the fact that it requires hours
with respect to research (for example, the Market Square project that is on the agenda for Committee of the Whole
at this Council meeting) in the sense of collecting appropriate minutes and that sort of thing. He stated that,
on that basis, he is making the above request. He stated that he sees no further requests after this nine-month
period because of the fact that from the graduating class of next year it would be a young lawyer filling that
position - and, also, by that time the two solicitors who have been admitted to the Bar this year will have a
year's experience.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the City Solicitor
Frederick A. Morgan based on the same terms and conditions as apply to
the Legal Department, for a further period of nine months from October
be authorized to make an offer to Mr.
Mr. Morgan's employment at present with
1st, 1976.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~~-
594
//<</.;;1;',( hI"
+lod-r/n pa~
$.J:%t'cePlehS
7/~d/I/Q ~s"
1/e,4-J? ~:5&Dn,
/9/a'i!?I"IH<<h;,/ ..L
,..?/dA.oIll?t9 ffd~,
/l/-6d.
;1/~pr
Crd1/'6"lol"<< sAl
7d1Y/J?f ,?'/bIY6'
e?p#re~ ee-c.
dJ'p'pI'uya/ ,.e
~J7dahce
t?'J;iYl?r
#'N-/~i!? &if ;f/dz'
(}~/T/!'/~t/'17 d'
fi'd- ~ ~~NS,
t'ohJ./Q/ifCees; dc.
ePhJ~,.'t~ ~o
eVd/U.;wk- ~h/-
c.-pi ~~~
'P4n
.. '. ,..,!, .At..a,Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the
sixteenth day of August, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Green, Gould, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
MacGowan, Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community
Planning and Development, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering
and Works, P. Clark, Fire Chief, E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police, and
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
Councillor M. Vincent, Chairman of the City's Protection Committee, stated that the float which
had been entered by the Saint John Policemen's Protective Association, Local No. 61, in the City's
Loyalist Days Parade and also entered in the International Days Parade, which is a joint celebration of
St. Stephen, N. B. and Calais, Maine, was very much appreciated and highly successful and that the
committee which organized the International Days celebration awarded a trophy for the State of Maine
to the Police Department for their efforts. At this time Councillor M. Vincent presented the award
to Constable Fred Gorman, who was chairman of the committee responsible for the said float.
The Mayor welcomed to the meeting Alderman Helen Gibson, who is visiting Saint John from
Medicine Hat, Alberta.
The Mayor asked for information on the status of tenders for crushing gravel which had been'
opened on July 19th last. Mr. Barfoot replied that the said tenders are presently being studied by the
Works Department; there are several areas of the tender which are not completely spelled out in the
tenders received and the Works Department is currently discussing with the low tenderer and with.the
second lowest tenderer as to various details of how the tenderers plan to supply the material called
for in the tender, and it is expected a report will be forthcoming to Council in two weeks time. In
reply to a further query of the Mayor, Mr. MacKinnon advised that the City is presently buying crushed
gravel from two suppliers, Chitticks in the west, and Grove Construction in the east, and that the
tender call under discussion is for the crushing of gravel in the City's own pit.
The Mayor stated he is concerned with the City's paving priorities, and he noted that several
roads in the City, for example, the Station Road and the Stevens Road, are badly in need of repair, and he
finds that roads which are very smooth have been paved this year and feels that this is something that
should be reviewed.
The Mayor made reference to a letter which had been forwarded to the Council members for infor-
mation from the City Manager regarding City staff who will be attending conferences in the near future,
and he wonders if Council must now make a decision if they wish the City Manager to recommend to Council
for approval the names of staff who will be attending conferences, or leave it up to the City Manager to
authorize such conferences as he sees fit. The Mayor stated it is his feeling that the Council should
approve such matters, as was the case prior to the previous City Manager. During discussion, several
Councillors noted that the Council has control over such matters when the budgets of the various depart-
ments are being considered by Council, and therefore, the matter should be left with the City Manager.
Councillor M. Vincent stated he feels Council should be advised, as a courtesy, when
department heads will be out of the city.
At this time the Mayor gave the following Notice of Motion:
"I give notice of motion that at the next meeting of Council I will ask to be moved:
The City of Saint John has been utilizing the talents, experience and abilities of a great
number of citizens who serve on Boards, Commissions and Committees, some of which are established by
statute, some by by-law and some by resolution of Common Council.
And as there does not appear to be any compendium or index or location where members of Council
or the public can easily find the terms of reference of the various Boards, Commissions and Committees.
And as there have sometimes been difficulties for both citizens and members of Council in trying
to determine to which Board, Commission or Committee they should refer, ask advice or send relevant
matters.
And it would appear that a compendium listing the Boards, Commissions and Committees in alpha-
betical order, with their general terms of references or authority, and the address of their Chairman,
secretary and other personnel would be of considerable benefit and assistance to not only Council members,
Committee members and City staff, but residents of the City as well.
RESOLVED that the Common Clerk and City Solicitor be asked to prepare a compendium of the
existing Boards, Commissions and Committees, their terms of reference or jurisdiction, with their membership,
in form suitable for distribution to both members of Common Council and the public.
AND FURTHER that a report on the progress and preparing of such a compilation be made within
four weeks of this resolution."
Consideration was given to a proposal submitted by the Mayor for a committee to evaluate the
unicipal Development Plan.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by
Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the proposal
the Municipal Development Plan be laid on the
submitted by Mayor Flewwelling for a
table until the next meeting for
ommittee to evaluate
further study.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
JII""
59:J
.
I
1?f?-AQ~/rIff
I
.
~nf
~Dh
ah~:Cl"Ud/
~. ~-6-d.
I
Phhn,I?~'
C'(7P7P1. be
.
I
I
Np-;:?on/
~,/,1ayew/f.
~%.#ift!'.s
~-cd
.
~
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding the proposed re-zoning for Manford
Thompson Construction Co. Ltd. of the block of land on the southeasterly corner of Ocean Westway and the road to
Lorneville, to provide approximately 35 lots on which may be built two-family (or single family) homes, and that
no written objections were received in this regard. No person was present to speak either for or against this
proposed re-zoning.
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising that the Committee recommends this re-
zoning and that the company has submitted a tentative plan of subdivision which is being processed by the Com-
munity Planning Branch, which proposes to subdivide the property into 30 lots on each of which it intends to
erect semi-detached units to be sold to individual owners under the C.M.H.C. Assisted Home Ownership Orogram, and
that it is proposed to service the lots with City water and sewerage services.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the block of land on the
southeasterly corner of Ocean Westway and the road to Lorneville with a frontage of about 1,100 feet on Ocean
Westway and the C.P.R. right-of-way at its rear, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential to "R-2"
One- and Two-Family Residential classification, be read a first time.
Councillor Gould asked Mr. Zides why a time limit for development is not placed on re-zonings. Mr.
Zides replied that there are different classes of re-zoning, one is for a specific development, and the other is
as in the re-zoning application presently being considered, which is to design the subdivision and to design the
servicing in accordance with the requested re-zoning, and he noted it is going to take some time in this in-
stance, before the developer can apply for building permits. In reply to a further query of Councillor Gould as
to how many areas of land the City has re-zoned which have not been developed, Mr. Zides stated he could not
answer that question, although obviously there would be some. Councillor MacGowan wondered if there should be a
section inserted in the by-law that land would revert to the previous zoning if development is not undertaken
within a certain period of time. Mr. Zides stated he does not feel that would be the way to handle the matter,
as he does not feel a developer can be tied to a time limit in certain cases as noted by him.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the block of land on the south-
easterly corner of Ocean Westway and the road to Lorneville with a frontage of about 1,100 feet on Ocean Westway
and the C.P.R. right-of-way at its rear, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential to "R-2" One- and
Two-Family Residential classification, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory Committee
received and filed.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding the proposed re-zoning for Millidge-
ville Estates Ltd. of 46,208 square feet of land on Noel Avenue in Phase 3 of the Millidgeville Estates Sub-
division, to permit the construction of 14 townhouse units, and that no written objections were received in this
regard. No person was present to speak either for or against this proposed re-zoning.
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising that the Committee recommends for this re-
zoning and advising that the developers are proposing to purchase the five lots shown on the submitted plan which
would then be used for Phase I of the Birch Heights development; later, they would acquire the three lots shown
on the northerly side of Clovelly Drive together with a portion of the parcel on which "RM-l" is shown - this
latter land is vested in the City as land for public purposes and would obviously be subject of a Council decision.
The additional lands would form Phase II of the Birch Heights development which would consist of 26 townhouse
units but it is not anticipated that development in this phase would take place for another two years. The
letter stated that Mr. Harry Colwell, one of the partners in this development, has informed the Committee that
the owners of Millidgeville Estates have found it impractical to continue development along Noel Avenue and
Woodhaven Drive because of topography and rock conditions there; the new proposal for Phase I of Birch Avenue
will see a development of 14 townhouse units instead of the ten semi-detached units now possible, and that the
townhousing units would be a rental project. The letter states that Mr. Colwell is not requesting re-zoning of
Phase II of Birch Heights because of the many unresolved problems, for example, the purchase or exchange of land
with the City and the financing for development of the larger area; and further states that the now proposed
townhouse development would be 800 feet from the one-family housing on Birch Grove and about 600 feet away from
the townhouses being built north of this subdivision on the westerly side of Woodhaven Drive, and that with
respect to water supply, it is intended to erect a pumping station as the water pressure is considered critical
for fire fighting purposes, and the anticipated timing for completion is the spring of 1977 if a start can be
made by the end of this month.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar aS,it concerns re-zoning Lots 75-16, 75-17~ 75-18, 75-19 and
75-20 on proposed Noel Avenue and on proposed Clovelly Drive in the Millidgeville Heights Subdivision Phase II as
these are shown on the Subdivision Plan thereof approved by The Development Officer for the City of Saint John on
November 13, 1975 and filed in the office of the Registrar of Deeds in and for the County of Saint John on
December 5, 1975 as Number 203, being Phase I of the Birch Heights Development, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family
Residential to "RM-l" Multiple Residential classification, be read a first time.
In reply to a query from Councillor Green, Mr. Zides advised that the cost of the pumping station
required for the proposed development will be paid by the developer if it services the development only, however,
if it is found after designing of the development, that the pumping station will be required to service other
areas, it will be cost-shared between the developer and the City, and that it would be the subject of a typical
servicing agreement.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
596
~
?e- .zPJ?/hf
1It1A'4ey;/k
.k5-&-d#eS /~L
'?/..,hh. #dn$,
~
~t!"-~O~Uhf
.(/t7h?0l ah-
:5~r<<d/o~ ...&
7>/ann. I'9k/.$.
C'e?h7.h7.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
.
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning
By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning Lots 75-16, 75-
17, 75-18, 75-19 and 75-20 on proposed Noel Avenue and on proposed Clovelly Drive in the Millidgeville
Heights Subdivision Phase II as these are shown on the Subdivision Plan thereof approved by The Develop-
ment Officer for the City of Saint John on November 13, 1975 and filed in the office of the Registrar of
Deeds in and for the County of Saint John on December 5, 1975 as Number 203, being Phase I of the Birch
Heights Development, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" Multiple Residential classification,
be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint I
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee with regard to the said proposed re-zoning, be received and filed.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding the proposed re-zoning for
Lloma Construction Ltd. of 64,125 square feet of land on Cindy Lee Street, Martha Avenue and Mark Drive to
permit the construction of townhouses, and that no written objections were received in this regard. No
person was present to speak either for or against this proposed re-zoning.
I
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising that the Committee recommends for
this re-zoning to permit development of three townhouse buildings containing six, six and four attached
one-family dwellings, and that the Silver Falls Park Association objected to this re-zoning and many other
points about the Silver Falls Park subdivision and its continuing development and some of these points
will be referred to Common Council at such time as a definite proposal for the next phase of the sub-
division takes place and others will also be referred to the City Manager for appropriate staff action. .
The letter notes that the residents' objections to the re-zoning are based in part on alleged deficiencies
in the development to date and the Committee feels that most of the points raised by the residents are
valid, but that the time to correct them is when the further development of subdivisions is being proposed
and that the requested re-zoning does not itself permit further development - it only clears the way for
subdivision and development proposals for this area. The residents also object to the proposed re-zoning
because they feel that once the zoning was carried out, the developer should be obligated to live with
this; some of the residents apparently feel that re-zoning would create an infringement on areas that are
set aside for one and two-family dwellings, that it would lead to a depreciation in the value of existing
dwellings and that it would be unfair to the residents of the area who were refused the re-zoning a few
years ago on the grounds that the zones were fixed at the time of the original development and ought not
to be changed. The letter advised that the area proposed for re-zoning is to be part of a proposed
subdivision and development of Silver Falls Park, Phase 9 and will contain 29 lots for semi-detached
dwellings along Mark Drive, Martha Avenue and Cindy Lee Street and the three lots proposed for re-zoning
would contain a total of 16 townhouse units. The said letter from the Planning Advisory Committee notes I
the provisions of the subdivision agreement for Silver Falls Park Phase 8 and the restrictions contained _
in the said agreement, and advises that when a firm proposal on Phase 9 is submitted, the Committee will
be recommending to Council that no further development be approved until the developers complete existing
developments in accordance with past agreements, having regard to time periods for completion set out in
such agreements or with satisfactory arrangements through bonding, etc., to meet all obligations under-
taken in such agreements.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning a proposed lot backing
on the St. Joachim's Church and Silver Glade Nursing Home lying opposite what would be the intersection of
Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue, with a frontage of about 515 feet along the latter, and a depth of
about 186 feet, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" Multiple Residential classificatton,
be read a first time.
.
Mr. Zides advised that most of the points raised by the residents in objection to the proposed
re-zoning will be the subject of subdivision agreements, and if the re-zoning is approved, this will open
the way for the proponents of the latest development, Phase 9, to discuss with the City the servicing of
the subdivision. He further advised that the reason the Committee has stated that the chipsealing of
Martha Avenue will now be a condition of the development of Phase 9, rather than Phase 8, is due to the
timing of Phase 9 as now proposed, it is useless to require the chipsealing under Phase 8 and then having
to tear it up ,to install the servicing for Phase 9.
I
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning
By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning a proposed lot
backing on the St. Joachim's Church and Silver Glade Nursing Home lying opposite what would be the inter-
section of Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue, with a frontage of about 515 feet along the latter, and a
depth of about 186 feet, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "RM_l" Multiple Residential classifi~
cation, be read a second time.
I
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee with regard to the said proposed re-zoning, be received and filed.
.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding several proposed amendments to
the text of the Zoning By-Law, and that no written objections were received in this regard. No person was
present to speak either for or against the proposed amendments.
~
,..-
-9""
b .4
.
Z,h/~/hf
~-Aaw
OIrnenst'me.
QJJ1//r.'';;/s"
?ar~/hf lJ?
drll/etuG1j's"
I
I
, $/ffns ~/;z.
.
C()/'IIMi:>J7
/lVa/h
I
.,,;>Ct%'$'S
dI5-t-.;1nCe
+,"OP'1 (!el"-
ca/11 ~
/1J7es
.
I
I
CpmP?t?I"e/.,;,
l/E!~/1k.s.q.
o/u.~ In
res" 'a!en-t-/a
.z. pl;16'.s
.
~
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", to amend the text of the said by-law, as follows:-
1.
Amending Section 20, subsection (2) by
(1) re-designating clauses (b) to (0) inclusive as clauses (c) to (p)
inclusive
(2) inserting a new clause (b) to read
"(b) the keeping of domestic animals in conjunction with the
residential use of a lot only".
2.
Amending Section 77 by inserting the following as clause (h):
"(h) for four or more dwellings in a series or group, where parking
is to be provided between the dwellings and a public street, individual
accessways or driveways to the street are not permitted."
3.
Amending Section 210, subsection (5) by
(1) substituting the words "subject to subclauses (ii) and (iii) and
clause (c)" for the words "subject to subclauses (ii) and (iii)"
(2) inserting new clause (c) to read as follows:
"(c) notwithstanding the foregoing the size of a sign projecting more
than six inches from the building or structure to which it is attached
shall not exceed the lineal frontage of the lot on which it is located,
multiplied by one."
4.
Inserting the following as a,new Section 215A after Section 215:
"215A. Dwellin"s on Common Walls on a Lot
A lot which contains a dwelling unit on each side of a common wall may be subdivided into 'part lots'
at that common wall provided that each dwelling unit shall continue to be used as a single unit within the semi-
detached building and any rebuilding of either dwelling unit shall be to the common wall and in the opinion of
the Committee is architecturally compatible with the adjoining dwelling unit."
5.
Amending Section 216 by
(1) substituting the following for subsection (7):
"(7) Subject to subsection (9), no access may be closer to the
street line of a street intersecting the street upon which the
lot fronts or abuts than
(a) 100 feet, if such lot fronts on any of the following
streets:
Bayside Drive
Broad Street
Carmarthen Street
Charlotte Street
Chesley Drive
City Road
Crown Street
Douglas Avenue
Fairville Boulevard
Germain Street
Grandview Avenue
King Street
Lancaster Avenue
Loch Lomond Road
Main Street
Main Street (West)
Manawagonish Road
Manchester Avenue
McAllister Drive
Hillidge Avenue
Prince William Street
Rothesay Avenue
Russell Street
Somerset Street
Station Street
Thorne Avenue
Union Street
Water Street
Waterloo Street; or
(b) 30 feet of an intersection other than a street mentioned
in clause (a)."
(2) deleting subsection (8);
(3) substituting the words "subject to subsection (9)" for the words
"subject to subsections (8) and (9)".
(4) inserting the words "on the same lot" after the words "proposed access
or driveway" in subsection (14).
6.
Inserting a new Section 224A after Section 224 as follows:
"224A.
Commercial Vehicles and Equipment in Residential Zones
No person shall allow
(a) a commercial vehicle with a gross vehicle weight (GVT) rating in
excess of nine thousand pounds to remain on a site in any residential
zone; or
(b) more than one commercial vehicle with a gross vehicle weight (GVT)
rating not in excess of nine thousand pounds to remain on a site in any
residential zone, for longer than is reasonably necessary to load or
unload the vehicle;
598
~
Z(7J7/h-tIf of
.;m.,eJUl Plehts 1.
(.;;IS (7/1
/i}e ~-1'7 )
(c) a commercial vehicle to remain in a front yard;
(d) a derelict vehicle, contractor's machinery or equipment to remain
outside of a building in a residential zone.
.
- be read a first time.
During discussion prior to adoption of the above resolution it was agreed that the word "un-
licensed" would be deleted from clause (d) of the proposed Section 224A.
Considerable discussion ensued with Mr. Zides on the proposed amendments during which time Mr.
Zides made the following points: the proposed amendment to Section 77 has to do with attached townhouses I
where parking is now taking place between the fronts of the properties and the City streets and under this
amendment buffer zones would be required and he is p~epared to submit to Council a sketch of what is
proposed in this regard, however, this proposal has nothing to do with access to the rear of such pro-
perties; the proposed new Section 215A dealing with common walls in attached dwelling units will provide
that such properties can be subdivided and owned by different property owners; the amendment to Section
216 is really only the change of a few words in the present section of the by-law to clarify the intent of
this section which provides that the access locations on these streets cannot be located closer than 100
feet of an intersection and applies to new construction only; the word "site" in the proposed Section 224A
does not include a street and he believes the matter of parking such vehicles on a street should properly I
be included in the City's Traffic By-Law rather than the Zoning By-Law; a side yard is not included in
this section although he could see where in some areas this would be a problem; this section deals mainly "
with "storage" and the words stopping or storage are just as legimitate in this section as the word
"parking"; the intent of this proposed section is to discourage people from leaving commercial vehicles in
their yards and to encourage such people, if at all possible, to keep such vehicles in garages.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Cave voting "nay" to sections 2,3
and 6 of the proposed amendment.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
The
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", to
by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
amend the text of the said by-law, as follows:-
Amending Section 20, subsection (2) by
(1) re-designating clauses (b) to (0) inclusive as clauses (c) to (p)
inclusive
(2) inserting a new clause (b) to read
"(b) the keeping of domestic animals in conjunction with the
residential use of a lot only".
I
2.
Amending Section 77 by inserting the following as clause (h):
"(h) for four or more dwellings in a series or group, where parking
is to be provided between the dwellings and a public street, individual
accessways or driveways to the street are not permitted."
3.
Amending Section 210, subsection (5) by
(1) substituting the words "subject to subclauses (H) and (Hi) and
clause (c)" for the words "subject to subclauses (H) and (Hi)"
(2) inserting new clause (c) to read as follows:
.
"(c) notwithstanding the foregoing the size of a sign projecting more
than six inches from the building or structure to which it is attached
shall not exceed the lineal frontage of the lot on which it is located,
multiplied by one."
4.
Inserting the following as a new Section 215A after Section 215:
"215A. Dwellinp;s on Common Walls on a Lot
I
A lot which contains a dwelling unit on each side of a common wall may be subdivided into '~art
lots' at that common wall provided that each dwelling unit shall continue to be used as a single unit
ithin the semi-detached building and any rebuilding of either dwelling unit shall be to the common wall
and in the opinion of the Committee is architecturally compatible with the adjoining dwelling unit."
5.
Amending Section 216 by
(1) substituting the following for subsection (7):
I
"(7) Subject to subsection (9), no access may be closer to the
street line of a street intersecting the street upon which the
lot fronts or abuts than
(a) 100 feet, if such lot fronts on any of the following
streets:
Bayside Drive
Broad Street
Carmarthen Street
Charlotte Street
Chesley Drive
Ci ty Road
Crown Street
Douglas Avenue
Main Street (West)
Manawagonish Road
Manchester Avenue
McAllister Drive
Millidge Avenue
Prince William Street
Rothesay Avenue
Russell Street
.
....4
,....
.
:?f?I7/h1'
~y-/.;aW
.:JJ7It?m:t/?J1?11
I,' (.;;5 OJ?
~~e ~'11
I
.
I
CI'~ Sf?t~ .
2v17J/lf
.JJt/-./~w
dkRnt!JI11l!!'ho
~
Jahlt!?S
/luder
.
2f?~in~
:lJ1/-,(~w
eilMen//'IIIif?
/o~ .s/~<9
I
I
.
~
59~
Fairville Boulevard
Germain Street
Grandview Avenue
King Street
Lancaster Avenue
Loch Lomond Road
Main Street
Somerset Street
Station Street
Thorne Avenue
Union Street
Water Street
Waterloo Street; or
(b) 30 feet of an intersection other than a street mentioned
in clause (a)."
(2) deleting subsection (8);
(3) substituting the words "subject to subsection (9)" for the words
"subject to subsections (8) and (9)".
(4) inserting the words "on the same lot" after the words "proposed access
or driveway" in subsection (14).
6.
Inserting a new Section 224A after Section 224 as follows:
"224A.
Commercial Vehicles and Equipment in Residential Zones
No person shall allow
(a) a commercial vehicle with a gross vehicle weight (GVT) rating in
excess of nine thousand pounds to remain on a site in any residential
zone; or
(b) more than one commercial vehicle with a gross vehicle weight (GVT)
rating not in excess of nine thousand pounds to remain on a site in any
residential zone, for longer than is reasonably necessary to load or
unload the vehicle;
(c) a commercial vehicle to remain in a front yard;
(d) a derelict vehicle, contractor's machinery or equipment to remain
outside of a building in a residential zone.
- be read a second time.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Cave voting "nay" to sections 2, 3 and 6
of the proposed amendment.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law be referred
City Solicitor for preparation of the proper amendment.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed regarding several proposed amendments to the
ext of the Zoning By-Law with respect to minimum sizes of the lots to be used for on-site sewage disposal, so as
to bring these in line with new Provincial standards, and that a written objection has been received from Mr.
James Hunter, P. O. Box 642, Oak Ridges, Ontario, who is a property owner and taxpayer to the City. No person
was present to speak either for or against the proposed amendments.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", to amend the text of the said by-law, as follows:-
1.
Substituting the following for Section 14:
" Lot Sizes
14. (1) Subject to subsection (2), no building or structure may be placed, erected or altered on a lot unless the
lot has and contains an area of at least 58,560 square feet, a width of at least 195 feet, and a depth of at
least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width or depth
less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description in
a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry Office
for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal."
2.
Substituting the following for Section 21:
11 Lot Sizes
21. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed, erected or altered on a lot unless the
lot has and contains:
(a) in the case of a one family dwelling or a mobile home site
600
~
;z t:M7/'rJ.!f.
$y- X~W
';;hJl!!!/Nt'p;e~-t s
/e?zf- s/~e.Y
(i) an area of at least 43,560 square feet,
(H) a width of at least 180 feet, and
(Hi) a depth of at least 125 feet
(b) in the case of a two family dwelling
(i) an area of at least 58,560 square feet,
(ii) a width of at least 195 feet; and
(Hi) a depth of at least 125 feet
and
(c) in the
dwelling,
case of a main building or structure other than a one or two family
(i)
an area of at least one acre,
(ii) a width of at least 180 feet, and
(iii) a depth of at least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width
or depth less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry
Office for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal.
(3) The lot sizes mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of subsection (1) may be reduced to lot widths of
at least 75 feet and lot areas of at least 7500 feet and lot widths of at least 100 feet and lot areas of
at least 10,000 square feet respectively, with respect to a subdivision of land which in itself or together
with one or more adjoining, subdivisions will contain a minimum of 40 lots serviced by municipal water and
sewer systems or by other public water and sewer systems approved under the Health Act or the Water Act.
3.
Substituting the following for Section 177:
"177. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed, erected or altered, and no
building or structure may be altered on a lot unless the lot has and contains
(a) in the case of a one or two family dwelling, a mobile home site,
or wood lot
(i) an area of at least ten acres,
(H) a width of at least 400 feet, and
(Hi) a depth of at least 125 feet.
(b) in the case of a church, a community centre and grounds, an elementary
school, a high school or vocational school, a library, or a park or playground
(i) an area of least one acre,
(H) a width of at least 200 feet, and
(Hi) a depth of at least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be
or depth less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if
placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width
such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry
Office for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal."
4.
Substituting the following for Section 184:
" Lot Sizes
184. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed, erected or altered on a lot
unless that lot has and contains an area of at least 43,560 square feet, a width of at least 180 feet and
a depth of at least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a wdth or depth less than
that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry
Office for the County of Saint John, and
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
~ 601
.
I
I
.
.z017/17$
-.3!;f- ;;t'.;aw
.;}Mel7d~
/cnf S/~6'S
c;'~!I.
SQ~t::-/'-t:t?r
IJah76"S
//VlI76!?r
7?~~~.;;;u
:Tf7I177 ;1/c
. '7QPm..:/S
Io/~w
,(~9'A
~s-#er
ii held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-$~ te se..:age oJ,$')?O$!\l."
5.
Substituting the following for Section 214:
" Unserviced Residential Lots
214. Subject to sections 14, 21, 177 and 184, and notwithstanding any other provlslon of this By-Law, no dwelling
which is not serviced by a municipal sewage system or by a public sewage system approved under the Health Act or
the Water Act may be placed, erected or altered on a lot unless the lot has and contains an area, frontage and
depth equal to or greater than the minimum set out in the following table.
Number of Dwelling
Units, Where Permitted
Minimum Lot Area
in Square Feet
Minimum Width
in Feet
Minimum Depth
in Feet
One
Two
Three
Four
Five (Maximum)
43,560
58,560
73,560
88,560
103,560
125
125
125
125
125"
180
195
210
225
240
- be read a first time,
Councillor Cave voted "nay" to the above motion.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
During discussion of the proposed amendment, Councillor Kipping questioned the words "or altered" in
the said amendment, and whether this would prohibit existing buildings from being altered. Mr. Zides explained
that the Province is honouring all existing lots in the province regardless of size and the new regulations would
only apply to new lots and that the Provincial regulations supercede any regulations of the City.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law be
referred to the City Solicitor for interpretation of the words "or altered" wherever they appear in the said
amendment.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. James Hunter of Oak Ridges, Ontario,
objecting to the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law with respect to minimum sizes of the lots to be used for
on-site sewage disposal, be received and filed.
'/-'
In reply to a query from Councillor Kipping if the statement contained in Mr. Hunter's letter that the
rationale for the proposed changes is to force people to build in serviced subdivisions'Aand if this is so, is
this bad, Mr. Zides stated that he cannot speak for the Province, but he thinks it is safe to say that they would
prefer to have development in serviced subdivisions, and he outlined the problems which are encountered by the
use of septic tanks in some areas.
The Common Clerk advised that advertising was completed which provided that the Common Council intends
to move a resolution ordering that the fee simple in the so-called "service lane" or "fire lane" commencing at
Harding Street between Montreal and Molson Avenues and running westerly and southwesterly from Harding Street to
Molson Avenue, vest in the City of Saint John, subject to any easements to the same expressly granted to or
otherwise acquired by adjoining lot owners, and that a written objection has been received from Messrs. P. E.
Michaud, John J. McCarthy and Thomas Megaw, opposing the building plans for the above named fire lane. No person
was present to speak either for or against the proposed resolution.
It was noted that the proposed resolution would provide for the City to acquire title to this lane,
which will then allow the fee simple in a parcel of land on the northern side of Molson Avenue to be transferred
to Mr. Leigh Webster, as approved by Council on June 9th, 1975.
On motion of Councillor Davis
I H';1Q ~/Hj
Ve'$ui7 /1'7
c,~ the Land
'/'.;;JI74' CdhNH
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that
Committee and City staff, with regard to the
the said matter be laid on the table for further study by
objections of the said residents of Molson Avenue.
The Common Clerk advised that with regard to the proposed amending of the Municipal Development Plan,
with respect to property on the east side of Sea Street between residence Numbers 483 and 509, which property is
owned by Pas con Brothers Co. Ltd., by changing the property land use classification to light industrial from low
density residential classification, and to the proposed re-zoning of the said property from "R-2" One- and Two-
Family Residential to "I-I" Light Industrial classification, the Council, at its meeting of August 3rd last, had
adjourned the public hearing in this matter and had agreed that the presentation of Mr. Alfred H. Brien, sol-
icitor for Pascon Brothers Co. Ltd., would be heard at this meeting, when the report of the Planning Advisory
Committee will be considered.
~~ /7. Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee advising that the Committee recommends for the above
~/~I.>)?,I7.I~~/S; proposed amendment to the Municipal Development Plan and proposed re-zoning, and that the Committee had earlier
~t?h?)?7. recommended against the re-zoning of this property and Common Council's May 25th meeting adopted this recom~
11.f~J? ~~17 mendation, however, the circumstances have changed in certain respects, as noted in the said letter, and this is
~JI-~~ why the Committee has also altered its thinking.
~~~b~ Mr. Lyman F. D. Purnell, Q. C., Barrister, was present at the meeting in the absence of Mr. Brien, and
.~~~~e~ stated he was prepared to answer any questions of the Council members with regard to the matter under consider-
~ /~-' ation. He advised that Pascon Brothers Co. Ltd. is a local industry owned by three brothers, being residents of
1.-&>,^77~. 4 4
the City, who employ 45 men in their operations and they are seeking permission to build a 0 foot by 0 foot
~j1~~'7 ~~ building for office and warehouse space on this property.
. ~rl7e//
11/.,L'~..PNe.
~
60'2
~
/J1<<h/~i?// _
71&17 JY-~W
~~h~
Cp~~~L
;re-;?Ol?/~
?~h", /l~v/s,
ammo
A1lt' n~ ~~
iPe-2PI7/h~
..<:-r/a ~~ ~
,( Q~.,#/ 5"'f?.;'l.;
L2J..k:W
In reply to a query of Councillor Green, Mr. Zides advised that he believes there are four
families on Sea Street who are still objecting to the proposal, although the majority of property own~rs
in the immediate area are not in objection to the proposal, and the four families who do object, are
located on the opposite side of Sea Street, and are not located adjacent to the land in question.
.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal
Plan By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing
from a Low Density Residential area and placing in a Light Industrial area the property on the east side
of Sea Street between residence Numbers 483 and 509, be read a first time.
I
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan
By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing from a
Low Density Residential area and placing in a Light Industrial area the property on the east side of Sea
Street between residence Numbers 483 and 509, be read a second time.
I
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the east
side of Sea Street between residence Nos. 483 and 509, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "I-I"
Light Industrial classification, be read a second time.
.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee be received and filed.
The Common Clerk advised that with regard to the proposed amending of the Municipal Development
Plan, with respect to property situate on Ludlow Street between Tower and St. George Streets (the former
car barns site), on which Local 502, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers propose to construct
a Union building for offices and meetings, by changing the property land use classification from low , I
density residential to sub-central commercial, and to the proposed re-zoning of the said property from "R-
2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "B-2" General Business classification, the Council at its meeting of "
August 3rd last, had adjourned the public hearing in this matter, and at the same meeting, the letter from
the Planning Advisory Committee, dated July 26th, 1976, recommending against the proposed amendments, had
been laid on the table for two weeks. The Common Clerk further advised that at the said August 3rd
meeting the Council members had agreed that the presentation of Mr. Eric Teed, Q. C. on behalf of the
Unions concerned, would be heard at this time.
Mr. Teed was present at the meeting accompanied by Messrs. Fred Haley, President, Hartley
_ Bastarache, Assistant Business Manager, and Harold Burke, Steward, of Local 502, I.B.E.W. Mr. Teed noted
that l{r. and Mrs. Tremblay, owners of the property in question which is under option to the said Local,
were also present at the meeting, in support of the Union's request. He stated that the Union has had an
opportunity to examine the report of the Planning Advisory Committee and would like to point out what ,they
feel are inconsistencies or errors in the report. The Planning Advisory Committee states that the present
zoning is "R-2", and it is suggested that the proposed use of the land is preferable to having it vacant .
as at present; Ludlow Street has for many years been considered a local commercial street although the
Committee considers it residential, and the site was formerly used as a commercial site, and the site has
not been used for anything else since; the suggestion that the Union group would put up a large building
which would interfere with the visual amenities of a low density residential area, they would suggest .is
wrong, as the two houses at the rear of the property face in the opposite direction, and secondly, if you
erect a two-storey residential home or row housing, which is apparently also acceptable, these would
interfere even more so with the visual amenities of the area than the proposed one-storey or storey and a
half commercial building. Mr. Teed noted that the problem is the west side of the City in general is not
in the best economic condition, there are a great number of vacant lots, there are houses which need
rejuvenation, and the Union is suggesting that its development would be of benefit to the area and the I
west side as a whole. Mr. Teed made the following points during his presentation: with regard to the
suggestion of the Planning Advisory Committee that the Union might care to investigate the possibility of , _
locating on King Street West, there is no available vacant lot of a suitable size for the project, and if
the Union acquired land on King Street West it would have to tear down existing buildings, and it is
suggested that this would not be the best use of land on this street due to the area of the building and
the parking in using a prime commercial site for a low density office building and would be a waste of use
of valuable land; with regard to the suggestion of the Committee that the proposed building could be used
for large social events on weekends, the Union feels this is not a proper suggestion, and they noted that
other Union buildings are not used for such purposes, and it is felt that this suggestion is going a I
little beyond the Planning Advisory Committee's terms of reference; regarding the value of the building,
hich is estimated to cost $150,000.00, this would result in additional real estate and business assessments; _
ith regard to parking and traffic, it is not felt that there would be any problems involved, as it is
felt that although there would be a certain amount of traffic flow generated, it is a good site as it is
ithin easy access of the Harbour Bridge; it is felt that this project could stimulate development in the
est side of the City; meetings of the Union are orderly and businesslike and the suggestion of undesirable
disturbances in the neighbourhood by reason of such meetings the Union feels is most improper and is
considered a slur upon the activities of the Union members; the statements of the Planning Advisory
Committee are appreciated, however, it is felt that in this case they are not justified and are more
heoretical than practical. The attempts of various Unions in the past years to obtain properfaciltiies
ere outlined by Mr. Teed and he asked that the Council give favourable consideration to the Union's 4It
equest.
Councillor Green inquired as to the size of the lot under discussion, and the size
~
,...
.
I' l?1uh/~
PhI? ~-k
I,(~~/ .?~~
:T::lJ. E YV.
../Pe-.zon/nf
-<tx'eil/ 5"P.2
L2i~w
I
P/.;mn. #6/
Cpm.-n.
{!';1/ L 23-
. (). r.;ul"C
I
:1JcJn'L cf-
,(or;-;e 61
fJi/fhh ~
. WoadU/d,ff
.:l rI<<//d'/n.
/O~6
C/-6ff ~;fr.
~n~ P
I'oaa
.
~
60:3
.,' )
of the proposed building, and Mr. Teed advised that the lot size is 100 feet by 200 feet and the dimensions of
the proposed building are 100 feet by 50 feet, approximately. and that the said Union shared facilities on Church
Avenue West with other Unions and no problems were encountered at this location. Councillor Hodges stated he has
never known Unions to cause the problems suggested by the Planning Advisory Committee and he noted that other
cities have Union buildings located in residential areas.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-
Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing from a Low
Density Residential area and placing in a Sub-Central Commercial area the property situate on Ludlow Street
between Tower and St. George Streets (the former car barns site), be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan
Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing from a Low
Density Residential area and placing in a Sub-Central Commercial area the property situate on Ludlow Street
between Tower and St. George Streets (the former car barns site), be read a second time.
By-
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property situate on Ludlow
Street between Tower and St. George Streets (the former car barns site), from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential
to "B-2" General Business classification, be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property situate on Ludlow Street
between Tower and St. George Streets (the former car barns site), from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to
"B-2" General Business classification, be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of ,The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
July 26th, 1976, with respect to this matter, be received and filed.
Mr. C. J. Stark, District Administrator of The Canadian National Institute for the Blind, Maritime
Division, was present at the meeting in support of a written brief submitted by the Institute, which outlines the
activities and current problems of the Institute in detail. Mr. Stark outlined the matters contained in the said
brief, and in conclusion, stated that the Institute, because of its financial circumstances, regrets the cir-
cumstances which compelled Council to decrease their grant by 25% for this year and respectfully requests that
consideration be given to ways in which Common Council might be able to increase the assistance given to the
Institute, and that if the Institute's financial position does not improve in the near future there will be an
inevitable deterioration in services causing additional hardships for the blind, and in addition to the financial
matters mentioned, it would be appreciated if Council could give consideration to have the appropriate committee
of Council meet with a group of blind persons in the near future to discuss the problems which have been ex-
pressed by blind persons about the difficulty experienced in travelling throughout the city as a sightless
pedestrian. Attached to the brief from the Institute was a document prepared by the C.N.I.B. describing some of
the ways in which public buildings can be made more accessible to the blind.
Considerable discussion ensued with Mr. Stark on the items contained in the Institute's brief and Mr.
Stark was commended for his presentation. Councillor M. Vincent advised Mr. Stark that as Chairman of the City's
Protection Committee, heis sure that Committee would be willing to meet with Mr. Stark's group to discuss the
problems as outlined.
Consideration was given to a letter, dated August 10th, 1976, from Messrs. David and Lorne Green
regarding their desire to obtain approval for two building lots on the John Green Roadway, which matter had been
considered by Council on July 15th 1974, and referred to the City Manager with the request that he endeavour to
arrange a satisfactory solution with Mr. John Green, owner of the property, in connection with bringing the John
Green Roadway to required standards for sub-division purposes and with Mr. Green's desire to convey two buildings
lots to his sons, as outlined in Mr. John Green's letter to Council dated April 29th, 1974. Copies of corres-
pondence between City staff and Messrs. Green regarding this matter were considered, and particularly, the points
contained in a letter from the City Manager, to Messrs. Green, dated June 22nd, 1976, as follows: the City
Manager recognizes there is some validity to the point of Messrs. Green that the City should not insist upon hot
mix paving of the 180-foot extension of the John Green Roadway when the City is only prepared to chip seal the
first 1,000 feet, and the City Manager is therefore prepared to recommend to the Works Department that the City
accept the street, but only require a chip sealing surface finish, which would make this portion the same stand-
ard as the City is going to complete on the balance of the street; the City Manager cannot agree to any change in
the requirement that the suggested contribution of $1,000.00 per lot be paid by the Developer as a contribution
towards the cost of bringing the private road up to acceptable standards. The letter from Messrs. Green on the
agenda of this meeting objects to the payment of the suggested $1,000.00 per lot for the reasons as stated in
their letter.
Mr. David Green was present at the meeting to answer any questions of the Council members with regard
to the request of he and his brother, Lorne, for approval of the two building lots as outlined above. The Mayor
noted that in a letter he received from the City Solicitor, dated July 16th, 1976, Mr. Rodgers stated he can find
no authority in the relevant by-laws for the insistence of payment to the City of $1,000.00 towards the work
required to bring the existing section of this road up to City standards and that the amount seems to be arrived
604
I'e~)o do
1lff?n.;JS .1/6
f/endel"$O~
~ec,.ea~/oh
qu1P~;d
k"~~<Jt~1"h
:Pe#- l79/h?1>"t-
(/IJQJY4./Une)
7i-'7Dn ~
tII~rhJ.:V17 /'e
~/A'e 4re.
~ahL~/'p:?
;:;;'/1>Y.-7e
-i/PJ? ~-h:i!.
.2J, 'R. ./;, F:
~.;JhC. ~tN)",;j' 1.
.S~_~/t1h
W/I C~n6//4
/lsso~.
t#r-/PrL,tdr: .
Ct7//. s~,.
~~h~~
~~~
6?aS?6~ 4//.
~/();,
a.,/,/2(..../ ,.p1t>"p
$~8p?~k~ 1.
e: /<< ,J;?OJZ$l?
H( E kP/& L-t-.
b!;.8?I7~/e .s
SeWdr
/-d/"""~ a
-i/e>-? L~.
~
at arbitrarily, and the Mayor stated that such amount has not yet been authorized by Council. Mr. Barfoot
stated that the correspondence in this matter is much more voluminous than is before Council today and it
originally arises out of a number of decisions by Council and the Planning Advisory Committee, one of,
which was adopted by Council some time ago, that the City Manager attempt to find a way to solve the
problem and this has been done and the suggestion of $1,000.00 is an attempt by the City Manager to try
and satisfy the policy the City has of not approving lots on the extensions of private roads, which these
two lots are, and the suggestion of $1,000.00 is an attempt to enable the City to vary that policy so ,that
they could approve the lots on the extension of private roads provided a contribution could be made from
those who wish to develop the lot. Mr. Barfoot further stated that Messrs. Green are only objecting to
the payment of $1,000.00 per lot but are in agreement with the present conditions of the City for sub-
division of property, and he noted that the only policy of Council at present is that this development
cannot be permitted on the extension of a private road. Considerable discussed ensued with Mr. Green on
whether the said road is a private road and the history of the requested extension of the said road.
Following general discussion, the Mayor advised Mr. Green that the Council will render a decision, later
in the meeting.
.
I
Councillor Cave withdrew from the. meeting.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, the lowest tender received for supplying and installing bleachers in the three new city arenas,
namely, that of Henderson Recreation Equipment Ltd., Norwich, Ontario, in the amount of $9,600.00, be
ccepted.
I
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report of the Works Branch of the Engineering
and Works Department for the months of May and June 1976, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
.
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, the lowest tender received for construction of 8-inch and 12-inch watermain to the Willie Avenue
standpipe, namely, that of Fairvale Construction Ltd. in the amount of $69,285.00, be accepted, and that
the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the contract in this regard.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engin-
eering services regarding projects that have been undertaken in connection with the Department of Regional
Economic Expansion programme:-
I
Lancaster ,Lagoon Lift Station
W. H. Crandall & Associates
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 10,
dated July 28, 1976
$ 68,255.04
$ 3,485.31
2.
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer
(a) Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 56,
dated July 20, 1976
.
$ 200,116.19
$ 2,122.15
(b) Gaspe Construction
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 13
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 13,
dated August 12, 1976
$1,463,230.25
1,417.543.23
58,526.29
1,349,183.67
$ 9,833.27
On motion of Councillor Green
I
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Acting City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering
services regarding the following named capital projects:-
Athletic Facilities Shamrock Park
W. E. Kelly Limited
Construction of athletic facilities
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention '
Payments previously
Sum recommended for
building
$ 221,900.00 I
44,109.32
6,616.40
14,377.88
2,
$ 23,115.04
approved
payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated August 5, 1976
2.
Greendale 36-Inch Storm Sewer - Phase II
Fairvale Construction Limited
Installation of 36-inch storm sewer
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 4
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated July 30, 1976
$ 89,170.00 .
91,218.00
2,736.54
86,481. 46
4,
$ 2,000.00
~
,...
. t/rkf7 ~
rl&lhlr Fdl#f!S~
So~,$ .(-it4_
b/-~..7~K
I~$r-
e/v/e (!f?J?~
t3/.;;mf~(JJ1 "
~~ca
I7hP"h/?, ~."..
~,-e;>_
~.4,~@hl
,(~~ ~
~7it/9)Pk//
e::1""~'w;,m;
~/-~5I4rlV.
$~.
, /l'1;J,tR//he
/V,;;m..s
S~lf/iJ?/if07~
~'!?Y- ~/-
-I- "'1t!!S ~--6a.
:JJDd ~~
~r ~hr
IIY.B.~. c
SJ~;g/Okr
:lJr/~e
/lt4J,"'/!5
(},1esk!/ ~.
~nvh :JjcJ-
e
{I/I!I ~r.,
. /l..1J.I
..I-I-d.
t}~/;! A
/TIedd.
amm.
11r1J,~ ~
,JRMd-~
ref/,~'/I"s
~1I1r~~5,f/
,spn'
I /eh~~r
I#'.ekrq.-
~r.slW''''~'
~d-t?;;'K/
..$'z:lW"h7 ~d.
kf'hy5'14//e
CplnfNd-&-
, (/ag;,n $IPSI
.w~a~2
(}/lu.5'o;/t;> /II.
$.~f.Ir/n4
~;~~~
... /;"frun:l(n:r I
.. reAN~)As
805
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Deputy Commissioner
of Housing and Renewal Services, approval be granted for the acquisition of the freehold interest of Frank Fales
& Sons Ltd. in property known as 61-63 Dock Street (F-6-19-10), which is required in connection with the North
End Urban Renewal Scheme, for a total amount of $148,000.00, free and clear of all encumbrances and to include
business disturbance claim and any and all other claims of any nature whatsoever by the present owner, the
approval of the Partnership for the acquisition of this property for the said amount having been acknowledged.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be granted for
payment of accounts received from Clarkson, Gordon & Co. in the total amount of $2,119.80, for professional
services rendered in connection with properties being acquired for the Market Square Civic Centre, the approval
of the Partnership for payment of the said accounts having been acknowledged.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be granted for
payment of the account received from Thorne, Riddell & Co. in the total amount of $1,355.00 for professional
services rendered in connection with the acquisition of properties for the Market Square Civic Centre, the
approval of the Partnership for payment of the said account having been acknowledged.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be granted for
payment of the account received from Palmer, O'Connell, Leger, Turnbull & Turnbull in the total amount of $60.00
for professional services rendered in connection with the expropriation of property known as 41-45 Harrison
Street (F-11-20-26) from Madeline Evans, the approval of the Partnership for payment of the said account having
been acknowledged.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as requested by the City Manager, approval be granted
for payment of the account received from Shawinigan Engineering Maritimes Ltd. in the total amount of $151.73 for
professional services rendered in the appraising of the Dock Street power plant in connection with the North End
Urban Renewal Scheme, the approval of the Partnership for payment of the said account having been acknowledged.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Deputy Commis-
sioner of Housing and Renewal Services, approval be granted for the acquisition of the freehold interests in
Parcels "B" and "C", Chesley Drive, as shown on the submitted sketch, from the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority,
for a total amount of $62,812.00, free and clear of all encumbrances and to include any and all claims of any
nature whatsoever by the present owner, the approval of the Partnership for the acquisition of this property for
the said amount having been acknowledged.
Read a letter from the City Manager, dated August 13th, 1976, advising that the bandstand in King
Square has been unusable for some time for its intended purpose because of deterioration of the iron and the City
asked the firm of A.D.l. Ltd. to investigate the condition of the structure and recommend on the repair work
required, which work was done late last year, and resulted in the submitted letter from the said firm, dated
December 29th, 1975, which summarizes the condition of the structure; subsequently, the cost to carry out further
engineering investigation and design with a view to dismantling, replacing, repairing and rebuilding the band-
stand was estimated at $41,000.00 and it is puzzling to know exactly how to proceed on this project as the
bandstand is certainly a unique structure, very much a part of King Square, but not well adapted to any useful
function other than a cynosure for inhabitants and visitors alike and possibly Council should consider other
alternatives to repair the bandstand as it now is, so that a focus such as the bandstand is retained in the
centre of the Square. Councillor MacGowan, Chairman of the Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee, which
Committee had submitted a letter at the August 9th Council meeting in this regard, stated the said Committee
understands that the blacksmith who was formerly employed by the City may be qualified to do the necessary
repairs to the bandstand. She noted that the structure has not been used as a bandstand for twenty or thirty
years and is an attraction in the Square and she understands there are only two two-storey bandstands in
existence and it is unique and should be retained.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above letter from the City Manager be referred to Mr. W.
H. Hodgkinson, a former City employee, to ascertain his views on repairing the bandstand in King Square.
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
the lowest tender received for the construction of water and sewer services on Partello Avenue East and con-
struction of a storm sewer on Kingsville Road, namely, that of Ocean Westway Construction Ltd., in the amount of
$74,463.00, be accepted, and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the contract in this
regard.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, with regard to a recom-
mendation of the Saint John Parking Commission that the Parking Meter By-Law be amended by adding to Section 12
(2) thereof the words, "and all unpaid meter tickets", thereby reading, "(2). If a vehicle is parked in violation
of this by-law any police constable of the City of Saint John may take such vehicle or cause it to be impounded
in a suitable place and all unpaid meter tickets, all costs and charges for removal, care or storage of the said
?l7t7ied/onth.
h/st? ~'f'te
.;J la,.. J?1S
.K'~'Y~hC'y
re'pp~/I?:I
fef,rOhe .sy.
9//
;y,.1J. 7i,/. tJ:,. ~~
G!eil7JeWg// C&:>o
f!!h/tf?/W'$h(;q w/ee
'~' ~, ~_ Councillor Kipping declared a possible conflict of interest in the matter under discussion and
Ct?mm<<.h. sySa!?/f? stated he was refraining from voting on the item, however, he would like to make a remark as a result of
his employment, and that is he would like Council to be sure they know that this is not the Emergency
eporting Telephone System, and the system recommended is other than that.
606
S.J: ~ IJ?4 ~
n.Nf!,'n~ /)'/#/rf>1'>
-o/~W
-'~~~~~If
ven/~,y
,;Pk...,'1.,4d'V/s,
tft?~w~ ~-&
$1l:P-d/v-,
Pa,yp/ed /J?
//eu. t/f" 'pU~~1:!
pU;;PbSt?S h
khL -/OJ->
PtJ~~ /,/e./7'p?S~
-#Jou.s"lf- /l.-nd
?~J7,,f~v/s ,
L1t:7h?/n.
:lh~/;( ;:::
~C b::,Wdll7
~dr/s
~d~/.;JS
7?~Qn/n~
I'eSe/d/Qh v~A!
.t!I-/.;;IW M
.1)avRA,~e)?r
$c/;G>~e:?kse.7;
S~~e .r
'f/bJn. /9,11-"/.5'.
CbhP/'
~~17. ~'ky
Rb-d.l'L .:r;
t+?C'#C1H7ClI'W
.$ unlP7/-I :J) r.
1J/c'/Y..7hJd~j ,
$UA&>-~/Y-
{II '-'"y JP"?'C'/i?~
~
vehicle shall constitute a lien upon such vehicle.",advising that he has examined the resolution as well
as the relevant statutes and it is his opinion that such an amendment enacted by the Common Council under
present legislation would not be valid, be received and filed and a copy forwarded to the Parking Com~
mission.
.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the
Common Council accept the sum of $616.00 in lieu of land for public purposes in respect of the Margaret
Kelly Subdivision, and that the letter from the said Committee, advising that Margaret Kelly owns and
occupies a lot on the westerly corner of Myles Drive and Westbrook Avenue in the Myles Subdivision and is
requesting permission to divide the property into two lots, and the subdivision is now serviced by City
water and sewer and therefore meets the By-law requirements; and stating that the Property Management
Branch estimates that the market value before the sub-division of the resulting new vacant lot would be
$7,700.00 (at 8% of the $7,700.00, the sum of $616.00 is payable to the City) and that this money is to be
deposited in the City's trust fund for the acquisition and development of land for public purposes -- be
received and filed.
I
At the request of Councillor Gould, Mr. Park agreed to submit a report on the accumulated total
of the City's trust fund for the acquisition and development of land for public purposes.
1
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated
August 12th, 1976, with regard to the application made by Mr. Donald F. MacGowan, solicitor for Mr.
Demetris Bountalas, that Mr. Bountalas be permitted to provide for a one-bedroom or bachelor apartment in
the basement of his structure under construction at 23 St. Anne Street in addition to the permitted six
dwelling units in the said building, recommending that, having regard to Council's previous decision with
respect to the William Roberts' property located on the western side of St. Anne Street which is similar
to the request of Mr. Bountalas, the resolution of Common Council of October 6th, 1975 which re-zoned Mr.
Bountalas' property under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act to limit the maximum number of dwelling
units in the building to six, be varied to permit the proposed seventh apartment at 23 St. Anne Street, be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
dated August 13th, 1976, recommending that the by-law for the East Development Scheme, Phase I, Stage I,
enacted by Common Council on June 26th, 1974 be amended by adding to Section 3.3.2.4.2, on page 7, the
words "except for lot 72 where the side yards on the westerly side are respectively 4.6 feet and 2.95 feet
at the front and rear corners of the house", be received and filed and the recommendation adopted, and
authority be granted for the necessary advertising in this regard.
Read a letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated August 12th, 1976, with regard to the
resolution adopted by Common Council at its August 9th meeting, which referred to the Land Committee for a
report and recommendation a letter from Mr. John G. Riley, solicitor for Mr. Edward J. McNamara, in
respect to land for public purposes on Summit Drive, advising that a report on the decision of the Planning
Advisory Corurtittee on March 30th, 1976 in this regard has not been made to Common Council because the
Committee has not yet received a firm subdivision plan on the proposed extension of the Edward J. McNamara
Subdivision with which it would normally approach Common Council and this letter will serve as an interim
report; advising that there is a related problem in the same vicinity in that Mr. Ronald J. Maber owns a
building lot situated on the westerly side of Summit Drive and south of Willie Avenue and Mr. Maber
recently made application for a building permit to construct a dwelling on this lot but the permit has
been refused for the reasons as stated in the said letter, and advising of subsequent discussions in this
regard, and further advising that it appears to the Committee that it might not be fair or necessary to
hold up the Maber development pending a resolution on the broader issue of financing of a road to the
Airport which this eastern arterial might not be. The said letter outlines the original concept in the
Municipal Development Plan for an Airport Expressway, and states that the Maber property presently has
access by existing Summit Drive and it would have alternative access if the proposed new McNamara Sub~
division across the existing land for public purposes materialized, and the Committee therefore concurs
with the City Solicitor's opinion in the granting of the permit to Mr. Maber as it does not foresee any
immediate or long-term increased financial involvement as a result of this action.
I
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
letter from the Planning Advisory Committee
to issue a building permit to Mr. Ronald J.
on the westerly side of Summit Drive and
I
Consideration was given to a report, dated August 13th, 1976, from the Protection Committee,
advising that the Committee has held several meetings with the Fire Chief, Police Chief and represen-
tatives of the New Brunswick Telephone Company, so as to discuss the item of false alarms and material
relating to Emergency Reporting Telephone System 911, as referred to the Committee by Common Council, and
further advising that the Fire Chief has submitted two written reports, relating to the following sub-
jects: (a) dealing with the proposed New Brunswick Telephone Company Emergency Reporting Telephone System
and (b) dealing with Gamewell's Emergency Voice Communication System, which reports are summarized in the
said report from the Protection Committee. The following recommendations were submitted by the Protection
Committee in this regard: (1) That the existing telegraph firealarm system remain in effect and that the
Gamewell Voice Annunciation System be brought into effect on a gradual basis to replace the telegraph
system; and (2) that this recom mendation be implemented by referring the purchase cost of the console to
the 1976 Budget Committee as well as a programme purchase system for the voice annunciation box, the
intent being to locate the new boxes on a priority listing in areas where the greatest number of false
alarms occur.
I
.
~
,..-
.
1/~lse .,t/';re
d/~rm.s
.,()"ffl"<1'iJ"hC' 9'
~/o/"n"'ne
Va- yp/t?e
tJt>mmt.< I? .
.system
I
7edcJ-/n
.
/ifarJ-d ~
.7)ev,p/oR-
med [on;.
'1
7e?1mS p.,e
re.;erehC'e
.
1
I!I't7M/l7afl
ef?lltA7 ,/
1
I9ffb/h
~ecKlViPtNt
~r4- &<<,ns:
. ~M/~
eo~-
F/,,&c- ~
-<-e-A.
~
~Q7
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above report be received and filed and the recommendations
contained therein adopted.
Councillor M. Vincent, Chairman of the Protection Committee, advised that the Committee met on several
occasions with the officials of the Fire and Police Departments, and had the Telephone Company to a meeting for a
presentation on the Emergency Reporting System, and taking all factors into consideration, the Committee felt at
this time that the recommendations submitted were proper and suitable, bearing in mind the costs and the pro-
vision of a necessary service to the citizens of Saint John, and the report arises from a referral from Council
to the Committee on the consideration of removing the fire alarm system in the City.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting)
Councillor MacGowan, a member of the Protection Committee, stated she has heard different Councillors
voice an opinion that they were not quite sure Council would be doing the right thing in adopting this recom-
mendation, and she asked if a delay of one week, in order that Council could be briefed on the matter, would
create any difficulty. Chief Clark replied that he did not feel another week's delay would affect the Fire
Department.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Davis
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table pending a briefing of
Council on the proposals.
Prior to adoption of the above resolution, discussion took place with the Fire Chief on the present
alarm system, and the process of moving the present console system from the Union Street station to the new fire
station on King Street East. Chief Clark noted that the system being recommended by the Protection Committee
does not include some of the amenities of the Emergency Reporting System, however, these can be added at a later
date, and in reply to a query of Councillor Davis, he advised that the present cost to maintain our own system is
~50,000.00 per year.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that the recommendations contained in a report of the committee
composed of Councillors M. Vincent, Davis and Hodges, which was formed to investigate the Market Square project,
be adopted, as follows:
(1) That the Committee be called the "Market Square Development Committee".
(2) That its terms of reference be:
(a) To study, generally, the concept of the idea of Market Square Civic & Commercial
Complex as it has developed to date, and from time to time, and to advise and
make recommendations to Common Council of relevant conclusions which are believed
to be important to the people of the City of Saint John.
(b) To study and make recommendations to Common Council concerning matters arising
out of resolutions of Council imposing responsibilities, duties and liabilities
on the Developer, so called, respecting the Market Square Civic & Commercial
Complex.
(c) To study, report and advise and do all and each of those things covering the
Market Square Civic & Commercial Complex which, in its opinion and in the
opinion of the Council, will be of assistance to Council.
(3) To handle and deal with the recommendation made to Council by the Rocca Group during its presentation made on
June 28th, 1976 and contained in their report of that meeting.
(4) To attempt to secure on loan from the senior levels of government of some appropriate agency, or to employ in
an advisory or consultant capacity, an individual who will provide the Committee with financial, marketing and
giving development assistance to the project. (The c~sts of such assistance be capitalized as a cost of the
proj ect) .
Councillor A. Vincent stated he would only be prepared to vote in favour of the above motion if the
Council was willing to add the names of the three Councillors on the said Committee to the next item on the
agenda, which is the report of the Nominating Committee, as he does not feel that such committee has ever been
appointed by Council. He further stated he would like the Council to thank the citizens and members of the
original committee on the Market Square development, who served the City faithfully, and spent many countless
hours on the matter. Councillor Davis noted that he and Councillor A. Vincent, as well as former Deputy Mayor
Arthur Gould, served on the original Committee with a good many citizens until the first design and study of the
financial viability of the project, and when that committee was dissolved he and Councillor A. Vincent were
appointed to the co-ordinating committee of the project as liaison members. Councillor Davis made reference to a
recent publication which is a survey of about 39 harbour front developments in the world and he read excerpts from
the said publication and noted that Saint John was the first city in Canada to consider such a proposal but still
no development has taken place and he expressed his concern that this matter should proceed in a positive manner
as quickly as possible.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended in the report of the Nominating Committee, the
following appointments be made, namely:-
ockwood Park Advisory Board - Miss Barbara Malcolm, for a term to expire December 31, 1977.
Parkin
William
1977.
Commission - Messrs. Charles L. Curren, Stanley C. Bustin, Mrs. John P. Palmer, Messrs. W. John Alliston,
Leahy, E. A. Farren, Frank Bailey and Councillor Hartley G. Green, for a term to expire December 31,
First L.D.H. Ltd. (Board of Directors) - Messrs. Eric L. Teed, John D. MacCallum, Councillor A. Vincent, Councillor
, Leo Pye, Mrs. Grace Munro, Mrs. Helen Burton, and Mr. Donald H. Garey:
608
'Jh,.f~h t0d
~..7J,~ ~--htt'.
:P.I';, Carey
lIum01h ..2)eve'/~-
me~ S#~!/
/"-i1hS~, ~~_,
C'w.mNh. &~4
~V'/6IfO ..eJ~
S.J::IhlC~ ~h';;'/
~r.fs ,,(#
~~ .:a~
G2....,.,...,;y
/ltu-.A-e~ $9.
:l)evq/"",e h~
l?on;n, .
v; ,E :i)QS/?/6hL
eQs~-sA.;;/'/~
pp~c~ /'Ie
suP-~/~s,
:JkF.III~'~/
lfe's'IQ'le~$
C/os/h9 f'/!'$eh'e.
,.,,~ he~;r
Pr/mro.s~
.A~hL COh....,.,.
:lJ.1/. KyereH
fh,s&,htler e~
10-/, corner
t/I?/p/i-r tl/de~
.5'-1' s.
'Power Lt,m'W.
c/~~ ,Mfr.
"Pt:>/B S I'>6'h6 V.,;7/
t/nipnq -:z>t::CA
0710/19 PP....~~()
1?e-~Oh/J1g
/lsspC/';'~ ~
-tp.l'les ~-t-~.
P/o/hh,/Jil'V/S.
AND FURTHER that Mr. Donald H. Garey be given a proxy, as a Director of First L.D.H. Ltd., to vote on
behalf of the City of Saint John at the annual meeting of the Company.
Human Development Study - Councillors Edna MacGowan and Fred Hodges
Transportation Committee - Mr. Reginald Smith, for a term to expire December 31, 1977.
Community Appeals Review Board - Miss Lynda Farrell, Mr. Cedric Stokes, and Deputy Police Chief Ronald
Jackson, for a term to expire December 31, 1977.
Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. (Board of Directors) - Councillor A. Vincent, Councillor M. Vincent and
Messrs. Frank Rodgers, William Wilson, R. Park and Donald H. Garey, Secretary:
AND FURTHER that Mr. Donald H. Garey be given a proxy, as a Director of Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd.,
to vote on behalf of the City of Saint John at the annual meeting of the Company:
AND FURTHER that Councillors Davis, Hodges and M. Vincent be appointed to the Market Square
Development Committee.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. V. E. Desmond regarding proposed
changes in the City's sub-division cost-sharing policy, be received and filed and Mr. Desmond be thanked
for his comments.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. T. E. Sifton, Director of Lands
of the Provincial Department of Natural Resources regarding the proposed discontinuance of a portion of a
reserved road near Primrose and near the Kings-Saint John County line, and adjoining City property, be
referred to the Land Committee and City staff for a report to Council. '
Read a letter from Mr. B. H. Everett regarding the unsightly condition of the vacant lot at the
corner of Waterloo and Union Streets (former Brown's Drug Store site).
Mr. Barfoot advised that the work at this location is approved in the 1976 capital budget and
will be done as soon as it can be scheduled, and that he will check into the illegal parking of cars at
this location, as noted by Councillor Hodges. Councillor Davis stated he recalls that at a recent meeting
of the Works Committee it was stated that the City is waiting for the Power Commission to move the pole at
this intersection before work is started. Councillor Hodges noted that the hydro pole at the intersection
of Union and Dock Streets has not yet been moved by the said Power Commission.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the City Manager contact the Power Commission
regarding the removal of hydro poles at the intersection of Union and Waterloo Streets and the inter-
section of Union and Dock Streets, and that the City Manager direct the Commissioner of Engineering and
Works to commence work at the lot at the intersection of Union and Waterloo Streets.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the application from Associated Laboratories Limited
for re-zoning of 292-296 Wentworth Street for a proposed dental laboratory, be referred to the Planning
Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation, and that advertising with regard to the said proposed
re-zoning be authorized.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that
Golden Grove Road for an auto repair shop, be
and recommendation, and that advertising with
the application from Mr. Douglas Mitton for re-zoning
referred to the Planning Advisory Committee for a
regard to the said proposed re-zoning be authorized.
:JJo~~S /J//#/"11 ~~p~~~
:/)..;11'/114 ..( cI""e
t;?,.,een
..7r/~,., t9;.et9~
7fOd~ .:z,
&,4./7 d'/I1!? /O&-$
~V/h~ ro..;,dt!
C, ff, I: ;E.
(;niI 17-6-
:l31<L ~ ~ 4? -t-
C.. /V,:L:lJ.
blt'J,,{ f?'!r~"hS
l!roIAb~,~
~#C7;"IPh
, ',CJo/nP;
I7p,d/n .y
G/~en sr.
tJ/ly ~fr.
O~ motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that a meeting be arranged between Messrs. David and
Lorne Green and the City Manager with reference to the presentation and discussion at this meeting, and
that the City Manager report back at the next Council meeting.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the request of The Canadian National Institute for
the Blind that consideration be given to ways in which the Common Council might be able to increase the
assistance given to the Institute, be referred to the budget committee.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Protection Committee be requested
to meet with representatives of The Canadian National Institute for the Blind to discuss the problems
encountered by blind persons in travelling through the city.
Councillor A. Vincent asked that the City Manager submit a report to Council as to the cause of
flooding on Gilbert Street this date, as he understands it has to do with the manhole not being connected.
Barfoot agreed to submit a report to Council in this regard.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Clerk,
, ,
~-
~
.
I
1
.
1
.
I
I
.
~
,...
609
.
1
I
.
I
,{/st- 0-/
'..L..L.
comll?/ i-",;;?ef.
em
COn;"I'rOll CI,f:
Crt.fMe*
.
~ i~
~/~
('ob7~eh-
sivk ah?Pf~H
~~n
1 n:~c1;j~
/J1Hn/e/p/
J)l?"I7/d/,~
~/';!h
I
.
.....
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-third day
of August, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager,
J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering' and Works, J. Gabriel,
Deputy Commissioner of Administration and Supply, and C. Sullivan,
Senior Project Engineer, of the Engineering and Works Department,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, F.
Ross, Deputy Chief of Police, and D. French, Director of Personnel
and Training
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Philip J. Lee, rector of St. John
and St. Stephen Presbyterian Church.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on August 9th
last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the following resolution be adopted, namely:-
"WHEREAS the City of Saint John has been utilizing the talents, experience and abilities of a great
number of citizens who serve on Boards, Commissions and Committees, some of which are established by statute,
some by by-law and some by resolution of Common Council;
AND as there does not appear to be any compendium or index or location where members of Councilor the
public can easily find the terms of reference of the various Boards, Commissions and Committees;
AND as there have sometimes been difficulties for both citizens and members of Council in trying to
determine to which Board, Commission or Committee they should refer, ask advice or send relevant matters;
AND it would appear that a compendium listing the Boards, Commissions and Committees in alphabetical
order, with their general terms of references or authority, and the address of their Chairman, secretary and
other personnel would be of considerable benefit and assistance to not only Council members, Committee members
and City staff, but residents of the City as well:
RESOLVED that the Common Clerk and City Solicitor be asked to prepare a compendium of the existing
Boards, Commissions and Committees, their terms of reference or jurisdiction, with their membership, in form
suitable for distribution to both members of Common Council and the public:
AND FURTHER that a report on the progress and preparing of such a compilation be made within four weeks
of this resolution."
In reply to a query from Councillor Parfitt, the Mayor stated that it would be up to each Council
member to keep the list of committees up to date following compilation of same by staff.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that as proposed by Mayor Flewwelling, a committee be appointed
of not less than six and not more than nine persons to study the City's Municipal Development Plan (Comprehensive
Community Plan) as it was adopted by the Common Council in 1973 and subsequently amended, and to report back to
the Council its opinions of the validity of the Plan and any recommendations, arising out of the committee
deliberations which bear on the Plan, and that such committee also recommend proposals and measures to implement
the Plan both in the long range and in the short range of five years or less, and that such committee be expected
to: (1) inform itself of all the various facts and factors influencing the Plan and the planning process itself;
(2) evaluate the various principles, objectives, policies and proposals which make up the Plan; (3) evaluate what
has transpired since the adoption of the Plan and any ways that new developments, plan amendments, etc. suggest
possible amendments and improvements to the Plan; (4) consult with City staff, City Committees, Boards and
Commissions, citizen groups, and citizens to obtain various views and suggestions on the Plan with an aim to
improving the quality of and efficiency of the community; (5) relate local planning and development to the Saint
John Urban Region Plan; (6) provide Council with an assessment of some of the implications of growth for Saint
John beyond 1977; (7) suggest goals and objectives to make the city great; (8) prepare programs or plans dealing
with growth in the long-range with a short-term plan of not more than five years to guide the City's growth and
improvement; and (9) recommend to Council how to more properly apply the policies in the Plan and suggest ways
and means of co-ordination in and out of City Hall for the optimum application of the Plan:
AND FURTHER that the said citizens' committee is specifically not to become involved in the review of
development proposals, even insofar as these might affect the Municipal Development Plan as the responsibility
for such a review is already legally vested in the Planning Advisory Committee, and as an assistance to the
Committee as they carry out their review, inasmuch as possible under present conditions, at least one profes-
sional member of planning staff attend all Committee meetings, and if necessary, professional planning services
be added to the Community Planning Branch on short-term contracts.
Councillor Davis stated there are two types of citizens' committee and in 1970 former Mayor Calvin
appointed a Mayor's Committee to examine the Comprehensive Plan, which was a committee of citizens composed of
Dr. Forbes Elliot as Chairman, Mr. K. V. Cox, Mr. K. C. Irving, Mr. John Disher, Mr. M. Somerville and Mr. G. E.
Graham, and that committee presented a four-page report, and was dissolved after six meetings. He noted that this
committee of citizens as proposed would continue and would require some staff and he noted that every committee
appointed is a cost to the taxpayers, and this committee should cost in the vicinity of $30,000.00 a year if it
is going to produce anything, and should have one or two staff members, and he does not like the proposal, and he
610
,~,~
does not like the idea of having too many lines of communication, and he does not see how citizens could
serve any purpose at the moment because when the first committee was created, the City Hall building was
being built and it was to be a catalyst for further development in the area, and he is very pessimistic
about the appointments that will be made to this committee and he cannot see any advantage whatsoever ,if
it is created as an on-going committee, and he feels it is a job for management, with civic input, but to
make it a committee of citizens alone he feels would make another line of communication, and therefore he
will vote against the motion.
The Mayor noted that the original committee referred to by Councillor Davis was a Mayor's
Committee, and he felt that the Committee proposed should be approved by Council. He noted that the
details of the proposal have been written by Mr. Zides, and that Mr. Zides and the Planning Advisory
Committee approv:el, of the proposal as they do not have the time to review the Plan, and they note that
times have changed, the population has changed, the industry has not been produced as we were told by the
Provincial Government would be produced and in the end result that we are not at the stage of which the
Plan had predicted we would be at this time, so it is time for a review. The Mayor advised that the
committee will not continue after their pl,an has been presented and Mr. Zides feel he and his staff should
have some input into the committee.
Councillor MacGowan stated she agrees with Councillor Davis and feels it is premature to start
evaluating the Comprehensive Community Plan now, and she noted that although staff do not have time for
such a review, the Planning Department staff would definitely be involved with such a committee, and she
does not see that any citizens group could put in as much time as required to do a good job and that it
takes expertise to undertake such a review.
Councillor Kipping noted it takes a considerable amount of time to prepare a community plan, but
it is much easier to reassess such a plan and he feels due to the demonstrable changes in the City, he is
in favour of the appointment of such a committee.
.
1
I
Councillor M. Vincent stated he is in favour of a review of the Plan as the said Plan was done
almost five years ago, and if the Plan is not going according to its schedule or intent it should be
reviewed, however, he does feel there may very well be problems in getting qualified citizens to serve on
the committee. In reply to queries of Councillor M. Vincent, the Mayor advised that the said Committee
would report directly to Council and that the members will be appointed by the Council through the Nomin- .
ating Committee.
$ 19,188.30 I
7,519.72
7,596.00
3,825.00
43,543.50
Plan.
Councillor Parfitt expressed her approval of having a reassessment of the Comprehensive Community
ffnay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Cave, Davis and MacGowan' voting
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following named invoices:-
Ltd. - July 16-31, 1976 (dated August 4, 1976)
- July 1-15, 1976 (dated July 19, 1976)
71,/ L /. D. Hatfield
.v.ffa-r-/i'eM ...(~
~,.~~.:z>tml&>I61JlNorman Donovan
;fJe17~_/.s
?enP'" ~~
II'lRP/t/npr? Spa!
~~
Sf?~~~ dr
~cv~~'el'~ Councillor M. Vincent asked if the City charges contractors for the use of water during land-
"'ZJ, / L /" scaping contracts, and the City Manager replied that he will ascertain if such a charge is made , although
~~Jr ~~J?he would state that the volume of water used would be very small. Councillor M. Vincent cited water being
used in Haymarket Square regarding the landscaping in that area. Councillor Green stated that if con-
tractors were charged for the use of water, such a charge would be added to the price of their tender.
C/#~ /I14J?a~}
'/ .QSK rope/? 0'1
/(017- ..L11(!'.llreeJ;;; support the recommendations of
relate to municipal structure,
i J? /I/.. :11
~h#$
apt'.~/? ~.;J6/e
-p b//)
$td~be~ a~sr~
:e'dn t:J,. ./+~
Rentals - July 16-30, 1976 (dated August 3, 1976)
Stephen Construction Co. Ltd. -
July 16-30, 1976 (dated August 3, 1976)
August 2-13, 1976 (dated August 17, 1976)
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED
Ltd. in the
maintaining
that in accordance with the recommendation of the
amount of $1.80 per square yard, for a total cost
sod at the ballfield, Barrack Green, be accepted,
City
of
this
Manager, the tender of Maritime
$4,356.00 for supplying, laying
being the only tender received.
Sod
and
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED
the Task Force on
responsibilities,
that as recommended by the City Manager, the Council
Non-Incorporated Areas in New Brunswick as they generally
financing, and planning:
AND FURTHER that such a major reorganization of responsibilities within the Province be ac-
.
.
~
,..
611
.
I
1
.
1
Ct:ty /J1,.9'r.
.l)~vl L qI-
,(o,.ne c-.
.7l?hn f//~
~.a~..;;>y
.02~J:& M
Pavi~~ ~
renUL
JJC)I/~!:f /'Ie
P:<I!tmen-C- jJe.
/ H-- /17 /t'i?tt.
fI~ u..1?~~'
l/"tl~$ il?
$u,p-d'/vs.
,(\!?.5I;I? cJ nr0a,;.-
'/1"~i<9'"
t!./IJ./lc:
.a!/ve /lYe>.
I s~ah.(p//
~-~OJ7/l?ff
/I/#1J?-/"d I'd
TA4?nJ fc50n
Cbndr-l6dl.
~,(-&-, .
.
~
companied by a major increase in the level of grant support to all municipalities.
Councillor Kipping stated he would like to see this matter discussed by Council at some future time in
)( more detail, and he has been worried that if such recommendations are adopted the rural areas will find the-!Y1
, selves with a heavy taxation burden, plus the other municipalities, like the City of Saint John, carrying
them to a certain extent, and he would like to study the matter further. Mr. Barfoot stated that the City has
not yet received a lot of these full reports from the Government and appended to his above letter to Council are
only the recommendations contained in the Task Force report, and he would be willing to discuss with Council at a
"teach-in" the recommendations of the said report. Councillor Cave stated he understands that the unincorporated
areas are protesting this very strongly. Mr. Barfoot stated that the difficulty he sees here is the burden of
taxation which falls upon the incorporated municipalities and the ease with which this taxation can be escaped by
moving outside of such boundaries, and he believes that any step which would seek to place upon the people living
outside such boundaries of organized municipalities, some of the cost which the government has to expend on their
behalf" should be supported by the organized municipal ties . Councillor MacGowan stated she objects to the
proposed representation on District Planning Commissions.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table for two weeks for
further study.
Read a letter from the City Manager, dated August 20th, 1976, with regard to the appearance before
Council on August 16th, 1976 of Messrs. David and Lorne Green asking for Council's assistance in obtaining
approval of their lots on the John Green Roadway, South Bay, advising that the situation arises because of
Council's policy adopted.on October 23rd, 1972, which provided, among other things, that for private roadways to
be taken over as public streets, that the private road must be brought up to City standard by the owners of
property along the private road and when Mr. John Green first brought the matter to the City in 1974, the Works
Department spelled out the conditions for bringing this road up to standard prior to entering into a subdivision
agreement; the City solicitor confirmed this stand to Council and following further representations by Mr. John
Green, Council referred the matter to the City Manager on July 15th, 1974 with the request that he endeavour to
obtain a satisfactory solution in connection with the bringing of the John Green Roadway to required standards
for subdivision purposes, and accordingly, a meeting was held with Mr. John Green in October 1974 when discussion
was held on the principle of the City doing work on the first part of the road if the developer would do the work
on the balance, however, nothing was finalized. The letter further advises that since May of this year, Messrs.
David and Lorne Green have been meeting with the City Manager, Mr. Zides and the Committee, attempting to have
two lots approved at the end of the roadway, and a memo from the City Manager to Mr. Zides, dated May 25th, 1976,
a copy of which is submitted, sets out the concept that the City might well adopt to make it possible for limited
development on private roads without the necessity for the whole cost of road improvements to be paid prior to
issuing subdivision approval; and that the City Manager met with Mr. Lorne Green on August 20th, 1976 and he and
Mr. David Green have offered to pay $300.00 apiece toward the cost of this road improvement, and request the City
to accept this as their cost-sharing in the work of bringing John Green Roadway up to public streets standard and
feel they cannot offer more because they have already committed $3,600.00 each into their building lots; and
further advising that the amount of $1,000.00 was suggested in the first place as there was a reasonable pro-
bability that enough additional lots would be created on the John Green Roadway to eventually cover the estimated
cost of bringing the roadway to public streets standard and because in dealing with such subidivision of land,
the City should maintain a balance with its general subdivision policy, which requires land owners to pay for the
complete cost of servicing, and therefore, any amount much less than $1,000.00 would be inconsistent with City
policy, and therefore, the City Manager cannot recommend that the City accept the offer of $300.00 per lot from
Messrs. David and Lorne Green, and further recommending that Council adopt as policy on present so-called private
roads within the inner tax zone that, as an alternative to requiring a full upgrading of the roadway as a con-
dition of subdivision approval, a lump sum payment of $1,000.00 for each lot created be acceptable.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above letter from the City Manager be received and filed
and the offer of Messrs. David and Lorne Green of $300.00 per lot be not accepted:
AND FURTHER that Council adopt as policy on present so-called private roads within the inner tax zone
that, as an alternative to requiring a full upgrading of the roadway as a condition of subdivision approval, a
lump sum payment of $1,000.00 for each lot created be acceptable.
During discussion of the above matter, Mr. Barfoot advised that a fund would be set up for such monies
received to enable the City to give better service to such private roads, and that the sum of $1,000.00 is meant
to be a portion of the cost of bringing such roads up to a minimum standard for public roads and that he believes
there would only be about seven or eight such private roads in the inner tax zone, and that such a policy will
require amendment to present City by-Laws and that the necessary amendments will be submitted for Council ap-
proval.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted
for submission of a loan application under Part VIII of the National Housing Act, to Central Mortgage and Housing
Corporation, in the amount of $171,680.00, for the Willie Avenue Standpipe project.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the block of land on the
southeasterly corner of Ocean Westway and the road to Lorneville with a frontage of about 1,100 feet on Ocean
Westway and the C.P.R. right-of-way at its rear, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential to "R-2"
One- and Two-Family Residential classification, be read a third time and enacted and the 'Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto",
was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The
~ ty .5obcii~~pr
tS7Jo~/2f.~~(1)?~ 1976, s~bmitting.th~ decision
h.-" rotectlve ASSOclatlon, Local
<:<-,/5/,n . d d f'l d
~ ~ /. , e recelve an 1 e .
..c>.,,/. rQ'/c-e~~
~di!d. t9:3..5ex:'_
~y ;:;r~/~~
612
7(~-~PJ?in.1'
~//i~(?Y/ //e
P'Cei1-t-us .,I-t-L
~e- ~;?~iJ?f
,(/ ev.:>?cOi tJ?~
c-lt?J? k
I11/1!Q/~/p.,;;1 /
;P/~J? :BY-A_
Ife-Aon/ny
7f;,s~&>J7 3,..ed;,
l?~~~~
;?/u~/~/p/ ~
~-/~W
Re- ;ZPQ/~
/OC'a/ ~t7.;2,
T.:B.LH(
,(~.I1L C'o....,.,.IJOr.
divf//t- ('/a/h,
.JJt?€d
:/kJm /n /'17 Stbp
ktL
7Jaroj? ;{p~ #
,(.;J~~~ 4ve.
~
City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning Lots 75-16, 75-17, 75-18, 75~
19 and 75-20 on proposed Noel Avenue and on proposed Clovelly Drive in the Millidgeville Heights Sub-
division Phase II as these are shown on the Subdivision Plan thereof approved by The Development Officer
for the 'City of Saint John on November 13, 1975 and filed in the office of the Registrar of Deeds in and
for the County of Saint John on December 5, 1975 as Number 203, being Phase I of the Birch Heights Devel-
opment, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" Multiple Residential classification, be read
a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Cave
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning a proposed lot
backing on the St. Joachim's Church and Silver Glade Nursing Home lying opposite what would be the inter-
section of Cindy Lee Street and Martha Avenue, with a frontage of about 515 feet along the latter, and a
depth of about 186 feet, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to "RM-l" Multiple Residential clas-
sification, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments 1
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal
Plan By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing
from a Low Density Residential area and placing in a Light Industrial area the property on the east side
of Sea Street between residence Numbers 483 and 509, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate
Common Seal affixed thereto.
.
The by-law entitled "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law", was read in its entirety prior
to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning
By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property on the
east side of Sea Street between residence Nos. 483 and 509, from "R-2" One- and Two-Family Residential to
"I-I" Light Industrial classification, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal
ffixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
1
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal
Plan By-Law" insofar as it concerns amending Schedule 2-A of the Municipal Development Plan by removing
from a Low Density Residential area and placing in a Sub-Central Commercial area the property situate on
Ludlow Street between Tower and St. George Streets (the former car barns site), be read a third time and
enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Municipal Plan By-Law", was read in its entirety prior
to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning property situate
on Ludlow Street between Tower and St. George Streets (the former car barns site), from "R-2" One- and
Two-Family Residential to "B-2" General Business classification, be read a third time and enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments I'
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor
Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated August
of the Arbitration Board in the matter between Saint John Policemen's
61, C.U.P.E. and the City of Saint John with respect to forfeiture of
20th,
pay,
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee advising that
essrs. Palmer, O'Connell, Leger, Turnbull & Turnbuli, solicitors for Dominion Stores Ltd. with regard to
a transaction between their client and the Provicial Department of Supply and Services, have explained,
hat discrepancies between the description of the so-called "pump house lot" used by the City and another
sed by the Provincial Government for throughway expropriation purposes, have created the possibility that
he City retains an interest in a small portion of the lot Dominion Stores Ltd. now wishes to sell, be
eceived and filed and authority be granted for the Mayor and Common Clerk to execute a Quit Claim Deed to
ominion Stores Limited of lands shown as "Part a" and "Lot A" on the submitted plan, for the nominal sum
f One Dollar.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor Joan Parfitt advising that
~
"..
a,1H7"~rf;~
.7iiJk//
m.ach/l7€"$
7b1,; 'ee :zJ,
S,x:BL~,6
1C'f?~m;~
,IJ~~~6'A:
hted''Pkm
l"eVldW
'tJI,'r;. fir
IEn v/~I1"'~J7,
IYe1l1-rdwJ,
kffles I
76//. tJ/~
e'omP?7 ~V/e
:&~4 ~
a/M?~#;fr
~ept;~~'V7'
I9ff.a/ps
A pC'al..7i7,&;"
~;V~~ JJ;,P-
.ip'~p?e
r'fJ{, -77
C;-{;-f/ ~r.
{UB
after recelvlng complaints from citizens regarding the newly-established pinball machine operations, she viewed
such establishments and was appalled at the apparent ages of the children frequenting such establishments, and
that the citizens have complained of the nuisance and noise factors as well as the young children who were
attracted there and she has consulted with city staff and Deputy Police Chief F. Ross, and there seems to be a
proliferation of these operations now, both pinball and ticket type machines, and it seems that the City has had
no control over these since 1967, be referred to the Police Department for any necessary action.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Board of Trade advising that
the Board is most interested in the suggestion for a committee to review the Municipal Development Plan for Saint
John as in their opinion an updated evaluation of this report could provide valuable information to both Council
and staff in many areas of decision making and the Board would encourage the early establishment of this group,
be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from The Honourable Fernand G. Dube, Minister of
Environment, enclosing a report recently completed by the Environment Department on the problems associated with
the use of non-refillable beverage containers in New Brunswick, and that members of the Department are now
actively engaged in the process of formulating policy recommendations on courses of action which should be
adopted in response to this difficult problem area and would welcome comments on the report, be referred to the
Pollution Control Committee, Civic Improvement and Beautification Committee and the City Manager.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Henry G. Irwin, Assistant Deputy Minister,
Department of Municipal Affairs, advising that the Department of Manpower and Immigration has recently announced
the details of the Local Initiatives Program for the winter of 1976/77 which is outlined in the submitted guide
and since the likelihood exists that seasonal factors will again~ffect unempl~yment levels across the country
this winter, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, with the support of the Premier's Office, has requested that the
Department of Manpower and Immigration continue to give full consideration to project applications from munici-
palities in the Province and that the deadline for applications for the Program is September lOth, 1976, be
referred to the City Manager to make the necessary applications and recommendations as required.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor MacGowan
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. E. M. Bowland, Village Clerk, Village
of Hampton, advising of a resolution adopted by the Council of the said Village requesting the Provincial Depart-
tI.i~Jr~ ~~ ment of Transportation to immediately petition the proper authorities to instigate a properly designed commuter
,/ ~~ I? system between the communities of Saint John and Sussex, and that copies of the said resolution have been for-
I ~~I?,r~-,~ warded to the Minister and Deputy Minister of Transportation for action, and the Village Council would appreciate
(,e'~I7?~~J any comments and recommendations the City might have on this matter, and that the City inform the Minister of its
~~~)7?~~ recommendations regarding this very important matter, be referred to the City Manager and the Commissioner of
I'~/I'~~~ ~ngineering and Works for a report, and recommendation.
SI-~U5Se C. G b l't . f
/?~. A? ,~~ ounclllor Mac owan stated she approves of the a ove concept as would take the trafflc 0 four
~/~~/~ streets and alleviate the parking problem in our City. Councillor Kipping stated that in conversation with the
t?~~~.~1.1J'~ ice-Presidents of both railways several years ago this matter was discussed, and at that time the said railways
~~~Af~ were not in favour of the proposal because it did not appear to be an economically viable suggestion, although
their feelings may have since changed. He stated that in view of the rising costs of insurance, gasoline,
highway maintenance, etc. he would agree that now is a good time to make a formal approach on this suggestion.
Councillor Green expressed his support for the motion. Councillor Parfitt stated she wonders how passengers on a
commuter service would find transportation from the railway station on Rothesay Avenue to the centre of the City.
. Nlt-;p~';;'"
6tH/? N//S
,.,q$/'d'.,gH~S
;j}1<f IS ;:;dPJM'
7P=al7$"p.c.bA
IY). ~a.l"py
I '7?Q~r/C'-f
Oh174$ /Y-
:8,,~.y ..(,
JPe- .%PhlJ7
~r.-'o/tj,w,
.~"'~)"SDh
~5u~
"H",'?n. /I<<n'
(! 0"'7 n'I.
./'175 h'n;;;,
c,.., I S-f-..;rtrz-
/11g/7'C.s r
.:J u,;{'w!'oS"
ree!:.~
/T'. ~ ~ne
+~.
....
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the petition from 459 residents of Glen Falls and other areas
of the City expressing their dissatisfaction with the present bus service in the City, be referred to the Trans-
portation Committee.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the the application from Mr. M. Barry Roderick, solicitor,
on behalf of Olands New Brunswick Brewery Limited, for re-zoning of property, Simms Street West, be referred to
the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation, and that advertising with regard to the said
roposed re-zoning be authorized.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the application from ~~. Harry Colwell, solicitor, on behalf
of Anderson Insurance Limited, for re-zoning of property located at 77 Coburg Street, be referred to the Planning
Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation, and that advertising with regard to the said proposed re-
zoning be authorized.
The Financial Statements to December 31st, 1975 of The City of Saint John and the Auditors' Report,
prepared by H. R. Doane and Company, Chartered Accountants, were presented at this time by Messrs. Ivor E. Laws
and C. R. Colwell, Chartered Accountants.' Mr. Colwell distributed to the Council members a summary of the said
financial report which he discussed, item by item, and replied to various queries of the Council members.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the meeting during the preceding discussion).
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements of
December 31st, 1975, prepared by H. R. Doane and Company, Chartered Accountants, and
be received and filed.
The City of Saint John to
the auditors' report thereon,
614
LEGAL
C}if~_ Sohc/~a
J).lJ'7.c;,.///s,f;.
/Vt?n-t/h/PH
8hlI:1P~~~s
~/..n./t9S
rp//-~k
/1Jr-6-I-.L~k-6'
:M.
lit Uf 1JJ-tr/fVi.
C/tySO/'~/tOY'
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting.
At this time the City Solicitor and Mr. D. M. Gillis, Q. C., briefed the Council on the efforts
of the City in appealing the ruling of the Anti-Inflation Board with regard to the scale of compensation
or the City's non-union employees.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated August
12th, 1976, regarding a letter received by Council on August 3rd last in Committee of , the Whole from ~tr.
M. W. Patriquen complaining about his recent dismissal and requesting reinstatement to his former pos_
ition, advising it is his opinion that all employees probationary or otherwise have the right to appeal
their suspension or dismissal pursuant to the original Section 19 of the City Government Act and while,
under the legislation referred to, the individual employee has a right of appeal to the Council, Council
must be very careful not to interfere with any decisions of the City Manager respecting dismissals unless
it is established that such decisions were made in a capricious and arbitrary manner - in other words,
the legislation is not designed to give the Common Council the authority to override the City Manager and
all his decisions respecting dismissal, but more importantly, to provide rights to the individual as well
as an obligation of the City Manager to exercise his authority to dismiss, when in his opinion such
dismissal is warranted without being influenced by personalities and biased feelings, be received and
filed:
JU,D FURTHER that Mr. M. W. Patriquen be permitted to appear at the next Council meeting with
respect to his dismissal and request for reinstatement.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
on Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the thirtieth
day of August, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
pres ent
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Green, Gould, Hodges, Kipping, MacGowan,
Parfitt, Pye and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community
Planning and Development, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering
and Works, C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, and
P. Clark, Fire Chief
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
August 16th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the Financial Statements for the month of July be
received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
~
.
1
I
.
1
.
I
I
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engineering.
services regarding projects that have been undertaken in connection with the Department of Regional
Economic Expansion programme:-
~
,....
. "I:, , 1.
/I';:}2t!>7~
.i!14 ~
/t-;c.
,,(,~~e.k~p>>
/r~-I-'dfih. 2.
S;iIQ'ps PI?
c.'o~StJ.. ~~
1;7~~,
, ~O//. 56'#er
.: ~h4'h- ~ 3.
;' L.-E-d.
~~/de..2>r.
"'eeo~~'" ~
;?lebo a.~-
~I"vd:.'<-E~
.
e.,;>)"/t-~/
,0 l'v?Je ~ t-
,c;"e $fzt.
~rhJa d
-5t;
1( .?.::."'C'a tih
~,.~-~
I
~~~
re~R~
.
s..T.TrP~
tl/PflA-SA2
..l) rk~t1
./.-l-4f€,
I (IN,,e a~
/-6d.
l/afh1~e>n
I/?/I.a 5e
I(}t?h/~~~er
$~/~6' $J
S~.$S6'X
4't1;.~.,e~
. Pt7;r&a-t-/t?1?
'C'/i'/e S f?-f'
,1/,$ lrqb$/-
Stu4 ....J-
re?PPVe,
(/!me'/1C/d
1? 6/6)
~
61~
Hazen Creek Sewage Treatment Plant
Godfrey Associates Ltd.
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 39,
dated July 30, 1976
$
$
39,775.30
2,532.23
Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station,
Simpson Construction Ltd.
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 6
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 6,
dated August 11, 1976
$ 589,600.00
355,820.00
50,759.25
251,638.25
$ 53,422.50
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 57,
dated August 18, 1976
$ 202,238.34
$ 2,064.08
Bayside Drive Reconstruction & Extension - Phase IV
Metro Construction Limited
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 3,
dated July 31, 1976
$ 652,187.00
244,238.00
36,635.70
125,402.59
$ 82,199.71
; i, On motion of Councillor Gould
payment
gar ding
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
of the following construction progress certificate and approved invoice for engineering services re-
the following named capital project:-
1.
Fire Station - Carmarthen & Leinster Streets
Rocca Construction Co. Ltd.
Construction of new fire station
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 4
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated August 6, 1976
$ 578,579.00
387,741.64
56,618.80
256,892.84
4,
$ 74,230.00
In reply to a query of Councillor M. Vincent, Mr. Barfoot stated that the construction of the new fire
station was on schedule and Mr. Clark advised that the target date for relocation of the Union Street operation
is scheduled for the end of September.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report of the Division of Technical and Inspection
Services, including Plumbing, for the month of July, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following named invoices:-
Saint John Iron Works - July 31, 1976
$ 2,270.10
$ 6,812.70
$ 5,299.50
D. Hatfield, Ltd. - July 16-31, 1976 (dated August 4, 1976)
Grove Construction Ltd. - June 21-July 13, 1976 (dated July 14, 1976)
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated August 26th, 1976,
with regard to the request received by Council at its August 23rd meeting from the Village of Hampton for com-
ments, recommendations and support of their resolution concerning the instigation of a properly designed commuter
system between the communities of Saint John and Sussex, advising that the City of Saint John in common with the
other cities of New Brunswick has a problem in transportation and a public transit study of the cities is just
being completed, the objective of which was to evaluate the existing and potential demand for public transit in
each of the six cities of New Brunswick and provide detailed recommendations of the nature of the transit system
which will best suit the needs of each city, and that the present problem with urban transit is not that the
present forms of public transit cannot handle the traffic - it is that so few people use them that they are in a
bad way economically, and it would not help the situation to add another poorly used and very expensive service
by rail, and further advising that Saint John, in the meantime, has its own problems - the communities between
Saint John and Sussex are absorbing much of the population increase of the Saint John area, whereas the City's
Comprehensive Community Plan provides for this population increase within the City's boundaries and Saint John
should therefore be concerned with improving the transit services available to its own citizens, and not so much
with making a better service for those who have chosen to live outside the City, and recommending that the letter
from the Village of Hampton be received and filed and that the Minister of Transportation be asked to give early
consideration to the Cities of New Brunswick Transit Study report and recommendations, be received and filed and
the recommendation adopted.
During discussion of the above letter from the City Manager, Councillor MacGowan stated she would also
like to see this matter referred to not only the C.N. railway but the C.P. railway as well, as she feels we
Stf",d- 4II~'~1.l '
;{.'fIJ~,vH;e .
(#~/k.s/,!&/ I'e'.
Ca/fC" t:'l7 ~ dated August 26th, 1976, advising that a 541 square foot portion
,<:~~~ I Canada Limited service station at the corner of Lansdowne Avenue
~ ~ . ~ in the City as a street widening or corner rounding, as shown on
~~~~~~~ that Council assent to the subdivision p~an with respect to this
~~ ~J1 and the recommendation adopted.
B16
l?, ?>::P-
c. AI: J?
CJ.t:,m;,,~ te '"
:7el""'/ee SJ:-
Eki5SeX
I
t/,.,6ah ~H~
1I!"~~#-4
,(-6L.
Sl'trvi!!',!/
$oi/6ese.s+
s-ftut!v
Sea' N.;i//
/J1.~,.,.f6't- ~
Ple1/1!"7e;POX?d
pl"O J t3 Co-C-
F~/VcCJ
linbl" ole!<
Cleah;:1?4 ~
n,CI/ ~
,.?y~Q~A7?vl
meJda/ ~vk.
,(#-L
Rt?I'NZ/hf.,.
~$e;# '$-c:
C!/-ty ~d:
should also be looking into the matter of commuter service between Saint John and Westfield. Councillor
Parfitt noted the decrease in population in the City while the outside areas have a considerable increase
in population and she noted that the City has its own transit problems to solve. CouncIlor Green stated
that there will continue to be tremendous growth in the outlying areas of the City and that the City
should encourage new residents to build in Saint John, however, he feels something has to be done to
improve transit problems in and out of the City, and the suggested commuter system would help alleviate
some of our problems, as well as assisting our local transit company through increased fares in tran-
sporting passengers from the railway depots to the centre of the City. Councillor Hodges noted that this
suggestion deals with people living outside the City and the City's problem is that our own people are
not using the public transit system available. Councillor M. Vincent stated he believes it has been the
objective of this Council to increase the population of the City and if the proposal is going to provide
an incentive for people to move outside the City, then the Council would be better off in trying to solve
the transit problems of those people living within the City limits. Mr. Barfoot advised that the City
should be very concerned that the maximum number of transport dollars are made available for the transit
problems of the City, and he noted that in other areas commuter rail services have been found to be very
expensive and not very profitable. Councillor Cave stated that he supports the suggestion of Councillor
MacGowan that this matter should be referred to both railways for their input. Councillor Davis stated
that the Council has to be realistic in this matter, and he noted that in areas where commuter service is
available it has been found that only two to five per cent of the population avail themselves of such
service, and that in the areas between Hampton and Saint John and Westfield and Saint John there are
20,000 people which would mean only about 600 persons using the two services. Councillor Kipping sug-
gested that the Council is really dealing with a change in transportation which will take place, and that
is that less people will be using automobiles for transportation due to rising costs, and if the op-
eration of commuter systems is not profitable then the City should go after some of these non-profit
operations in our City, and he suggested that the City should be supporting and co-operating with its
neighbouring communities, to improve our transit systems.
Moved in amendment by Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the above matter also be referred to the two
railway companies for their input, as well as the possibility of a commuter service between Saint John
and Westfield.
Question being taken, the amendment to the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors
Cave, Davis, Green, Kipping and MacGowan voting "yea" and Councillors Gould, Hodges, Parfitt, Pye and'M.
Vincent voting "nay".
Question being taken the motion, as amended, was carried.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
granted for payment of the accounts received from Murdoch-Lingley Limited in the total amount of $412.71,
for surveying work carried out in connection with the North End Urban Renewal Scheme, the approval of the
Partnership for payment of the said accounts having been acknowledged.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
granted for payment of the accounts received from Foundation of Canada Engineering Corporation Ltd., in
the total amount of $17,256.14, for professional services rendered in connection with the preliminary
study and soils investigation of the Harbour Sea Wall, the approval of the Partnership for payment of the
said accounts having been acknowledged.
Mr. Barfoot advised that two of the above invoices of Foundation of Canada Engineering Cor- '
poration Ltd. completes that firm's work for Phase I of this project, and that the additional invoice is
for work which was necessary as an extension of the study investigation to arrive at an economical
solution for enclosing the development area, and that the said amounts represent the City's share of the
said costs. He further advised that two preliminary reports have been received from the said firm and
that the additional drilling work requested has been completed and an analysis of their findings is being
done and will be submitted to the City.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City
Manager, the tender of Aqualine Environmental Services Ltd., in the amount of $52,710.00, be accepted for
cleaning approximately 20,000 feet of 6-inch, 8-inch and 10-inch watermains in Saint John West.
It was noted that the sum of $75,000.00 had been approved for this project in the City's 1976
water and sewer capital programme, and that this will result in an under-expenditure for this work.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, dated August 27th,
1976 with regard to the flooding which had occurred on August 16th at the corner of Gilbert Street and
City Road, advising that the flooding was caused by blockage of the outlet of a manhole, and the nature
of this manhole is such that water has to build up ahead before it empties into the wooden sewer, which
sewer has very good flow and was not affected by the blockage, and construction work at the intersection
has resulted in two catchbasins being blocked, and further advising that the Works Department engineers
have worked in close co-ordination with the Department of Transportation engineers throughout the major
construction work at Haymarket Square, and there is assurance that all necessary work will be carried out
before fall to assure proper drainage of the intersection, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED
that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee,
is being severed from the Gulf Oil
and Wellesley Avenue so it can be vested
the submitted sketch, and recommending
street widening, be received and filed
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"...
. 76J1'Hen~ /J.?
I/eu d ~14rP
lie /,-161?f/!ge
/a11~
h6~k:
t?PI1I7f?PJ'
Su,b-~'V'.,
I
l~r5e?I7ht5'/
C'~R//7?/#&e
~'v/e
emp/o~s
e:7~4f?P//dr
n,eq-t- J
O/f///'>~ye,n,
. (!Pun_
10~/,il?f
. h'n&het!'
2)ep-c:
617,
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee, the Common
Council accept the sum of $256.00 in lieu of land for public purposes in respect of the Joseph E. Connors Sub-
divion, and that the letter from the said Committee, advising that the Connors subdivision consists of a one acre
lot situated on a private right-of-way to the north of Westfield Road and South Bay and that the Committee had
granted approval of the lot with respect to the private access and the payment of money in lieu of land for
public purposes, and stating that the Property Management Branch has appraised the property at $3,200.00 before
the subdivision (at 8% of the $3,200.00, the sum of $256.00 is payable to the City) and that this money is to be
deposited in the City's trust fund for the acquisition and development of land for public purposes -- be received
and filed.
In response to a query from the Mayor, Mr. Zides stated that the land in question is a private right-
of-way that cannot be opened up for further development and used as a City street, and therefore payment to the
City for extensions to private roads of the sum of $1,000.00 per lot, as approved by Council at its last meeting,
would not apply in this case.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the report from the Personnel Committee, dated August
5th, 1976, with regard to the report from the City Manager on the 1976 Establishment which was referred to the
Personnel Committee by Council on April 30th, 1976 for review, advising that the Committee has been meeting
regularly since that time and has examined the Establishment in great detail with each Department head and
generally and as a result of this detailed review, the Establishment is now submitted, showing a total of 914
approved permanent budgeted positions, which is an increase of 58 or 6% over the last official establishment
adopted by Council in March 1970, or a growth rate of only 1% per year, and that this very low growth in muni-
cipal employment, far less than that of other governments, has been achieved in spite of a great expansion in the
City's economy, many increases in City services, and shortened employee working times, be received and filed and
the said establishment be approved, as submitted.
Councillor Green, Chairman of the Personnel Committee, agreed to supply Councillor Kipping with further
information on why the positions in the Finance Department are listed under various sections of the said estab-
lishment.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Abattoir Commission, dated August
26th, 1976, advising that the said Committee and representatives of Canada Packers Limited met on August 24th
last to discuss the recent amendment to the Abattoir Act and the elimination of custom slaughtering from the
Abattoir operation, be received and filed:
4bc.ribil'9
(!Oh7P1.
Can:ALa
~den Al'lD FURTHER that, pursuant to "An Act To Amend An Act Authorizing The Municipality Of The City and
I County of Saint John", enacted by the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick during the 1976 session and published
1?7~~~~/'/7 in the Royal Gazette on June 30, 1976, whereby it is provided the Common Council of the City of Saint John may,
/7c~ by resolution, suspend the operation of Section 1, or any part or portion thereof, from time to time, and for
'7' such times as the Common Council deems necessary or expedient, and the agreement between the City of Saint John
19. ~~ and Canada Packers Ltd., may be varied by mutual consent of the parties, that the part or portion of Section 1 of
~~., ~ the said Act relating to slaughtering is hereby suspended and that the City Solicitor be requested to prepare the
~1?7~~e appropriate agreement to vary the agreement between the City and Canada Packers Limited bearing date the 31st day
~o el'/~~ of March 1954, and in particular Section 21 of the said agreement, to discontinue the custom-killing requirements
~_ f the said agreement, by mutual consent as between the City and Canada Packers Limited, and that the Mayor and
eU SbV./P?- the Common Clerk be authorized to execute the amended agreement.
A-/~I?f
/!far.
If/arA-d
$y-./~W
A/y.,41kt'"-
elk
e/-t-!l~he/
-/-or mended
.z;.v'fp P; I
. '!J.;Jvin!j
7hPP#e #&11
6;ml'P1, .Eh~
cf- U,/p,rH-S'
I
I :lJr/an
II/P$her
;;?(),J7/IJ~
:JJ!I-A~w
Podll"'fffJ?f,
t! gl7J. h/e'1"l! ta.
ve'4/t:-ks /;.,
.resl.;(. ciJ /"8#
~
Councillor Cave stated he has been asked by representatives of Canada Packers to bring to the attention
of the City, the matter of tanker trucks from the Irving firm located directly across from the abattoir on Thorne
Avenue, which trucks have broken portions of the extended pavement in front of the abattoir, and that the repre-
sentatives of Canada Packers would like the City to construct a six to eight foot apron in this area and the said
company will pave the remainde~.,of their parking lot. It was agreed that the Commissioner of Engineering and
Works would be requested to investigate this request and submit a report to Council on the costs of same.
On motion of Councillor Pye
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Market Committee, dated August 27th,
1976, advising that the Committee recommends that the City Market By-Law be amended by inserting the following
~lauses: (1) It shall be unlawful for any tenant of the City Market to obstruct the Deputy Market Clerk or his
representative in the legal performance of his duty, or make any loud noise or disturbance, or use profane,
obscene, impudent or abusive language to the aforementioned representative; and (2) It shall be within the
authority of the Deputy Market Clerk to suspend or cancel the license of any tenant in the City Market, who after
a fair hearing by the City Market Committee has, in its opinion, been found to be undesirable as a tenant of the
said Market -- be referred to the City Solicitor for a report and recommendation to Council.
Councillor Pye, Chairman of the Market Committee, advised that the said amendments are being recom-
in the interest of the preservation of harmony in the City Market.
Mr. Brian Mosher, solicitor, was present at the meeting on behal~ of approximately fifty members of a
private truckers association with respect to the proposed amendment to the City's Zoning By-Law regarding the
parking of commercial vehicles in residential areas. Mr. Mosher outlined the concerns of the truck owners in
this matter, and elaborated on the following problems, which his clients can foresee if the said amendment is
adopted by Council, namely, the increased vandalism of their vehicles, which cost in excess of $30,000.00 each;
the lack of alternate facilities for parking of such vehicles; and the lack of the necessary transportation to
and from their homes. Mr. Mosher noted the high cost of being the owner of a commercial vehicle and stated that
the majority of his clients park their vehicles in the side or rear yards of their properties at present, and
that such vehicles are not unsightly and are the only means of income for these persons. Mr. Mosher concluded
that to prohibit the parking of such vehicles in residential areas would create a very undue hardship to his
clients, and stated that the problem of vehicles left running all night, or for a continuous period of time could
be legislated against by the City. Following the presentation by Mr. Mosher discussion ensued on the matter
under consideration, and Mr. Mosher answered several queries of the Council members present. The Mayor thanked
Mr. Mosher for his presentation and advised that the Council will render a decision, later in the meeting.
Councillor MacGowan asked that an item be added to the agenda of this meeting regarding school trans-
portation.
-,(.
618
Ui:t/tln re
S~~OQ/ b"S cz
~/"oP1 tV ~,ft"t:'
Sc.?b'/S
.s~",'1 .YJ~
{?'14'1,~~~
~/l'o/~~tLs.
(Yd!/,- bti?AC,/;,gS
::Bu~e~
Ce:'<<h_~Ca
A11?~ SC: /t(~
~~,J'f.2Jivd t:l:H,.
'R'61~h- .7Je'p-&:
~
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Kipping ~
RESOLVED that the item regarding school transportation be added
to the agenda of this meeting.
A petition received from parents of twenty-three children who have been denied the use of the
school bus to and from the Ketepec Elementary and Ketepec Intermediate Schools, was circulated to the
Council members.
On motion of CouncIlor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the petition from parents of twenty-three children
who have been denied the use of the school bus to and from the Ketepec Elementary and Ketepec Inter-
mediate Schools, be received and filed and that the Board of School Trustees of District Number 20 be
asked to give consideration to providing transportation for these children for the school year 1976-77.
I
Read a letter from Councillor MacGowan stating that when budget cutbacks were discussed she was
violently opposed to the discontinuance before the end of summer of lifeguard services at the beaches and
was assured that consideration would be given to extending the time if conditions warranted, and that she
thinks it is absolutely ridiculous two weeks before school opens, while the weather was the hottest we
experienced this summer and the water at its best, to discontinue the lifeguard service, and she is
therefore prepared to propose a resolution that in future the beaches be serviced (reduced service if
necessary) with lifeguards until Labour Day, two days before the children return to classes.
I
The Mayor stated that he has been advised by the City Manager that consideration was given to
extending the time for lifeguard service at the City beaches, however, the employees concerned did not
wish to continue in this capacity, when asked by the City.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor MacGowan regarding the
ifeguard service at City beaches be referred to the appropriate City departments for consideration and a
recommendation to Council prior to consideration of the 1977 operating budget.
~
Councillor Gould voted "nay" to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor MacGowan regarding
he deterioration of the King Street West area, stating that something must be done to revitalize the'
area and to serve the needs of the residents, be referred to the Economic Development Committee and the
Planning Department for an immediate assessment and recommendation.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
~r/~J7 ~P~~~I" RESOLVED that the proposed amendment to the City's Zoning By-Law
;<:QJ1/~~,~~_~to restrict the parking of commercial vehicles in residential areas, be referred to the appropriate staff
~~~, ~~ and Committees for further consideration in view of the presentation made at this Council meeting by Mr.
rclrv;..~hif, ' Brian Mosher, solicitor, on behalf of a group of private truck owners in the City, and that a report be
f'~/~/~ I~ submitted in two weeks, prior to further consideration of the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law.
res;/ aJ-ol!flfi1s
Read a letter from Mr. Lorne Kilpatrick, President of Local 443, Bakery and Confectionary
Workers, advising that the Anti-Inflation Act of Canada provides where an Order is made by the Admini-
strator which affects a person, that person can petition the Government to have the Order changed, and
that individual employees of the Atlantic Sugar Refinery have acted under this provision and have pet- .
itioned the Governor in Council of the Federal Government to have the Order of the Administrator which
directed that penalties and pay backs be assessed against employees and the Refinery, changed so that
they will not have deductions made from their earnings and the Union feels the penalty being imposed upon
employees in the Atlantic area is improper and unjustified under the circumstances, and enclosing a copy
of the petition which individual members have completed and forwarded, for Council's information. The
letter further states that the Union would be pleased if the Common Council could indicate its support
for the individual members by forwarding a resolution to the Government in support of the individual
requests of the members of the Local and submits a suggested form of resolution which might be adopted by
the Common Council.
Read a letter from the City Solicitor, dated August 30th, 1976, with regard to the above letter I
from Local 443, Bakery and Confectionary Workers, advising that as this matter falls under the Federat
Statute known as the Anti-Inflation Act, he has studied the letter and the requested resolution for
Council adoption, in the light of Federal Legislation on the matter and it is his opinion that it would
be inappropriate for Council to adopt the resolution as suggested, in that the matter is now being
processed through the available steps of redress provided in the Anti-Inflation Act, however, Council
may, if it so wishes, ask the Common Clerk to forward a letter to the President of Local 443 expressing
Council's sympathy for the difficulties confronting the Local.
/ln6/- JI?~~"'o"
~ c
/H-/ah~/t:" ~.9"
;z?eh'l7-
~~'1~ W~~
:8c:l~r a
H'P,*~1'fS
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above letter from Local 443, Bakery and Con-
fectionery Workers be received and filed and the Common Clerk be asked to forward a letter to the President
of Local 443 expressing Council's sympathy for the difficulties confronting the Local.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
~ RESOLVED that the letter received by the City Manager from the
~~~~h'~/' epartment of Municipal Affairs, dated August 22nd, 1976, advising that Chapter 40, An Act to Amend the
~uv.1/~)'~~;~ !Municipalities Act, was proclaimed August 1st, 1976, a copy of which is enclosed for the City's information,
~. 11'C!~Mhich..clianges xhe;da~e of the holding of civic elections to the month of May rather than June, and which
t?/l//'~ &?~)'o).? Iso includes other amendments, be received and filed.
~ev~,e~~, The Mayor stated he did not feel it was correct procedure for the Department of Municipal
ffairs in forwarding the above letter to the City Manager rather than directly to the Common Council.
~
..4
~
619,
I' ~s
/lS511C. p,C/Y-J].
.;P""'~;;cii'/S Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
CjiI//S ~t?" RESOLVED that the letter from the Architects Association of New Bruns-
~e~~~)p~ ick expressing its concern in two areas of the Council's activities and those of its committees and commissions,
~~~~~J?fP' namely, the calling for proposals for the development of city-owned lands and property does not appear to be
'/eh~f'~~ uniformly conducted, and no opportunity appears to be available for proponents to be present at an official
IS7r~~/tre~ , tender opening; further, there does not appear to be any mandatory requirements for licensed professional in-
el7jP/J.1~~ olvement by architects and/or engineers depending upon the type of tender call, and secondly, the lack of
f7~~J?/~ requirement of licensed professional involvement by architects and/or engineers in projects being submitted for
~~)?~ I. planning approval and/or for a building permit is a ~eal concern and if there is no specific City by-law in
1II~~6f'~,~I'~/' orce, Section 2.7, Sub-section 2.7.5, of the National Building Code clearly empowers the authority having
III'~~~~~' jurisdiction to impose such a requirement, be referred to the City Manager for a complete report to Council.
~~~ On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
City/J1fr.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor
Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. L. W. Crandall, advising that on April
/ ~~_,~,' 2th, 1976 he forwarded a letter to Council outlining a number of questions about the Atlantic National Exhibition
". .~I and on May lOth, 1976 he received a reply which said that his questions had been referred to the special com-
1~~~'-1~'~ mittee set up to look into the operations and history of the Atlantic National Exhibition, which committee he has
;t/~~~X'~ ~ since learned has been abolished, and that as it appears now that since the Councillors are members of the
AV1 . ~ Exhibition Association, the City will be able to furnish the information and he therefore directs the submitted
!!yay-pr questions to the Councillors, be referred to the office of the Mayor for an appropriate response. '
.t:: )('/JI b, /9~
tbUh. ~e
.
II/iI?, ,#/Uh.
Il#,a/'irs-
~I'n. VsAe~
r;.n;;nd 2k
I/i'l/affe
~nfml!?hS
t?P~,.,sa
~i(7J7 :Ji)d.
I.
· f7pP/4hl,
L?~,c-~ /9re:
tJ~mP1,E~
~ ft/~)?%S
1
LEGAL
(7,'6y..5P~.g'-
-.z;SU-MI7t:!?e
. ~/a/P1':>
.
~
Councillor Pye stated he has been attempting to obtain a copy of the by-laws of the Exhibition Associatiol
and a copy of the latest financial report. The Mayor agreed to provide Councillor Pye with the information
requested when it is obtained by him for reply to the above letter from Mr. Crandall.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from The Honourable Horace B. Smith, Minister of
Municipal Affairs, dated August 23rd, 1976, and addressed to the Mayor, advising that a feasibility study has
been undertaken to consider the pros and cons regarding the annexation of the Workmen's Compensation Board and
Usher properties to the Village of Grand Bay and upon consideration of the findings of the Board, the Minister
has concluded that it would not be in the best interest of the City, the Village of Grand Bay, or the Pro-
vince generally, to go forward with the requested annexation and therefore, he has decided not to recommend to
Cabinet the proposed annexation, and he would like to recommend, in relation to the Usher properties, that
Council co-operate with the Grand Bay Council in solving the development problems arising from the fact that Mr.
Usher's properties lie within both municipalities, and that he is convinced that with good will on the part of
both Councils, Mr. Usher's problems can be resolved, and advising that the same recommendation is being made to
the Council of the Village of Grand Bay, be received and filed.
Councillor Cave asked that an item be added to the agenda of this meeting regarding flooding.
On motion of Councillor MacGowan
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the item regarding flooding be added to the agenda of
this meeting.
Councillor Cave stated that over the past week~nd there were twelve to fourteen basements flooded on
Edith Avenue near the corner of Belgrave Street and he would like to have a report from the Commissioner of
Engineering and Works as soon as possible in this regard. Councillor Davis noted that basements in several other
areas of the City were flooded as well and he stated he thinks it is time that the City investigated preventative
measures that could be taken to alleviate this problem, and inform citizens what could be done. He stated he would
like to have information on backup valves for basements, which he understands are not that costly to instal.
Councillor MacGowan stated she would like consideration given to having included in our City by-laws that con-
struction will not be permitted in areas where adjoining properties will be flooded as a result of such con-
struction, and she cited examples in such areas as the Greendale Subdivision and on the Golden Mile.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the matter of flooding of basements in the Edith Avenue area
during the past weekend be referred to the Commissioner of Engineering and Works for a report to Council.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillor M. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated August 26th, 1976,
enclosing a report received from the Commissioner of Finance regarding the Comprehensive General Liability claims
for the first quarter of 1976, advising that he has examined the report prepared by Mr. Park and is recommending
payment of ~2,021.57 to the City's insurers, and stating that Council will recall that the Comprehensive General
Liability Claims for the fourth quarter of 1975, which was submitted to Council in April 1976, and in particular
Claim No. 7515-17457, was not approved as he was looking into the circumstances surrounding that claim, and he is
still researching the matter with the solicitor for the Insurance Company, but having regard to the fact that the
payment has already been made by the Insurance Company, he is recommending that the amount of $440.69 connected
with this claim be approved, and that Council will be further advised on the outcome of his findings concerning
this particular item, be received and filed:
AifJD FURTHER that authority be granted for payment of the sum of $2,021.57 to the City's insurers re-
lative to the Comprehensive General Liability Claims for the first quarter of 1976, and for payment of the sum of
$440.69 with respect to Claim No. 7515-17457 of the Comprehensive General Liability Claims for the fourth quarter
of 1975.
620
C/6y ..JPhc,~
/VeIn - t/n / Pi?
~ m/,/o~6f!?.s'
.sa/a fl/ t3.$"
rp//- bacK
/1~/- InF/a6'
:Ed, ~J"/e-/'
lJ!eklY/ II/.
'POIpr/?~ en
J)/S;n/ss.;;j /
O/'l5:t ~.9' yo.
;::/nahe/~/
S-t-AfrzP/ehts
('/-Iy IlIffJ".
/I1ov~~ n-av6'/-
/""'f e,rpeJ7S6'.
$-k~J? a.~.
Cb,~~
[1~/H/cAs .51
6!,...avt9 /
/I/I?tJMt! ~l"'hH~
Ca-'7c:i>4 '
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Cave ,
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated August 26th,
1976, submitting for Council's information the Brief submitted to the Anti-Inflation Board outlining the
position with respect to the City's commitment to the non-union employees, be received and filed.
At this time Mr. Melvin W. Patriquen enetered the meeting with respect to his dismissal as
a City employee and request for reinstatement, and distributed a prepared statement on his appeal to the
Council members, followed by questions from Council members of Mr. Patriquen. The City Manager than
presented documentation on the dismissal of Mr. Patriquen which was again followed by questions from
Council members. Also present at the meeting during the hearing were Mr. C. E. Nicolle, Director of
Recreation and Parks, and Mr. J. H. Brownell, Assistant Director. Mr. Patriquen withdrew from the
meeting after agreeing that he had had a fair and just hearing.
Messrs. Barfoot, Park, Nicolle and BrowlJell withdrew from the meeting.
On motiOl; of CouncIllor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that upon hearing all the evidence and listening to both
sides, be it resolved that the City Manager's dismissal of Mr. Melvin W. Patriquen was justified under the
circumstances and that the City Manager's decision be confirmed.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
mmon Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Tuesday, the seventh
day of September, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping,
Pye, Parfitt and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor,
H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner
of Engineering and Works, S. Armstrong, Chief Engineer of Operations of
~he Engineering and Works Department, C. E. Nicolle, Director of Recreation
and Parks, D. Buck, Deputy Commissioner of Housing and Renewal Services,
A. Ellis, Building Inspector, P. Clark, Fire Chief, and D. French,
Director of Personnel and Training
The meeting opened with a prayer which was invoked by The Reverend Philip Williston, rector of
St. Mary and St. Bartholomew's Church.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held
on August 23rd last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on
ugust 30th last, be confirmed.
With reference to the financial statements to the end of July which were considered at the
ugust 30th last Council meeting, the Mayor asked that the City Manager supply Council with a report on
Items Number 3693 and 3698 of the said financial statements with reference to moving and travelling
expenses of an individual from Windsor, Ontario. He stated he understands that there was also a loan of
700.00 made by the City to the said individual. Mr. Barfoot agreed to supply the requested report.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
ranted for payment of the following named invoices:-
te hen Construction Co. Ltd. - August 2-13, 1976 (dated August 17, 1976)
August 16-31, 1976 (dated September 1, 1976)
$ 2,890.00
74,070.86
4,041.04
hitticks Sand & Gravel - July 16-31, 1976 (dated July 31, 1976)
llied Chemical Canada Ltd.
dated July 12, 1976
2,834.48
~
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...
· (?~/2f,,!, / .J-
;P~Jec&. .
Fel7ce ./OJ.
~/?Q.Pk?/
he/a
62a;y l4;,aon.
I
~hd'6"n 't5? /
6'~ ~
IF/,.,e~~
FuP.h/75u~
.2)~~es
C'A/Ht2f:f~
6?~ahs
. .4fd:
.:zJ. /4#;e/&
~t5-tL'.
/!ft?YmRI7~
~nzfA1~
I
I/,W~
('0.
/letd#tll"S
Ne;y
tv~~
~ff
.
.z;?-'?/~~-
I ~qW
~p~ .s/:z e,S
4Zf.
~cJ-b7.
621
\., ,.' /
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the
payment of the following construction progress certificate and approved
capital project:-
City Manager, authority be granted for
invoice regarding the following named
Memorial Field
Gary Vincent
Plywood fence
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated August 27, 1976
$ 29,500.00
18,121. 94
2,718.29
Nil
$ 15,403.65
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, tenders be awarded for
supplying furniture and drapes for the new fire station, as shown on the submitted bid summary.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following named invoices:-
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. - August 1-15, 1976 (dated August 24, 1976)
$
5,618.12
8,316.25
8,483.46
13,733.00
Grove Construction Ltd. - dated August 11, 1976
D. Hatfield Ltd. - August 1-15, 1976 (dated August 17, 1976)
August 1-15, 1976 (dated August 17, 1976)
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
payment of the following named invoices:-
orman Donovan Rentals - August 18-September 1 (dated September 2, 1976)
- August 2-17, 1976
$ 11,664.00
9,432.00
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Commissioner of
Finance, authority be granted for payment of the following fees to H. R. Doane & Co., Chartered Accountants,
namely: Water & Sewer Rate Study - $17,891.00; Examination of records for the year 1975; preparation and sub-
mission of Audit Report - $24,000.00, less interim billing paid of $12,000.00, for a balance of $12,000.00.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated September 3rd,
1976, with regard to the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law to amend the text of the By-law with respect to
minimum sizes of lots to be used for on-site sewage disposal, advising that the proposed amendment was referred
to the Legal Department for interpretation of the word "altered" as it appeared throughout the amendment, and it
is his opinion that the word "altered" has a distinct a meaning as each of the words "placed" and "erected" and
if Council wishes present and existing buildings to be exempted from the provisions of the proposed amendment, it
is his opinion that the word "altered" ought to be eliminated from the amendment, and submitting the proposed
amendment which has been prepared based on first reading and includes the word "altered", and further advising
that Council may, if it so wishes, strike the word "altered" from the amendment prior to second reading, be
received and filed and the word "altered" deleted from the amendment prior to second reading of same.
Councillor Davis noted that the proposed amendment was recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee
to conform to Provincial regulations in this regard, and he asked what effect the deletion of the word "altered"
would have in light of any Provincial regulations which might take precedent over City by-laws.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above matter be laid on the table until the City Solicitor
ascertains the Provincial regulations in this regard and their effect on the proposed amendment.
On motion of Councillor Gould
I Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law to Regulate
~~tf~f'~~dl7 the Subdivision of Land Within The City of Saint John" regarding minimum sizes of lots to be used for on-site
~~_~~~ sewage disposal, be read a first time.
~P-C-- S/::?t?S Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision of Land
Within The City of Saint John".
.
//1ar'{-d-
.:8g- ..(a?A/
~~,fifKt:
elk
~
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
, RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated September 3rd,
1976, advising that after careful consideration of the recommendation of the Market Committee to the Council at
its August 30th meeting for certain amendments to the City Market By-Law, he has prepared an amendment to the
said By-Law proposing the addition of a new subsection (3) to Section 3, to read as follows: "(3) It shall be
unlawful for any person in the City Market to obstruct the Deputy Market Clerk or his assistant in the perfor-
622
/J1arffd ~
~~~A1ffzf.. elk.
'!11,.,G/O/'7 U.
7?el-/remed
.JQbn/i:k~
'?ens/'{N7
h're :z;~
//(?4rrql-~leh~
19~f
1?t?lhJ..I!?fl?~ h-r
Q//~n tI//fk
;Po/A~e .:Pept-.
;f~9" lJrrK$
/I" ns- .:lid
PPbc-," re -Hes
/'(7" U:7e p-P
a-ren.as i /"e
(!a'p/~#/ {'(7~
of?6'I'1ii-t-; ".1 eo
,-f/rs.A a~
Se~P/)/ ops I"e
/I'<iilI'P/(J(5K~H/)d.
$~!I"/ .2Jd'.
JU~ a,~er~
,.1fo~/:/e -?OHH? .
/Ilar/#/hId'~ "Ift~
t'/iySohi7/I-Q
~
mance of their duties.", and it is his oplnlon there is no authority to enact the provlslon with respect
to creating a disturbance of using profane language as recommended by the Market Committee, and, as well,
the right of individuals to operate a business in the Market is governed by a leasing arrangement, either
written or verbal, and such lease cannot be terminated on the basis of an opinion of the Market Committee
if such individual is merely undesirable, nevertheless, the verbal arrangement can be terminated by proper
notice, depending upon the rental arrangement, be received and filed:
.
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law Relating to the Market in The
ity of Saint John", be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law Relating to the Market in The
Ci ty of Saint John".
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law
Relating to the Market in The City of Saint John", be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law Relating to the Market in
The City of Saint John".
I
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of Trustees of the
Civic Employees Pension Plan, recommending that Mr. John E. Ewart who was retired from the Fire Department
on January 1, 1976, receive an annual pension of 60% of his salary at the time of his disability retire-
ment of which $11,000.00 will be paid by the Pension Fund and the balance will be paid by the City of
Saint John, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
In reply to a query of Councillor Hodges, Mr. Barfoot advised that in addition to the pension of
$11,000.00, Mr. Ewart will receive an additional $960.00 per annum under the provisions of the Heart and
Lung Act.
.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Board of Trustees of the Civic
Employees Pension Plan, recommending the retirement of Mr. Edison M. McRae, an employee of the Police
Department, effective July 16, 1976 in accordance with Section 9, sub-section 2 of the Pension Act, he
having complied with the provisions of the said sub-section by providing medical reports as to his per-
manent disability, be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
Read a report from Councillor Higgins, Liaison Councillor on the Recreation and Parks Advisory
Board, advising that on April 21st, 1975 Council adopted a report submitted by the said Board which I
recommended an implementation formula to cover the policy adopted by Council on April 1st, 1974, which
formula calls for the City, through tax-based revenue, to pay for all capital costs and two-thirds of the
operating costs for age-limit scheduled activities, while adults are required to pay full operating costs,
and that such a policy would have minor hockey teams paying $13.00 per hour (prime time) and $7.00 per
hour (non-prime time) for the 1976-1977 minor hockey schedule (rental rates last season were $12.00 and
$6.00); and further advising that at a recent meeting with the presidents (or their representatives) of
the three local minor hockey associations, the minor hockey executives were unanimously opposed to any
increase in fees, but Councillor Higgins believes the two-thirds City share as a rental policy is more
than fair. The said report recommends that the Common Council confirm the policy that calls for the City,
through tax-based revenue, to pay for all capital costs and two-thirds of the operating costs for age7
limit scheduled activities, while adults are required to pay full operating costs.
Discussion ensued on the recommendation contained in the said report from the Recreation and
Parks Advisory Board, during which several Council members expressed the view that the said increase in
rental fees is a fair and nominal increase. Councillor Pye contended that the rates should be $11.00 and
$5.00, or at least reduced by $1.00 in each category, as many children have stopped playing minor hockey
because of the rate increase, and he feels this increases juvenile delinquency in our City, through non-
participation in sports. Mr. Nicolle advised that there has been a very good response from the citizens
to the three new arenas and that there has been a considerable increase in pleasure skating by adults at
these rinks. He noted that minor hockey participation was down about 10% last season, although it is,
expected that this figure will increase this season.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED tbat as recommended by the Recreation and Parks Advisory
Board, the Council confirm the policy that calls for the City, through tax-based revenue, to pay for all
capital costs and two-thirds of the operating costs for age-limit scheduled activities at the City arenas,
while adults are required to pay full operating costs.
I
Councillor Pye voted "nay" 'to the above motion.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from 11rs. F. Carpenter, 49 Allingham
Crescent, on behalf of residents of the Danells Drive and Allingham Crescent area, regarding the lack of
school bus transportation for students attending Havelock School, be received and filed and a copy forwarded
to the Board of School Trustees for their information.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the letter from Mrs. Judy Cameron regarding the
location of their mobile home on property behind the Maritimer Motel, Ocean Westway, be received and filed
and referred to the Legal Department.
.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. W. K. Usher, with regard to a
~
,..-
t(/, ~ !/sJe r
1Pfp,.l7qJ ~,,~
.me:>~t~p'/ vn,
f?n ea17~ko
6>1" e~J.2
t'e:>h.7~. k'hy-~
~ /e/c>/Jfs
111.;)/'>/&5 J.
rhIP.>1u./C-
2V~~p;...
A?e kh.-It
C1,'-b-y /Il,:?'r.
I
.
/97'
I C'a"P/lfH/
Jtt/ f? nf:; :rz, -
~r~m~e
pr~nt9'$s
,( ()~ AO/?/t?
??tL . '
ff.Rff/a ,
"~~/R6' e:>#
.
I
I
?arl/h
CO/?~ 're.
I/e/'//C: '{?S /;.,
.1"e:5/ . a)7e,
/fJp-f"f?i!i1tT
.23(-Qs'/I'8J?s-
?O~
~
62:3
<>
Council resolution of December 3rd, 1973 which referred to the Works Department for a report a brief from residents
of Morna Drive and Morna Crescent, requesting that no further construction be authorized on, or extension of,
Morna Drive until the conditions as outlined are fulfilled, advising that the requests of the said residents have
not been carried out, be referred to the Commissioner of Engineering and Works for a report to Council.
Read a letter from Mr. Harley J. Thibault advising that in June 1976 he obtained a building permit to
build a home in Acama~, however, for the reasons given he was unable to build this house, and is therefore
requesting return of the building permit fee paid in this regard.,
Mr. Barfoot noted that the City has no definite policy at present with regard to the return of permit
fees, and he stated he would suggest that the City look at adopting a policy of only retaining that portion of
the permit fee which relates directly to the administrative costs of issuing the permit.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above letter be referred to the City Manager for a report
to Counc il.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the report prepared by the Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, dated September 3, 1976, on the progress of the 1976 capital works programme up to August 31st, 1976,
which had been forwarded to the Council members for information, be added to the agenda of this meeting.
Considerable discussion ensued between the Council members and Mr. MacKinnon on the above progress
report and Mr. MacKinnon was commended on the report. In reply to a statement of the Mayor that he understands
that several of the roads in the Lorneville and Martinon areas will be included for resurfacing in next year's
capital budget, Mr. MacKinnon added that they will be submitted in the capital budget, and will be done if
approved by the Council. Mr. MacKinnon noted that his department does not deviate from the approved capital
programme unless requested to do so by Council.
In reply to' a query from Councillor Parfitt, Mr. Barfoot advised that the staff has examined the matter
of applying for L.I.P. grants and has determined that it is difficult for the City to get involved in this
programme because the limitations upon participation really disquality a City-staffed project.
In reply to a query from Councillor Gould, Mr. MacKinnon advised that work on Chesley Drive which is
required as a result of the laying of the Irving oil pipeline will hopefully be started this week or next week by
the said firm.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the report prepared by the Commissioner of Engineering and
Works, dated September 3rd, 1976, on the progress of the 1976 capital works programme up to August 31st, 1976, be
received and filed.
Mr. MacKinnon outlined the resurfacing and rebuilding work which will be undertaken this week on Loch
Lomond Road, between McDonald Street and Champlain Drive, and the changes in traffic which will be undertaken as
a result of such construction work.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~
. Common ~
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the thirteenth day of
September, A. D. 1976, at 7.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
~
Councillors Cave, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, Parfitt;
A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, F. Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis,
Assistant to the City Manager, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of Engineering
and Works, M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development,
D. French, Director of Personnel and Training, and E. Ferguson, Chief of
Police
The meeting opened with silent prayer.
The Mayor pointed out that a few nights ago, the Council had a group of truck drivers'before it in the
Council Chamber who were worried about the effect of the by-law regarding parking their trucks. He stated that
since that date, he has had a call from the manager of the Moffatt Brothers Transport at Woodville Road (also
eferred to as the Bay Shore Road) near the Canadian Pacific Railway tracks, claiming that this site can ac-
624
~
C'.~~r/'9'prMK
::?f?6
II/Of/IJ1ff
eK,PtJI'7SeS
JJr/:-n 4J&;Isk
Io/€ilh~. /ld v/:s_
~r.>7 nor '
Re-~oJ7lng
..2Jo~as
M,'ficm
commodate over fifty trucks and that the greatest number of trailers the company will have in this yard at
anyone time would be three (the said company does business between Saint John and Newfoundland), and this
company is willing to rent space at the yard to trucks - the area is not fenced but it is lighted and ,the
company has not had any problem - the company will rent space to trucks for $10.00 per month. He added
that for anyone interested, the telephone number of the said company is 672-9220, and that he thinks that
was a nice offer from a citizen.
.
Referring to recent reports that the Cherrybrook Zoo is leaving Saint John, the Mayor stated
that he has been told that the Government is going to support them in their move to Moncton - however,
this is not a fact as the Government says it has not stated that - the Government will help them in any
way, financially. He stated that we in the City of Saint John, for all citizens who are interested in the
Zoo, have offered space to those people who operate the Zoo at Rockwood Park at no cost to the Zoo - the
only tie we had was that they would look after the City's animals that belong to Rockwood Park as well as
their own animals; however, the Zoo operators have turned this offer down saying that there is pollution
in the air in that vicinity and it is not good for the animals. He stated that since then, he has con-
tacted Base Gagetown and asked that they support us in applying to the Minister of National Defence for
land that the City might lease - they did come back and say that it would be possible possibly to make
arrangements to lease land in the area where the ski hill is at Douglas Mountain - but, this area ap-
parently is not large enough and the people operating the Zoo for some reason or other would like to get
to Moncton. The Mayor advised that all he can say is that it is a costly operation to operate that Zoo
each year - it will cost a little over $100,000.00 to do so each year - and we in the City of Saint John
cannot seem to find any way that the City can finance it at this time or possibly even later.
I
I
The Mayor recalled that last week, he questioned the move concerning an individual who is
employed by the City of Saint John. He stated that in this regard, he has been told that there was a
grant made to the individual and it is not uncommon to do this (the grant in question was $1,000.00) to
help move, and there was a loan of $700.00, which he thinks is a new procedure, possibly, but that $700.00
will be paid back to the City; therefore, the said amount included the extra cost of the move plus the
transportation of the individual here, personally.
The Common Clerk advised that with regard to the proposed re-zoning of property owned by Mr.
Douglas Mitton at 187 Golden Grove Road opposite the intersection of Westmorland Road and next to the
entrance to the Golden Grove Heights, to permit the location thereon of an auto body repair shop, the .
necessary advertising was completed, and no written objection was received. It was noted that no person
was present :0 offer objection to the said re-zoning.
Mr. Brian Mosher, Barrister, representing Mr. Douglas Mitton, was present and distributed copies
of a map which shows in red the property Mr. Mitton desires be re-zoned, and other properties along the
Golden Grove Road which are already zoned "I-I", and he exhibited a picture of Mr. Mitton's lot at 187
Golden Grove Road looking at the front of this property from Westmorland Road, pointing out that this lot
is presently surrounded by trees, roads and rights-of-way and that it is a very clean, well-kept lot and
contains Mr. Mitton's house and two garages, and that it is hardly possible to see another property from
this particular lot because of the surrounding trees. He made the point that along the north side of
Golden Grove Road on which Mr. Mitton is located can be found a service station, a tavern, a car repair
shop, a restaurant, a trucking firm, and Grove Construction. He stated that Mr. Mitton has canvassed the
neighbours in this area, and, to his knowledge, no-one who is anywhere near his property objects to this
proposed re-zoning; there would be very little traffic created by Mr. Mitton operating this repair shop
- at the most, it would be one car per day and there would not be any parking problem or a number of
vehicles located on his lot because of this business because Mr. Mitton can only do one car per day at
the maximum. He advised that the garage that is shown in the middle of the photograph would be moved to
the rear of the other garage, so, actually, only one garage would then be seen, instead of two garages. .
In reply,to queries from ,Council member,s, Mr. Mosher advised that his client is operating at this lot
at the present time, and has only owned the property less than two years, and besides himself, 11r. Mitton
employsc one person, and if the proposed re-zoning is approved he will expand the operation to employ
one more person; the petition that his client prepared as a result of canvassing the people in the area
was presented to the Planning Advisory Committee; when repairing a car, it would be located in the garage
and would not be seen from the street; Mr. Mitton does not have any scrap material from this repair work
around his property as he disposes of all such material, and he keeps a very well-kept lot. Councillor
Higgins expressed the view that although he has no doubt but that Mr. Mitton will maintain this as a very
well-kept lot, if Mr. Mitton were given permission to have the requested re-zoning for the purpose stated,
it would be establishing a precedent. He asked that Mr. Mitton relate how well-kept this property will
be. Mr. Mitton advised that he does not do repair work resulting from collision work other than perhaps
for a friend who has an accident, and therefore no parts such as fenders, et cetera would be involved with
this repair garage - he just does paint jobs and rust and dents - he does not have the facilities or the
equipment to do repair jobs from collisions and he does not plan on doing such repair work from collisions.
He stated that he works there part-time and he has a full-time employee; he expects to keep the lot a'lot
cleaner than is shown on the photograph and to paint the garages.
I
.
Consideration was given to the letter dated August 31st, 1976 from the Planning Advisory Com-
mittee which recommends that the above proposed re-zoning not be carried out for part of the said lot ,at
187 Golden Grove Road from "RS-2" Suburban Residential to "I-I" Light Industrial classification for the 1
use of two existing garages to be joined together for an auto body and repair shop, and which notes that
the lot presently contains a three family dwelling and has two garages respectively 24 x 26 feet and 20 x
24 feet which would result in a 24 x 46-foot auto body repair shop if permitted. The letter states that
the Planning staff found contrary to what the applicant says that: "the surrounding area is in various
residential zones - 'RS-2', 'RS-l' and 'RM-l'; the nearest 'I-I' Light Industrial zones on the north side
of Golden Grove Road are 3,600 feet easterly (Grove Construction) and 3,600 feet westerly opposite Park
Hill Drive; the nearest 'B-2' General Business zone is about 4,100 feet westerly on the north side of
Golden Grove Road; in fact, no other business or industrial zones fall within a circle centered at the
subject site and having a radius of 3;600 feet.". The letter further states that the Planning Advisory I
Committee felt that this is a relatively key location in a developing residential area being as it is,at
the intersection of Westmorland Road and Golden Grove Road and next to Roxbury Drive which is a main
entrance to the Golden Grove Heights development, and that the Committee's view is that this is no place
in which an auto body shop should be operating or permitted.
On motion of Councillor. A. . V.incent--
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the above named letter from the Planning Advisory
Committee be received and filed:
AND FURTHER that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the property known as 187 Golden Grove Road
opposite the intersection of Westmorland Road and next to the entrance to the Golden Grove Heights, from
"RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential district to "I-I" Light Industrial district, be read a
first time.
.
~
,...
.
'Re- ;ZpJ7/Hff
1.J)f?Uf(as
1f1/fi'Ph
I
.
p!Q/'}J'7.
/}dr/s.t;
~-~.,:Z
l/l.ss~/ ~
/61.k~liiJ-b/<7'"
4L
.
.zf?n/~!I
$!/-ho1W
1s.J:~$r
:zJet/lJ?/. $CI
'Phase ..L
I' 6s6-2>N6"h
h1e~
.
~:as~ ~t?v.
men(-@.!I'..(.
~
625
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Higgins and Kipping voting
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the property known as 187
Golden Grove Road opposite the intersection of Westmorland Road and next to the entrance to the Golden Grove
Heights, from "RS-2" One- and Two-Family Suburban Residential district to "I-I" Light Industrial district, be
read a second time.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Higgins and Kipping voting
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
The Common Clerk stated that advertising was completed with regard to the proposed re-zoning requested
by Associated' Laboratories Limited of the vacant lot on the northeasterly corner of Wentworth Street and Broad-
view Avenue to permit the erection of a one-storey dental laboratory employing about twelve persons. No person
was present to speak to the said proposed re-zoning, and the Common Clerk advised that no written objection was
received. Consideration was given to the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated September 9th, 1976
which recommends against the change in the Municipal Development Plan, the South End Neighbourhood Development
Plan and the requested re-zoning of the said vacant lot for the said proposed purpose, and which outlines the
Committee's reasons for making this recommendation. The letter advises that the said application is for a change
of one small lot to a different type of zone from surrounding lots, and this is a case of "spot zoning" which the
said Committee cannot recommend.
Councillor Parfitt advised that on speaking with two of the five members of the Housing Committee of
the South End Development Corporation she learned that they would have no objection to the above named proposal
but they were taking it for granted that the Planning Advisory Committee would have sent letters out to people in
that area. Mr. Zides replied that such letters were not sent out. He added that if these people want to change
the South End Neighbourhood Development Plan (whiCh the Council adopted together with the Municipal Development
Plan, and regarding which no change is recommended by the Planning Committee) they should be approaching the
Common Council and they should not be doing it by individual "spot" re-zoning.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended in the letter dated September 9th, 1976 from
the Planning Advisory Committee, with regard to the application from Associated Laboratories Limited for re-
zoning of the vacant lot on the northeasterly corner of Wentworth Street and Broadview Avenue from "RM-l", Three-
torey Multiple Residential district to "B-1" Local Business district or other appropriate zone which would
permit the erection of a one-storey building for use as a dental laboratory, a change not be made in the Municipal
Development Plan, the South End Neighbourhood Development Plan and the said re-zoning application be refused.
The Mayor asked if Associated Laboratories Limited have been told that there are other areas in the
city that have been turned over to the Commissioner of Economic Development to find another area for them, so
that someone will be looking for them to develop something in Saint John, such as in one of the industrial parks;
has Mr. Zides recommended to Mr. Baird that this company find a spot possibly in the industrial park or some
other place. Mr. Zides made negative reply, stating that his staff has talked with representatives of this
company, suggesting to them that they might look at other spots but this is a ready-made spot taken.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Parfitt voting "nay".
The Common Clerk stated that with regard to the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law for the East
Development Scheme, Phase I, Stage I, to permit the Common Councilor the Planning Advisory Committee to grant a
variance with respect to the side yard requirement of Lot 72, the necessary advertising was made and no written
objections were received. It was noted that no person was present to speak either for or against this proposed
amendment.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee with regard
to the above named proposed amendment, advising that the Committee recommends that the Zoning By-Law for the
Saint John East Development Scheme, Phase I, enacted by Common Council on June 26th, 1974 be amended with respect
o Lot 75, Boyaner Crescent, and further advising that Schedule B of the Development Scheme calls for a 25-foot
front yard setback for this lot and that a sub-division plan has been submitted for the two lot parts of Lot 75
based on the actual location of the semi-detached dwelling and that the building is located 25.2 feet rather than
25 feet as shown in the Scheme and is very slightly off the alignment of the lot; and further advising that the
Committee recommends that Schedule B of the said Scheme be amended by replacing "25" as front yard setback for
Lot 75 with "25.2", be received and filed and authority be granted to advertise the necessary amendment in this
regard.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled "A Law to Amend Saint John East Development
Area, Phase One, Stage One, Development Scheme By-Law", insofar as it concerns adding to Section 3.3.2.4.2, on
page 7, the words "except for lot 72 where the side yards on the westerly side are respectively 4.6 feet and 2.95
feet at the front and rear corners of the house", be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend Saint John East Development Area, Ph"se One,
Stage One, Development Scheme By-Law".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled "A Law to Amend Saint John East
Development Area, Phase One, Stage One, Development Scheme By-Law, insofar as it concerns adding to Section
626
~
k_1 //~.2,
/1m~~hS/t-
r/h/t?YI
CI'fw /n;J;ihS';
7/_6~.
.2?u.s 6ydt!".n7
"-~
3.3.2.4.2, on page 7, the words "except for lot 72 where the side yards on the westerly side are res-
pectively 4.6 feet and 2.95 feet at the front and rear corners of the house", be read a second time.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend Saint John East Development Area, Phase
One, Stage One, Development Scheme By-Law".
Mr. Robert B. Mullin, President of Local 1182, Amalgamated Transit Union, was present at the
meeting accompanied by several fellow employees of City Transit Limited. He read a brief from the said
Union which expresses the Union's concern for the employees of City Transit Limited, the brief reading as
follows: -
"1. Our main concern is job security for all employees of this company, a reasonable working day at a
air and just wage rate.
2. A garage suitable for this type of operation with the welfare of our maintenance employees our first
objective, as well as clean busses, properly maintained which is impossible at our present location.
3. To improve the bus service by re-scheduling of the service throughout and maintaining an efficient
service to all areas.
4. To give senior citizens a type of fare structure that would be more in line for those on fixed
incomes such as half fare between the hours of 9.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. daily.
5. To up-grade the whole system to a point that the City would be proud of its transportation system.
6. To look for sources of revenue by advertising and promoting charters, etc.
7. We consider the employees have subsidized the company for years by working for less wages than the
industry has paid in comparison for the same work across Canada; as an added insult we were rolled back
the 15~ per hour by the Anti-Inflation Board on our present contract even while we are still at the foot
of the list.
8. Since the company has expressed a desire to give up the Transportation System and are applying for a
further cut back of service to the amount of 200,000 miles per years on a service that is now intolerable
to the travelling public we ask Council to give this situation their immediate attention."
In reply to the Mayor's request that point number 8 in the above brief be clarified, and the
Mayor's question as to whether such statement means that the company wants to go out of business, Mr.
Mullin made affirmative answer, stating that this is his understanding. The Mayor commented that the
Common Council has not heard that. Councillor Gould added that when we had our meeting that question was
asked directly to the President of the company by one Councillor - "Do you wish to give it up?" - and the
answer was, "No". He asked if Mr. Mullin recalls that statement. Mr. Mullin stated that he recalls that,
and he was present at that meeting. Councillor Gould asked if they (the company) have changed their
opinion. Mr. Mullin replied that the company has, to the Union (the employees), and that this may not be
an official thing - but, the company has expressed the desire to the said Union. Councillor Cave stated
that he does not think the Council should discuss this matter, and he pointed out that a transportation
study has been made and finalized and will be dealt with at The Cities of New Brunswick next month - this
study is for the Province of New Brunswick - and that he does not think the Council should discuss the
subject here this evening - he does not think the Council can do so. The Mayor replied that he thinks
what the Council is looking for is: they made a presentation, passed forward some information, expressed
to the public their desire to give good service - and this the Council appreciates ~ and The Cities of New
Brunswick have asked for a report on the transportation system throughout New Brunswick as it affects the
cities and towns, and that report will be discussed openly at the next meeting of The Cities of New
Brunswick, and some of our people sit on that committee; the next meeting of the said organization has
been deferred from the originally set dates of September 17th and 18th to later dates. The Mayor advised
that the Council will take the said brief under consideration and it is pleased to have the report.
Councillor Hodges noted that there have been some remarks made in the local newspaper concerning
the meetings the Council had with Mr. Gerald Lawson regarding this transportation matter in Saint John and
that there have been some editorials on it. He stated that he thinks it is only right now that the
Council should tell the City's side of the story as the Council understands it - at least, he would like
to state that as he understands this problem. The Mayor replied that if it refers to that meeting which
was a meeting requested by the company and by the Union, and which was a closed meeting... Councillor
Hodges interjected that it was in the newspaper - that they (the company) published it - he has the
newspaper clipping of the article. The Mayor asked for the City Solicitor's opinion as to whether the
Council could discuss the said meeting. Mr. Rodgers replied that he was under the impression that the
meetings held until now have been of a private nature with certainly no understanding of the matters being
unilaterally to be debated publicly and public statements issued by the Council at this point. The Mayor
stated he thinks that at a later time Councillor Hodges could discuss the subject. Councillor Hodges
stated that he wanted the public to know that the remarks that were being made are not the opinions of the
Council members, and that as a Councillor, he does not agree with the remarks that were made in the
newspaper by Mr. Gerald Lawson. He stated that he thinks, if necessary, the Council should go back to the
meeting it had less than a year and a half ago with the Irvings on this same question. He stated he feels
that if they are going to publish their side of the conversation, then the Council should publish its side
of it, because he has nothing to hide and he does not like that type of a method.
With reference to point number 8 contained in the above brief, "the company has expressed a
desire to give up the Transportation System and are applying for a further cut back of service to the
amount of 200,000 miles per year.. .", Councillor Green advised that since the students have returned to
school this past week he has received several calls regarding the students not being able to get in the
busses and being left standing at the bus stops with full busses passing them by. He felt that the
officials of City Transit Limited must realize that their paying passengers, even though there is not a
subsidy, there should be busses enough that the young children, particularly when it is raining and so on,
that they are standing and getting wet, the bus goes by that is completely loaded - no fault of the drivers
because they cannot put them in. He stated that on top of that, he has had a call from another school
teacher going to a school which is in the Milford area and she could not get in the bus - she has to catch
the bus around 7.00 a.m. to get to Milford in Saint John West. He stated that the situation is serious -
either we are going to have a bus transpprtation system, or we are not - and he feels that this thing is
being kicked around too much. He stated that he realizes that the transit study is now available and we
have received it - as a matter of fact, he believes the Council should get cracking as soon as possible
and get something out of this because if it is going to be sudsidized then let us get it going so that the
employees know where they stand, and also, the public.
Councillor Parfitt recalled that for several years she has been urging support for the bus
service, by the travelling public, and stated she is wondering if there is going to be any educational
programme or incentives for people to use the busses more. 11r. Mullin stated that he appreciates this
interest and that this is why he is before the Council: the situation is becoming intolerable daily and
they, as employees, consider that they may not be able to wait for the Six Cities report - they need
something done immediately - where they are losing men, the situation is not good on the streets as far as
transportation goes. He stated that in the case of a lady who spoke to him today, who lives in the North
End and works at the Kwik Pik, it costs her 50~ to go to work but it costs her $2.50 to come home, which
means it costs her $3.00 a day, and she needs the money, which is why she is working. He stated that he
realizes fully that things (regarding the transportation system) are going from bad to worse, and this is
."
I
1
.
I,
.
1
1
.
~
,..-
6Q7,
.
I
C'/t-!j
7~h.$/r
/-t"d
IEus
.:5J"5z!en,
.
1
.
I
;{'Q~/ //~
I/lMCi1./. 7h
S/t- t/n/ &In
7endt2.11
acc~d
~r#/4re
S q&(" ...(~
..<'q>J?.,.(~.
. /;"'l!?~a S"
...
why the said Union is before Council, asking for assistance and asking for something to be done because it is
becoming intolerable, daily; their situation where they are as the garage is ridiculous - there is mud and dirt,
their busses are filthy dirty - they realize this - they apologize for it, but it does not help the situation,
one bit; they need a garage - they need a lot of things - and with the winter coming on the situation is going to
get worse, not better - that is why they are here. He expressed the group's appreciation for this hearing before
Council, who are their elected representatives, adding that it is because the Council members are their elected
representatives that they were before Council.
Councillor Kipping felt that the whole problem should be brought to a head, and very quickly because
the longer it drags on the worse it is for all concerned - not just the company and the employees, but the public
and the public is suffering, probably, more or certainly as much as the employees, and the employees are cer-
tainly suffering. He noted that the matter is in the hands of the Transportation Committee now, and he felt that
we should be asking that Committee for their report and then get on with it, very, very quickly and not tie it up
any more on studies and re-studies and too much - we know the situation, we know the attitude of the company, and
he thinks the Council has to know pretty well where it stands as a company and the matter should be brought to a
head, right quick.
Councillor Higgins noted that Mr. Mullin at this meeting, as he did at the private meeting we had, has
expressed very eloquently the concern of the bus drivers and what have you. He added that he thinks it should be
made very clear to the public that this is not a City-run Union that is coming in here talking about bad wages,
bad working conditions, and any number of things: the City entered into a contract with a private company that
pays the wages of the bus company employees - he knows the condition of the garage and the wage structures they
have, the condition of the busses, and what have you - this is actually between the Transit Union and City
Transit Limited - the said Transit Union group is coming to Council to let the people know what is going on, in
the group's opinion, and he appreciates that, very much - many Unions do not do that; but he wants to make it
very clear that the Council does not have any great influence to say it agrees with this group and is going to
really go out and raise the wages and build a new garage. He stated that he wants to make it clear because he
thinks that people are getting the idea that the City is dragging its feet with the said Transit Union group. He
pointed out that the City has a contract with the said company and they say they shall provide adequate bus
service until we do not know when, so the Council is now involved with the Motor Carrier Board, legality, the
report of the study that might lead to subsidies and improved bus service throughout the system. He stated that
he would simply say that the Transit Union's report at this meeting of Council makes it obvious to the public of
the deep concern of the drivers and mechanics of this Union. In reply, Mr. Mullin advised that the Union group
was not present at this meeting complaining about their contract - they negotiated a contract which was quite
reasonable and suitable after plenty of time - ,they were rolled back by the Anti-Inflation Board which was an
insult to them - but it is through no fault of the City; the Union group is stating their situation because they
wish the Council to know just how the situation is at the present time and if the Council members are getting
calls about the poor bus service, then they know why.
Councillor A. Vincent asked when will the Council members be meeting on a special committee with The
Cities of New Brunswick to find out what approach we are going to take, because he understands it is not going to
be ready for another six months. The Mayor replied that the transportation study report is ready and it is just
a matter of being compiled - it is several books, and we are going to meet with The Cities association within the
next two to three weeks. Councillor A. Vincent stated that he wonders, when we get the said study report, if it
is going to be any good to us. The Mayor replied that he has not seen the said report himself, and he trusts
that the said report will be of value to us, and we have to trust that it will be. Councillor A. Vincent requested
that the Mayor try to have a date set, and when a firm date is received, that the Mayor notify the Transit Union
so they will know the date is set. The Mayor replied that the date will be set for the meeting and the Transit
Union will be and he thinks we would invite them to come to the meeting.
Mr. Frank Bailey, a member of the delegation which accompanied Mr. Mullin at this meeting, advised that
the Transit Union has been waiting for two years for The Cities of New Brunswick (regarding the said transport-
ation study report) and cannot wait any longer. He stressed that the said Union was before the Council in this
matter as a Union because its members have no place else to go. He stated that regarding the extent to which the
Council can go with reference to the points made in the above named brief, the Transit" Union would like to be
informed now as this is of the greatest importance; if it is the laid-down policy to stand "pat" on this vital
community service, they would like to know now, and then the Union members can go on to Unemployment Insurance
benefits, Canada Pension, and other type of employment, maybe Welfare; they have subsidized the company in many
ways through wages - they have no pension plan - working conditions are deplorable - and a contract they must
honour until 1977, July 1st; they are not before the Council over wages or working conditions, but for job
security. He stated that the end is in sight for security, pay cheques, and the future of their membership as a
Union.
Councillor Cave advised that the Common Council is very much concerned about the City Transit operation
but there is not a thing the City can do with it until it gets the said study, and that is all he is concerned
with; the Council gets the study and it has to go into it, now - hoepfully, we come up with something, but until
that time, we are just having discussion on the subject.
The Mayor noted that at one time Mr. Mullin stated that it is as important to have this type of trans-
port as it is to have fire and police, and he stated that he thinks the Council agrees with Mr. Mullin's statement.
He added that the Council is going to do everything in its power but the Council has this (study) before it and
what the Council is looking for is a means of getting some financial support and it has to come from higher
governments than the Common Council; in the meantime, we are going to fight every way we can through our com-
mittee to make sure that the bus service is not reduced. He stated that that is all he can say, for now. He
thanked the Transit Union for its presentation.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the above named brief from the Amalgamated Transit Union,
Local 1182 regarding the operation of City Transit Limited, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
the only tender received, namely, that of Maritime Sod Limited in the amount of $31,052.00, for landscaping the
areas around the three City-owned community arenas, be accepted.
Councillor Cave stated that he knows the above landscaping work should be done, but he is wondering if
it should be laid over until next year wait until next year to do it, having regard to the fact that the City
this year did a big paving job regarding these arenas. Councillor Hodges reminded the meeting that the Council
ade a commitment to the people out there that it would be done, and stated that having given his word, he, as a
Councillor, intends to keep it; he also reminded the Council members that this expenditure has been budgeted for.
The Mayor spoke in agreement with Councillor Cave's viewpoint, noting that the Council promised it would do the
work and that he does not think the Council said the work would be done this year; he added that it is only
628
~
t'Yap/t..,/ R!:.O-
Jec'&-
Ifl//I/qei////e
$ee.v.. "" ~~h~
/},2J.I: ./-6;(.
.:z;,~~F
C',;Ju,5e way
1I/..lJ. lei Co. ,/e:d
/lJ}.T -<-i-d'.
;ftllb;.~~. Ce-//
Sew.er 2.
74>$';;>$ .?;;F4e-:sz::
.s~/e.5 /If-d.
sensible to do the work when the City can afford to do it, and he personally does not think the City can
afford to do it when there are other things that seem to him are a little more important. In reply to
Councillor Gould's query, Mr. Barfoot advised that the sum of $22,000.00 was budgeted for landscaping :as
compared with the above tendered price which is higher than the estimate, this higher amount being because
on full design of the job it was found that a larger area of landscaping as required, the contract in-
cludes a full year of maintenance and replacement of planting materials, it includes more trees and shrubs
than the first estimate, and it includes actually an increase in the price of planting materials from ;the
estimate which was prepared in the spring. Councillor Gould noted that this is well within the total
budget that the City had planned for this type of operation this year. Mr. Barfoot confirmed that this
observation is correct. Councillor Gould asked if the Council did not also pass a budget which included
this amount. Mr. Barfoot confirmed that there was a total budget passed. Councillor Cave pointed out
that, by the same token, that $22,000.00 can be used elsewhere - for instance, it could be used on the
Golden Grove Road. Councillor Gould replied that that is true of every amount of money we spend in Common
Council.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Parfitt and Cave
voting "nay"".
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificate regarding the following named
capital project:-
1.
Millidgeville Sewage Treatment Plant
A. D. 1. Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 5,
dated July 31, 1976
$ 12,125.99
$ 3,972.75
Councillor A. Vincent recalled that a teach-in was promised by this Council, the Council having
received eight or nine pages regarding the above named matter, but that the teach-in has not been held.
He stated that he asked for such teach-in and was promised it, and that he would like A. D. I. Ltd. to
come to it; he stated he does not think that the piece of paper that he got was worth $2,000.00 let alone
$12,000.00, now, and that he has to vote against this because he is afraid somebody may take a citizen's
action for spending money and getting nothing for our dollars. He added that we just cannot continue to
spend taxpayers' money and not see anything - and he hid that piece of paper - and he knows he can be
sued, what he is saying, but his lawyer tells him that defence from libel is truth, that the amount of
work we got if we went by the scale of consultants they are well overpaid - he wants to know what we are
getting for this kind of money. In reply, Mr. Barfoot stated that the Council has requested a teach-in
and he must apologize for not having arranged it earlier - he will attempt to do so. Councillor A.
Vincent asked for the conversation that took place between a man in the A. D. I. office and some City
staff about Vincent wanting a teach-in; he added that it came back to him from reliable sources, and that
he just may ask for an inquiry under oath, because he took an oath to guard the taxpayers' dollars to the
best of his ability and while he is only going to be sitting on this Council a few months more he is not
going to give money away without service because he would be the first one that would be put in gaol. He
stated that he wants a teach-in, and before voting on the above motion, he wants to know when the teach-in
would be held. Mr. Barfoot replied that we will try to arrange it next Monday. Councillor A. Vincent
stated that he just wants to know if there is any truth that A. D. I. Ltd. says there is nothing in their
contract that they have to have a teach-in with Councillor Albert Vincent. He added that he is not asking
for the teach-in for himself, but for all the Council members because we have a real tiger by the price-
tag out there and these consultants are being well paid for it.
Question being taken, Councillors A. Vincent and Green voting "nay", the motion was carried.
.
1
I
.
I
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to have the terms of reference of what contract
the City entered into on this particular case, and he asked that he have the said terms of reference
before next week's teach-in. The Mayor replied: "fair ball". Councillor Kipping asked if that could be
part of the teach-in, as well. .
I
$ 54,294.00
54,294.00
Nil
$ 27,147.00 *
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
given for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engin-
eering services in connection with projects that have been undertaken under the Department of Regional
Economic Expansion programme:-
1.
Courtenay Bay Causeway
(a) New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited
Ductwork Installation
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated March 19, 1976
*New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited's share of cost
(b) A. D. I. Ltd.
Engineering Services for Western Approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 46,
dated May 31, 1976
$185,012.89
$ 290 . 61
(c)
A. D. 1. Ltd.
Engineering Services for Western Approaches
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 47,
dated June 30, 1976
$185,303.50
$ 311. 96
l1ilford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer - Supply of Pump Station "B"
Thomas Industrial Sales Ltd.
Total value of contract $ 27,583.00
.
....
"...
628.
.
1
I
.
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 1,
dated August 17, 1976
27,583.00
4,307.45
Nil
$ 23,275.55
In reply to queries from the Mayor and Councillor M. Vincent regarding the above named progress payments,
Mr. Barfoot advised that the New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited is billing the City for the amount the City
is recovering from the Department of Regional Economic Expansion and it is for work done on the installation of
duct system on the approaches to the Courtenay Bay causeway - that is, the City will not be paying anything at
all towards the cost of this New Brunswick Telephone Company, Limited work - everything the City is paying the
company for the City will be claiming through D.R.E.E. on the terms of the cost-sharing on this particular
D.R.E.E. agreement; the claiming procedure is that the City pays and then claims - the City has to pay in order
to support the claim with a voucher. Councillor Gould asked if the City is going to claim for the money it loses
in interest during the time the City's money is out of its bank account in payment of the said $27,147.00 before
the City reclaims that sum. Mr. Barfoot replied that there is a final accounting at the very end - in point of
fact, there are interim claims - there is an interim claim procedure which can be adopted by which we claim
amounts which we know we are going to incur and so limit the amount of carrying costs of these projects. Coun-
cillor A. Vincent pointed out that this is in line with the agreement the City entered into with the said Tele-
phone Company. Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply. Councillor M. Vincent asked how much money the City claimed
in penalities for the delay by contractors in this causeway development contract. Mr. Barfoot asked that Mr.
MacKinnon provide information in this regard. Mr. MacKinnon advised that the matter of penalty costs is a figure
that has to be arrived at at a meeting with the contractor - the contractor has not brought the issue forward to
the City, and we have held the money back from payment to the contractor - the contractor has been in the city
recently repairing one portion of the western approach which had sunken down and it had to be restored, - however,
the matter of penalty costs has not been discussed and the City is still holding the monies in the City's favour.
Councillor M. Vincent asked for a rough estimate of the money the City is still holding. Mr. MacKinnon replied
that he does not have that figure. Councillor M. Vincent asked if it is enough to cover any penalty factors that
may be worked out. Mr. MacKinnon made affirmative reply.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
Common Council, because of the restraint programme this year, decided at budget time to suspend the policy of
trading Police vehicles at 60,000 miles which policy has resulted in somewhat higher maintenance and more down
time on the Police transports, but should be rectified in 1977, and further advising that, however, the situation
~~. ~ zL has been made worse because a vehicle which was stolen in 1975, and for which the City has subsequently received
~e ~. an insurance settlement, has not been replaced, and recently a further Police vehicle was damaged beyond repair
~~r for Police use by an impaired driver, and the loss of these two vehicles has meant the use of high mileage
~ vehicles which would otherwise have been replaced and such high mileage vehicles are very costly to maintain; and
~O~J7~ advising that in view of this, the Police Chief and the Commissioner of Works recommend that an additional new
~~ /L/ vehicle, 1976 model, Police package, tri-coloured, be purchased from Downey Motors, at a cost of $5,259.00 plus
~ crs ,z~~. tax, which is the same supplier and which represents the same price for a tri-colour Police vehicle as the
balance of the 1976 contract -- and recommending that the said additional Police vehicle be purchased -- be
received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
C'/71'M/~s(/%2
-<r-L
~re t6IJS-/r.
./t-~
~.A.eJ?a.
~.L-t-,/,
· ~1J~J:1
J:Nkr/~~.17
~u.r~r
~'i/es tJ"c
IV-:R
7e/7di?r cOJ//
(/o/d) re
I OJ h-E/".. fl.eexe.
$~C?{/e/s
I
7e.l7d""e r
a t!?C'cj7red'
.:z;ehJt?~'6/C7J1
.4/~,;-. <'orl?&'.
/PWtZ// 51f4-
~aj" d5,fore
(;%/t-/,/ 'e.t s
(162) /t-rI.
~
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the City Manager,
approval be granted for payment of the following invoices, namely:-
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. - August 1-15, 1976 (dated August 24, 1976)
Grove Construction Ltd. - August 17,18,19, 1976 (dated August 24, 1976)
Grove Construction Ltd. - August 20,23,24, 1976 (dated August 25, 1976)
Stephen Construction Company Limited - August 16-31, 1976 (dated
September 3, 1976)
Chitticks (1962) Ltd. - August 16-31, 1976 (dated August 31, 1976)
$ 2,875.49
$ 3,262.50
$ 2,362.50
$ 3,664.00
$ 6,366.77
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager advising that further to the
resolution of The Cities of New Brunswick Association at their last meeting, a trial of combined purchasing is
being made for anti-freeze and shovels and that the submitted tender form represents an effort by Saint John,
Moncton, Fredericton, and Bathurst to join together for a relatively simple first effort, and that it is to be
hoped that this joint purchasing will result eventually in substantial savings to all participants, be received
and filed.
Mr. Barfoot advised that he omitted to mention in the above report that this whole business of joint
purchasing was pursued in The Cities of New Brunswick because of the Common Council's initiative in bringing this
matter forward some time back, and it has now come to a fruition in that we have at least reached the stage which
will eventually, he is sure, produce savings for the City of Saint John and the other cities of New Brunswick.
General discussion ensued regarding the eventuality that materials will be purchased in the various participating
cities of the Province under this purchasing policy in the interests of reducing costs to all participants.
Councillor Kipping noted that Saint John is not listed on the submitted copy of the tender call for anti-freeze
and shovels as being one source of supply of tender forms which he feels is an oversight, but which could be a
mis-direction to tenderers. The Mayor noted that Saint John is listed on the said tender call, above the City of
Moncton. Councillor Gould called attention to the fact that the terms and conditions of the said tender call
states that the six cities reserves the right to award the entire tender to one supplier or to split the award
among various suppliers to the cities' best advantage, 'noting that this would relieve some fear that we might
possibly be giving away business to local people for the sake of a few cents, and stating that he feels this
notation settles that issue.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager and the Building Inspector,
the lowest tender as submitted by Chitticks (1962) Ltd. in the amount of $975.00 be accepted for the demolition
of buildings located at the corner of Lowell Street and Bay Shore Road, Saint John West.
Councillor M. Vincent, referring to the question he raised
the number of vacant and dilapidated buildings that were existing in
series of meetings was held between department staff and personnel.
to staff a number of months ago regarding
the city, recalled that at that time a
He stated that, with all due respect to the
63'0
~
c:'u/?, ftf
:lJ/~P 9' V.;)C'an
.6~s.
Ct:f:lSo//C'/-tor
3~. /1J6peC~
KIJ,1/ neer;'o/~
It!; rf t3 JJo/t
llf'bPP/eM/t'Mre:-
~Prt/Ca/Ckre
,
Ct/Pt?/s t?p.,.?tYon
t- u,. ~ m:.tct?
4-=i1rf-~1- :By-..(~
2k>/"f ~,f~ CI k.
c~ SPbe/~or
;?P/J/I7j' ~-L<>7
-<p7f- .$/;;;: eS'
;Z0171 17~
~-/dN
,;{P-&- S/.zes:
staff, he does not see that much difference or that much action taken on the number of buildings that are,
in fact, still standing. He stated he wonders if he could be advised if there are still problems in
getting these buildings demolished or if for some reason there has not been action taken on the direction
of Council at that time. Councillor Hodges suggested that perhaps if Councillor M. Vincent wants to name
specific buldings that he wants to see demolished, as he himself has done (namely, the building at the
foot of King Street, Saint John West, which has now been demolished) he may be able to get them down
faster, taking into consideration the fact that legal problems ssurrourid ~ most of these buildings. Mr.
Rodgers advised that he can get in touch with the Fire Prevention Branch and get an up-to-date list of
properties they are still concerned about. He stated that he just cannot answer the question from the
point of view of saying how that list that the Council saw before has been reduced - he can only go to the
said Branch and request that information and come back to Council with an up-to-date report on it.
Councillor Hodges noted that some of the properties on the said list have been started on for repairs, and
he suggested that perhaps the Building Inspector could provide that information for Council to inform the
Council how many are in that category.
.
I
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the
Common Council adopted the report of its Committee on Organizational Study in May 1975 and since that time
personnel changes have taken place in both the Recreation and Parks Department and the Engineering and
Works Department, and that in order to take advantage of greater operational flexibility within the latter
named department, some functions that were under Recreation and Parks have been operating under Engineering
and Works (these functions are arboriculture, horticulture, woods operation, and turf maintenance), and
the remaining functions of the Parks Department which will for a closer working relationship with the
Recreation functions will not be transferred; and further advising that this move is in line with the
changes which both the Kates, Peat, Marwick and Davis Committee Reports envisaged as taking place in due
course; and recommending that the organizational structure of the City Departments, as approved in 1975,
be modified by the transfer of arboriculture, horticulture, woods operation, and turf maintenance to the
Engineering and Works Department -- be received and filed and the recommendation adopted.
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law
Relating to the Market in The City of Saint John", be read a third time and the Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law Relating to the Market in The City of Saint
John', was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor, dated September
9th, 1976, with reference to the amendment to the Zoning By-Law text which was given first reading by
Council on August 16th, 1976 and at which time the Council referred the said amendment to the Legal
Department for interpretation of the word "altered" as it appeared throughout the amendment, advising that
the Section of the proposed amendment dealing with buildings or structures is not copied from the Pro-
vincial Regulation but is a recommendation to Council from the Planning Advisory Committee and that the
Provincial Regulation deals mainly with the minimum size of building lots and septic tanks in relation to
the number of family dwelling units, and in that respect it is necessary to amend the Zoning By-Law to
bring the City's Zoning By-Law in line with the Provincial Regulations, and further advising that the
Provincial Regulation does not talk about buildings or structures being placed, erected or altered, and
thus from the Province's point of view existing buildings within the Province's jurisdiction are not
caught by the Regulation, and further advising that the wording in the proposed amendment, however, places
a regulation on buildings or structures, and consequently, if the word "altered" remains in the amendment,
existing buildings will be subject to the new Zoning By-Law amendment -- be received and filed and the
said word "altered" be removed from the wording of the said amendment before the third reading of the said
amendment.
I
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", to amend the text of the said by-Law, as follows:-
1.
Substituting the following for Section 14:
II Lot Sizes
I
14. (1) Subject to subsection (2), no building or structure may be placed or erected on a lot unless the
lot has and contains an area of at least 58,560 square feet, a width of at least 195 feet, and a depth of
at least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width
or depth less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
I
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description in
a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry Office
for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal."
2.
Substituting the following for Section 21:
" Lot Sizes
.
21. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed or erected on a lot unless th~ lot
has and contains:
~
,..
83J)
.
7t!l/?; hf
-?:r- .I ~ J1/
I
.lo-t-
05/7 e S
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
(a) in the case of a one family dwelling or a mobile home site
(i) an area of at least 43,560 square feet,
(ii) a width of at least 180 feet, and
(iii) a depth of at least 125 feet
(b) in the case of a two family dwelling
(i) an area of at least 58,560 square feet,
(ii) a width of at least 195 feet; and
(iii) a depth of at least 125 feet
and
(c) in the case of a main building or structure other than a one or two family
dwelling,
(i) an area of at least one acre,
(ii) a width of at least 180 feet, and
(iii) a depth of at least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width or depth
less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry
Office for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal.
(3) The lot sizes mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of subsection (1) may be reduced to lot widths of at least
75 feet and lot areas of at least 7000 feet and lot widths of at least 100 feet and lot areas of at least 10,000
square feet respectively, with respect to a subdivision of land which in itself or together with one or more
adjoining subdivisions will contain a minimum of 40 lots serviced by municipal water and sewer systems or by
other public water and sewer systems approved under the Health Act or the Water Act.
3.
Substituting the following for Section 177:
"177. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed or erected on a lot unless the lot has
and contains
(a) in the case of a one or two family dwelling, a mobile home site,
or wood lot
(i) an area of at least ten acres,
(ii) a width of at least 400 feet, and
(iii) a, depth of at least 125 feet.
(b) in the case of a church, a community centre and grounds, an elementary
school, a high school or vocational school, a library, or a park or playground
(i) an area of least one acre,
(ii) a width of at least 200 feet, and
(iii) a depth of at least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width or
depth less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry,
Office for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal."
4.
Substituting the following for Section 184:
" Lot Sizes
184. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed or erected on a lot unless that lot has
and contains an area of at least 43,560 square feet, a width of at least 180 feet and a depth of at least 125
feet.
(2) A one family dwelling may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width or depth less than that
prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
1632
,
~
ZOI1/I7~
-o/-...{a~
/071-
.s/;<es
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry
Office for the County of Saint John, and
.
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal."
5.
Substituting the following for Section 214:
" Unserviced Residential Lots
214. Subject to sections 14, 21, 177 and 184, and notwithstanding any other provlslon of this By-Law, no I
dwelling which is not serviced by a municipal sewage system or by a public sewage system approved under
the Health Act or the Water Act may be placedo or erectedon a lot unless the lot has and contains an area,
frontage and depth equal to or greater than the minimum set out in the following table.
"umber of Dwelling Minimum Lot Area Minimum Width Minimum Depth
Uni t s ~ Where Permitted in Square Feet in Feet in Feet
One 43,560 180 125
Two 58,560 195 125 I
Three 73,560 210 125
Four 88,560 225 125
Five (Maximum) 103,560 240 125"
- be read a second time.
Councillor Cave voted "nay" to the above motion.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Kipping
.
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-
Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", to amend the text of the said by-law, as follows:-
1.
Substituting the following for Section 14:
" Lot Sizes
14. (1) Subject to subsection (2), no building or structure may be placed or erected on a lot unless the
lot has and contains an area of at least 58,560 square feet, a width of at least 195 feet, and a depth of
at least 125 feet.
I
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width
or depth less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description in
a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry Office
for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal."
2.
Substituting the following for Section 21:
.
" Lot Sizes
21. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed or erected on a lot unless the' lot
has and contains:
(a) in the case of a one family dwelling or a mobile home site
(i) an area of at least 43,560 square feet,
(H) a width of at least 180 feet, and
(Hi) a depth of at least 125 feet
(b) in the case of a two family dwelling
(i) an area of at least 58,560 square feet,
(H) a width of at least 195 feet; and
(Hi) a depth of at least 125 feet
I
I
and
(c) in the case of a main building or structure other than a one or two family
dwelling,
(i) an area of at least one acre,
(ii) a width of at least 180 feet, and
.
(iii) a depth of at least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width
or depth less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
....4
"...
63~3
.
I
I
Z t7 J? /n .f
.ty- 4m/
')
. A.&>r
S/Aei
1
.
I
1
.
~
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry
Office for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal.
(3) The lot sizes mentioned in clauses (a) and (b) of subsection (1) may be reduced to lot widths of at least
75 feet and lot areas of at least 7000 feet and lot widths of at least 100 feet and lot areas of at least 10,000
square feet respectively, with respect to a subdivision of land which in itself or together with one or more
adjoining subdivisions will contain a minimum of 40 lots serviced by municipal water and sewer systems or by
other public water and sewer systems approved under the Health Act or the Water Act.
3.
Substituting the following for Section 177:
"177. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed or erected on a lot unless the lot has
and contains
(a) in the case of a one or two family dwelling, a mobile home site,
or wood lot
(i) an area of at least ten acres,
(ii) a width of at least 400 feet, and
(iii) a depth of at least 125 feet.
(b) in the case of a church, a community centre and grounds, an elementary
school, a high school or vocational school, a library, or a park or playground
(i) an area of least one acre,
(ii) a width of at least 200 feet, and
(iii) a depth of at least 125 feet.
(2) A one family dwelling or a mobile home may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width or
depth less than that prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry
Office for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
and if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal."
4.
Substituting the following for Section 184:
" Lot Sizes
184. (1) Subject to this section, no building or structure may be placed or erected on a lot unless that lot has
and contains an area of at least 43,560 square feet, a width of at least 180 feet and a depth of at least 125
feet.
(2) A one family dwelling may be placed or erected on a lot having an area, a width or depth less than that
prescribed in subsection (1) if such lot was on or before February 18, 1976
(a) a lot included within a filed subdivision plan; or
(b) (i) the subject matter of a separate deed or a separate description
in a deed of two or more parcels of land and registered in the Registry
Office for the County of Saint John, and
(ii) held under distinct and separate ownership from adjoining lots;
if such lot has been or is subsequently approved for on-site sewage disposal."
5.
Substituting the following for Section 214:
" Unserviced Residential Lots
214. Subject to sections 14, 21, 177 and 184, and notwithstanding any other prOVlSlon of this By-Law, no dwelling
which is not serviced by a municipal sewage system or by a public sewage system approved under the Health Act or
the Water Act may be placedo or erectedon a lot unless the lot has and contains an area, frontage and depth equal
to or greater than the minimum set out in the following table.
Number of Dwelling
Units, Where Permitted
Minimum Lot Area
in Square Feet
Minimum Width
in Feet
Minimum Depth
in Feet
One
Two
Three
Four
Five (Maximum)
43,560
58,560
73,560
88,560
103,560
125
125
125
125
125"
180
195
210
225
240
- be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Councillor Cave voted "nay" to the above motion.
634
~
$~d/t//.5'/t?J7
cP'Y-/OiW
~t:?-6- S/::? e,5'
/'l'75 HlJa/?c/61/
S-cOlr-e/7?e/?zf .s;
PeI7S/t?h ?kn
-?/a/?n,/ldt//s,e.,
Ilssent'- 7f-o sw,b-
vii r: j7/ol;, r S.4Olm-
f"MA- ;f'e.;;>/~ /~L
$~-a/v.
7k~;;e ~u~'p(1Se
/aJ7~
~.!/med /i? /'e
t?-/' j?Ub //c
,Pur/poSe /OJ.I7d
/J1/"$. CJ.~Z.h,~c~
.s~- c;(/I/.
kl7d Cb/?lln.
7?;r 1lf"5eneau
/Jf.;Ip/t/me c.~/,,~)f
er.s ' /-f;d
/5"'6 {//7/t?J1 $~
1lP.n.fe-t- L/:?/?7/?t,
/!lap ff-er h45e
,(awf'6'~e-l- &Mho
,(~/>7~ed (/pr.s.
!tlt(,pk/ *dJl'a;>
The By-Law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and Amendments
Thereto", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law to
Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The City of Saint John" regarding minimum sizes of lots to be used
for on-site sewage disposal, be read a second time.
Councillor Cave voted "nay" to the above motion.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision
of Land Within The City of Saint John".
I
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A By-Law to Amend A By-Law to
Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The City of Saint John" regarding minimum sizes of lots to be used
for on-site sewage disposal, be read a third time and enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed
thereto.
I
Councillor Cave voted "nay" to the above motion.
The By-Law entitled, "A Law to Amend A By-Law to Regulate the Subdivision of Land Within The
City of Saint John", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the report of the Board of Trustees of the Civic
Employees' Pension Plan for the year 1975 together with Financial Statements and a Statistical Summary for
the year, be received and filed.
.
In response to a query from the Mayor as to what is meant by the term "disability" in regard to
C1V1C employees, Councillor Green, who is a member of the above named Board of Trustees, gave a detai1ed
explanation as it relates to a disability pension. Councillor Gould discussed a theory that possibly it
would be of benefit for the Pension Board to invest the Pension Fund monies in one-year investments so
that the Board can take advantage of the increase each year rather than going for a long period of time.
Councillors Hodges and Green made reply in this regard with regard to the procedure that is followed by
the Board in investing the said monies of the Pension Fund. In reply to Councillor A. Vincent's query as
to whether the said Pension Fund is over-funded, Councillor Green felt that this aspect is part of the
study that is coming up and that the Pension Board will have a report back on that.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
I
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee,
the Common Council assent to the sub-division plan of the Shamrock Realty Limited Sub-division that is
situated to the south of Boar's Head Road and approximately 980 feet east of its intersection with Wood~
ward Avenue:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the said Committee, advising that the proposal consists of four
single-family dwellings and five semi-detached two-family dwellings along a new cul-de-sac street to be
named Wildlark Court and that also included in a 3706.5 square feet parcel for vesting in the City as land
for pUblic purposes, and further advising that the said Committee has approved the street name and location
and the land for public purposes and therefore recommends to Common Council the location of the street and
land for public purposes as shown on the submitted print and the assent to the sub-division plan, be
received and filed and the Council assent to the said street and public purposes land location.
.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
Advisory Committee, the Common Council accept the sum of $200.00 in lieu of land for public purposes in
respect to the Mrs. C. J. Doucette sub-division, which property is situated on the northerly side of the
Loch Lomond Road and opposite its intersection with Jean Street and which has a frontage of 142.9 feet, an
average depth of 116 feet and contains the Doucette residence:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the said Committee, advising that at the July 27th meeting of
the Committee the necessary variances were grant~d to permit sub-division of this lot on condition that
the development would not interfere with the brook flowing across the property, and further advising that
the Property Management Branch has appraised the new lot at $2,500.00 so that, at 8% of this value, the
sum of $200.00 is payable to the City, and that this money is to be deposited in the City's trust fund for
the acquisition and development of land for public purposes, be received and filed. '
I
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, advising that in
response to an advertisement in the Telegraph-Journal on August 26th, 1976 for sale or lease of the City-
owned property at 156 Union Street, known as the fire station, only one tender was received by the Land
Committee Secretary prior to noon on September 3rd, 1976, namely, that of Mr. R. J. Arseneau, of Maritime
Gardeners Limited for the purchase of the said property for the sum of $126,000.00 and that he complied
with the tender requirement and submitted a deposit (certified cheque) in the amount of $1,000.00 with the
said tender, and recommending that Maritime Gardeners 'Limited be sold the said property located and known
as 156 Union Street (Fire Station) for the sum of $126,000.00, be received and filed and the recommendation
adopted.
I
On motion of Councillor M. Yincent
.
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the letter from the Market Committee, advising that at
a recent meeting of the Committee a transfer of ownership of the Coffee Counter of the City Market from
Mrs. Muriel Northrup to Lawrence and Glenna Lambert was approved by the said Committee, and that the area
...4
,....
6:,35
.
'?edlld,lIoQ?
OW'I7t?J?S ;2h
/lS$o(!'.
/ti?a:t/..wn
7*PK S~cl/
1$,Peed s/Y.J?,$,
'lb//'t!e 'prdd
re s'p'I?ed/.J?Y
ift!/!r', apea
stred ;;~,M.$'
.7JI.4f?' bl'd~.
&(!W~;e
I ~vi I1jt cU/7h
s/P(t?w.;;/~s
Fir e f?I'.?Isc-l.
3il1t17.#A'v!.s.d
fre-~~ h/.J?f
J?PCca ~~
.t.+L
$est- ~Ie
::; 146- ~. t/.
.
"J?e,f-Izf/,/J? re
0<<:; &y.s'lfeh/
A(7ca/ /Ig,z,
.1' Ina ~/??at'e.
7;::d1/7sit-t0; (J
C-~ /rdhs/
/-zf-L
I
.
I
I
.
~
in question referred to as Stalls 6 and 7, CoUnter E6, comprises 639 feet and affords a monthly rental of $186.38
effective September '1st, 1976, be received and filed.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from Mr. Peter Roche, Vice-President of the Red
Head Home Owners Protective Association, submitting a list of requests on behalf of the 250 homeowners in the
Woodlawn Park Sub-division with regard to speed zone signs, increased police protection regarding the speeding
problem, implementation immediately of plans for a recreation and play area at Ocean Drive by the City Recreation
and Parks Department, installation of street lights and repair of broken lights, removal of the derelict shack on
the corner of Lucas Street and Ocean Drive, up-to-date information on the upgrading of the sewage system, paving
of all streets to provide sidewalks on one side and curbs on both sides, and provision of proper fire protection,
and that future development in the sub-division area be curtailed until such time that both the above requests
and the Comprehensive Community Plan's guidelines have been adhered to, be referred to the appropriate staff for
a response and that the Council be advised of such response within two weeks' time.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the application from The Rocca Group Limited for re-zoning
of the Carvell property, which adjoins the West Vale Sub-division (formerly known as Nelson Vale) in Saint John
West off Manawagonish Road, in order to extend the said West Vale Sub-division, be referred to the Planning
Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation, and that authority be granted to advertise the said proposed
, e-zoning.
The Mayor advised that a petition was received at this meeting signed by a group of 148 persons pro-
posing to back the Amalgamated Transit Union, Division No. 1182, whose representatives appeared before this
meeting of Council with regard to the operation of the bus service by City Transit Limited, the said petition
stating that the petitioners would like to have the regular day and night bus service restored. The Mayor stated
that it is the request of the City Solicitor that the Common Council receive and file the said petition, which
was submitted with a covering letter from Mr. Robert B. Mullin, on behalf of the said' Union. He noted that this
correspondence is really part of the submission made by the said Union at this meeting of Council.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the above named letter and petition be received and filed.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
~~.
, Common C rk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twentieth day of
September, A. D. 1976, at 4.00 o'clock p.m.
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Gould, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, Parfitt,
Pye, A. Vincent and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance, F. A.
Rodgers, City Solicitor, H. Ellis, Assistant to the City Manager, S. Armstrong,
Chief Engineer of Operations, and J. Gabriel, Deputy Commission of Admini-
stration and Supply, of the Engineering and Works Department, M. Zides,
Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, C. Nicolle, Director of
Recreation and Parks, P. Clark, Fire Chief, E. W. Ferguson, Chief of Police,
and R. Thompson, Chief of Rehabilitation Services of the Community Planning
and Development Department
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council held on September
7th last, be confirmed.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that minutes of the meeting of Common Council held on September
13th last, be confirmed.
636
~
~i/-t/h//?17
em;;/~e'e'5
s.ilar/.~'s mil-A
1lh6/ - ..zn';:-/;;;nf/tJl7
.23d
PI?//C.!f r;e
.L n-t-ef'v/ew /J1f
j7rll:5j?cct/f/e
eh1j74ycc.Y
S t7Cdh' hd
;tI;?&),f""'4(/,,fpod
.4 j?rovepk'p-r
?r~fr4>>?h/e
COJ'p/zf4/;;r&ed:
$..1';;mr~ 'lk,.4-
C/ub~p<<$e
J(I;.L:: ~/& .<-64.
I(/'nft'$v///e /Pd'.
Sewer
~mfe/pU' $-t-, /
tt/.;;;-6e~ .$&N76' r
Oceal7 ffedU/~
Lb/7:i>-crud (':p,
.7), ~,.L;. E:
-<.;;ne. /~.:J""C717 1.
//-/!,-t- S-&-A'z!7c
/l.saor L7fd
If': // CIC1J7 cL,// q-
8.ssoe. L7fd.
The Mayor advised that eight Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Province of Saskat-
chewan, accompanied by their wives, recently called at the Mayor's Office when they visited the City of .
Saint John.
The Mayor stated that on behalf of the Common Council he sent to Councillor A. Vincent a message
to congratulate him on the successful organization of the recent Atlantic Trowel and Trades Fair in the
City of Moncton.
The Mayor stated that he wished to speak about three other items, the first of which is the
Anti-Inflation Board. He noted that a few weeks ago the Council approved the, non-Union civic employees
expense to negotiate in Ottawa for their salaries, and seven people attended. He stated that he has heard
that another meeting 'is to be held in Ottawa this week, and he would suggest that the number of personnel
attending be reduced and that thought be put into how many times the cost should be borne by the City. He
noted that we will soon be asking ourselves the question, "Are we obliged to support every group of
taxpayers in the City who have had their salaries rolled back by the Anti-Inflation Board?". He stated
that he would give a suggestion that some very necessary hospital personnel have had theirs rolled back.
He stated that he thinks the Council has taken a stand - the Council is going to do all it can to help,
but he thinks the costs basis is becoming a burden that we do not take control over what we are actually
expending on this. He stated that the second item is employment, and that he has been informed that two
senior members of staff have travelled to Toronto to interview a prospective employee. He asked: is this
the new policy? and if so, have we budgeted for such a trip? He felt that it is important that we should
know this.
I
I
The Mayor stated that his third question is relative to the Neighbourhood Improvement Programme
in the South End, and that he has spoken to Mr. D. Buck that he might present this, because he (the Mayor)
has had many questions asked as to how we are making out with the said Programme. He stated that he is
told by the top people that the said Programme is on target - we are right up to date with what we are
supposed to do - but the people in the South End, and he agrees, want to see something tangible - there
has been so much money voted by the City over a period of two or three years, and the same with Govern-
ment, which is supplying money for over two or three years. He asked if Mr. Barfoot can add to the
foregoing. Mr. Barfoot advised that on the point of the City's total programme, the major expenditures
were in the second two years of the Programme: the first year was mainly in getting the Programme off the
ground; however, there are some road works which have been approved in this year's budget which will be
carried out this year on several streets in the South End, and to the end of getting these things straight-
ened away we have held a number of meetings at the staff level to get the work started as soon as pos~
sible. Mr. Barfoot, in reply to the first two questions posed by the Mayor, stated that two senior
members of staff travelled to Toronto to interview candidates for the position of Deputy Commissioner of
Planning which was earlier authorized by Council for advertising; most of the senior planning staff in
this category is in this part of Canada, and rather than pay the expenses of several candidates to come
down to Saint John it was looked at and determined that it would be cheaper for the City to actually just
pay two City people to go up there rather than possibly four other candidates to travel to Saint John for
the interviews; so, this was done on a basis of economy - we would do this where there was a large number
of staff which could be gathered in one place, to cut down on the interviewing expenses.
.
The Mayor noted that the Anti-Inflation Board question will be answered later.
I
, (Councillor Kipping entered the meeting during the aforegoing discussion)
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the ,City
Manager, authority be granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates in con-
nection with the following named capital projects:-
1.
Athletic Facilities - Shamrock Park
W. E. Kelly Limited
Construction of Athletic Facilities
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 3
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated September 9, 1976
$ 221,900.00
77,564.24 .
11,634.64
37,492.92
3,
$ 28,436.68
2.
Kingsville Road Storm Sewer and Partelow Street Water and Sewer
Ocean Westway
Installing Storm Sewer and Water and Sewer Mains
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 1
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number
dated August 31, 1976
$ 74,463.00
13,995.50 I
2,099.32
Nil
1,
$ 11,896.18
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City Manager, approval be
granted for payment of the following construction progress certificates and approved invoices for engin-
eering services, in connection with projects that have been undertaken under the Department of Regional
Economic Expansion programme:-
I
Lancaster Lagoon Lift Station
(a) Asdor Ltd.
Supply of Screw Pumps
Total value of contract
Total work done, Estimate Number 2
Retention
Payments previously approved
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 2,
dated September 8, 1976
$ 72,472.24
70,932.24
3,546.62
60,292.40 ..
$
7,093.22
(b) W. H. Crandall & Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved
$ 71,740.35
':,.'''''''
;-q~~,~~-; .
~
"...
L! "3 ...
~'.J~A
I t'",w,,,.f,tI~ Ie-"'
,(~~ Chitticks (1962)
2J,/lcd-he/d
..(-6 d.
.J)Ofl//;,o/: ~~
I '.(-p-.,(
Szf~e/1
{'O//SP? C;. /~
.7JJ?-~F
. M///brd,'et~
C'f?// SeNer 2.
b=/;t;te4 t9~
-<'6-,(/
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 11,
dated September 8, 1976 $ 3,388.36
Milford-Randolph-Greendale Collector Sewer System
Giffels Associates Ltd.
Engineering Services
Payments previously approved $ 204,302.42
Sum recommended for payment, Progress Estimate Number 58,
dated September 10, 1976 $ 399.89
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED
of the following invoices, namely:-
that as recommended by the City Manager, authority be granted for
Ltd. - Water & Sewerage - August 16-31, 1976 (dated August 31,1976) $ 4,870.82
- Works - August 16-31, 1976 (dated August 31, 1976) $ 2,473.80
D. Hatfield Ltd. - Water Dept. - August 16-31, 1976 (dated September 2, 1976) $10,750.40
- Works - August 16-31, 1976 (dated September 2, 1976) $22,664.60
Downey Motors Ltd. (Packer Engine) - (dated March 5, 1976) $ 2,234.52
Stephen Construction Co. Ltd. - September 1-15, 1976 (dated September 16, 1976) $48,775.01
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that the RecreatioJ
and Parks Department has made formal application for contributions of some $32,000.00 under the Local Improve-
~ ments Programme to commence winter sports activities and the development of hobbies, crafts, and drama, et cetera,
Ji'e;:y,4- Tarn:< using the project title "Operation Participation", and that this programme will employ nine persons whose rem-
~j7t: uueration will be completely supplied through the said Local Improvements Programme,as well as all material costs
estimated at $3,000,00, and that supervision of the programme will be supplied by City staff with no financial
eA"-TP - outlay by the City, and that, if accepted, the programme will commence in November and continue through to June,
/. 1977; and further advising that past experience has indicated that there is little acceptance for Works and
110 CJfJ'p/ICOl- Engineering projects, and any involvement here has proven fairly expense to the City _ consequently, no applic-
t-/t?J1 -f?or ation has been made from this Department this year -- be received and filed.
~~)7~ In reply to queries from Councillor M. Vincent, Mr. Barfoot advised as follows reregarding the various
portions of the above named programme: the winter sports portion (based mainly on cross-country and down-hill
skiing and on the toboggan slide at Rockwood Park) would mainly be operated in the central portion of the city;
the second part of the programme is centred in the Forest Hills Elementary and Junior High in Saint John East
where we are putting in the development of hobbies, crafts, drama, et cetera and sports activities out there; he
would take it that most of the nine persons referred to in the above named letter would be new employees, gener-
ally speaking.
I C/f-y /1fr
t1?/7l/71. t3/7lA"Ji:;
'P/.;;J/117. c;-
..7Jei/ekf711;e72
e
I
I .:fe-zOJ?/Of
.zJC/q/a 5
111/ ~17
4/UI7. ?/a)7
:By - ~Ol vV'
.
.....
Read a letter, dated September 16th, 1976 submitted jointly from the City Manager and the Commissioner
of Community Planning and Development, with regard to the proposed re-zoning for Mr. Douglas Mitton's proposed
auto body and repair shop at 187 Golden Grove Road, advising that this apparently simple re~zoning could result
in the following, among other things:- (1) unsightly premises (the piling of cars, car parts, et cetera) part-
icularly if a change of ownership occurs; (2) the right to install a commercial sign relating to the proposed
auto body and repair business. The letter states that if the Council has concerns on these points, it could
proceed under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act to limit the business to what is being proposed, to
prohibit out-door storage of any automobiles under repair or parts thereof, et cetera, and to prohibit business
signs in what is otherwise a residential area, and that in order to make such restrictions effective, it would be
necessary for the City and the proponent to enter into an agreement which the City would have to file in the
Registry Office to make enforceable. An appendix to the said letter, dated September 20th, 1976, advises that
the City's planning staff supports the Planning Advisory Committee's position that the said site is no place in
which an auto body shop should be operating or permitted - it lies in a residential area and a developing one, at
that; that, secondly, if the Council wishes to complete the re-zoning, it should do so only after the Municipal
Development Plan has been changed accordingly - the area is zoned residentially and it is shown as a low density
residential area under the Plan as well - public notice would have to be given for the required change to the
Municipal Development Plan and all three readings given to the by-law to amend the Plan before the third reading
is given to the by-law changing the existing zoning to "I-I" Light Industrial classification; that, in addition,
the Council would, of course, have to consider the points raised in the said letter of September 16th, 1976.
In reply to Councillor Higgins' query as to whether or not Mr. Mitton is familiar or has had any
correspondence from Mr. Zides about any restrictions placed (as referred to in the said September 16th letter),
Mr. Mitton stated that he would go along with it - no out-door storage and no signs, he can understand these
restrictions because of blocking the view. Councillor Davis commented that Mr. Mitton's property at this site is
an extremely well-kept corner property and it is a housing area - it is up on the high lands and that should be
housing, up there. He stated that he would not like to see the ordinary-type body shop there - it is the wrong
place for it - but this is a special case and if special care is taken then he can see some benefit in it to the
owners of the property who live there now and who certainly have enough room for it. He stated, however, that he
cannot see why we should make special cases here and there and he is not certain that the ownership will be
retained, for how long, and what happens to it in the future - he feels that it is dangerous precedent, and he
feels he will have to vote against it.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that with regard to the application from Mr. Douglas Mitton to
operate a proposed auto body and repair shop at his property situate at 187 Golden Grove Road, public notice be
given for the required change in the Municipal Development Plan and all three readings be given to the by-law to
so amend the said Plan before the third reading is given to the by-law changing the existing zoning of this
property to "I-I" Light Industrial district.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that he is a little concerned about this situation, and that he does not
particularly like the tone of the above named letter and its appendix. He stated that he will watch very closely
to see if Council passes the zoning requirements under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act and gives it the
three readings and then votes on the third reading for the application; he thinks it is rather interesting that
in one particular case, when we are told the man has said he is not going to do the things he has been asked not
to do - he said it publicly before Council - and yet, we are still expressing some concerns, and he sees letters
coming in here at the last minute. He stated that he is aware of other conditions relating to this case about
~hich he prefers not to speak now, but if he has to do so, he is going to. Councillor Davis stated that in all
these matters, it should be remembered that everyone is mortal - the property is not mortal; that is why he said
that Mr. Mitton would probably adhere to all these regulations but if there is a change, it may not - and he
6t38
~
~5r JJet/ekj?-
lnenr$c!?e/7le
Ey_ '<c;;w
{~a;:;e.z; S~e
--<~h d C!C'I77H?,
.lJ64>nT/C S .P"'e~
?ro~e
:l3cVJI.5/ '/e ..P....
p/'p~r6y
c. 'P, R.
II'1CJP,;;rcIJt?n /Pe,;>;t'l
Co, .-(-t-d.
,( C? /t/ t? 1/ 05'-t:'
?1"t:>J?t?~f
/)f1e.l?.ri ?;7/',h)y
kt-
(Jrnr 1ft?
1J""/?Chd.:>e
,(oiYh,c ~m",.
;?f'eL - secK-l"lty
pe/7 /7!e 17?f /.?i r'y
o ~/t?)'7 t:l~
S~/e
thinks the Council should keep that in mind.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend Saint John East
Development Area, Phase One,' Stage One, Development Scheme By-Law", insofar as it concerns adding to
Section 3.3.2.4.2, on page 7, the words "except for lot 72 where the side yards on the westerly side are
respectively 4.6 feet and 2.95 feet at the front and rear corners of the house", be read a third time 'and
enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
The by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend Saint John East Development Area, Phase One, Stage One,
Development Scheme By-Law", was read in its entirety prior to the adoption of the above resolution.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Land
Committee, the City purchase the building owned by Atlantic Speedy Propane and located on Bayside Drive,
for the appraised value of $24,000.00, so that the widening and curbing along this section may be com-
pleted.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Land Committee, which was pre-
pared by the Legal Department, advising that negotiations between City staff and the property branch of
the Canadian Pacific Railway known as Marathon Realty Company Limited for property on Lowell Street
required to provide additional parking for the Lowell Street Arena have culminated in a presentation to
the City by Marathon Realty Company Limited of an Offer To Purchase the land in question for $8,800.00
subject to the usual adjustments payable as follows: $1,500.00 upon execution of the Offer To Purchase and
the balance on the closing date which is to be on or before November 30th, 1976, and further advising that
the Legal Department has examined and approves of the form of the Offer To Purchase, be received and filed
and as recommended therein, the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute on behalf of the City of
Saint John the aforementioned Offer To Purchase, which stipulates the purchase price of the said property
at $8,800.00 subject to the normal adjustments which price is to be paid as follows: $1,500.00 upon
execution of the Offer To Purchase by the City and the balance at the date of closing on or before Novem-
ber 30th, 1976.
Read a letter from the Land Committee, dated September 20th, 1976, advising that agreement has
been reached to sell approximately 80 acres of City-owned land west of the Martinon Road to the Department
of Public Works to be used as the site for the medium security penitentiary, and that the exact area of
land will be defined by a survey to be carried out by the Department of Public Works, but the land is
shown on the plan attached to the Option, its location being: north boundary: approximately 2,000 feet
following the line of the Pumping Station Road from Lugrin Lake to Grassy Lake; west boundary: the shore
line of Grassy Lake from the Pumping Station Road southerly some 2,310 feet (more or less) to the boundary
of City-owned property; south boundary: from Grassy Lake approximately 1,500 feet easterly along the City
property boundary; east boundary: a line approximately 2,050 feet running from the City property boundary
on the south to the corner of Lugrin Lake at Pumping Station Road in the north. The letter advises that
the plan shows the proposed Green Lake Institution access road which will be built in a 100-foot right-of-
way and the land deeded to the City on completion; the areas of land to the west of this roadway and
fronting on Grassy Lake will be owned and maintained by the Prison authorites. The letter states that the
agreement for sale provides that the Department will give to the City rights-of-way on the south and east
boundaries to give access to lands owned by the City to the east, and that the Federal Governmen~ have
agreed to construct the access road to join up with Pumping Station Road to give alternate access from the
prison in emergency situations. The letter further states that the Department of Public Works have to
negotiate agreements for access across lands in private ownership before making application to Treasury
Board for approval of this project, and to facilitate this they are now requesting an option to purchase
the City's land on the conditions contained in the submitted documents. The letter recommends that the
City approve the option of sale to the Department of Public Works for the land as described, for the
period of the 15th March, 1977, for the sum of $1,500.00 per acre for an estimated price of $120,000.00,
subject to the acreage being accurately defined by survey, and that the Council authorize the Mayor ahd
Common Clerk to sign the option agreement.
Councillor Davis advised that the major problems regarding the above land sale were simply the
access to the property and access to City properties that were isolated by the penitentiary, so certain
right-of-way had to be acquired; the City acquired the rights-of-way to its lands - the Federal Govern-
ment, on the other hand, need a right-of-way to the penitentiary site because the Province does not want
an access to the Martinon cut-off - the Province would rather not have left-hand turns so that is the
reason they want this option - they (the Federal Government) are not yet sure that they have access to the
property - it is across private. The Mayor stated that he understands there were some land changes made
in the last year. Councillor Davis replied that he does not know whether it was in the last year - some
recent changes were made in the last two or three years, whatever it is. The Mayor stated that he would
like to see these listed to see whether people have been trying to...if they got information that they
would make a little "deal" on this thing. Councillor Gould pointed out that it is called "speculation".
Councillor Hodges noted that the Council members are not doing it and are not involved in it. Counciilor
Davis stated that there are several other things that perhaps could be said - one is in answer to a letter
from Mr. Jack Wilson who has been opposing this penitentiary site for a long time and who has some very
good points; one thing Mr. Wilson raises in his letter is the question as to whether or not the Federal
Government will expropriate. Councillor Davis stated that the Federal Government has told him they will
never expropriate anything for a penitentiary site - it has to be a straight sale. The Mayor stated that
the Land Committee is to be complimented on the very idea that the Committee stuck to a price and there
were times when the Federal Government was very low (in price) in its desire to take over this land, and
the end result of the Land Committee's steadfastness in price is now before the Council.
On motion of Councillor Kipping
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that as recommended by the Land Committee, the City approve
the option of sale to the Department of Public Works for the 80 acres of land, approximately, lying west
of the Martinon Road, for the period of the 15th March, 1977, for the sum of $1,500.00 per acre for an
estimated price of $120,000.00, subject to the acreage being accurately defined by survey, the location of
the said land being as follows:- north boundary: approximately 2,000 feet following the line of the
Piunping Station Road from Lugrin Lake to Grassy Lake; west boundary: the shore line of Grassy Lake from
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...
639
.
I
I
Op/M
S';;;k
;o/eL -S~I'/
pe/l/lfe/?-h'dr.
.
I
.
III/$7ftlNC
S/&S4-
heds
ct>)7Jn1.
Great- S.x
h're /17~
100/J17/!/G'rsary
.
h/c. L.
7e~ Gl ~
~
the Pumping Station Road southerly some 2,310 feet (more or less) to the boundary of City-owned property; south
boundary: from Grassy Lake approximately 1,500 feet easterly along the City property boundary; east boundary: a
line approximately 2,050 feet running from the City property boundary on the south to the corner of Lugrin Lake
at Pumping Station Road in the north:
AND FURTHER that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign the option agreement on behalf of the
City of Saint John.
Councillor M. Vincent asked how much land the City originaliy believed the Federal Government was going
to take when that Government first made the request for land. Councillor Davis replied that the said Government
actually started off with 179 acres approximately. Referring to the map which accompanied the option agreement,
he pointed out the site that the said Government is now dealing with and the rights-of-way, and the original area
of land contemplated by that Government, and he stated that the original area of land would have meant that the
City-owned land out along the Martinon cut-off would have been completely isolated; the Federal Government
dropped that acreage down quite early in the spring to 80 acres, and the reason the City did not object to that
is because they would have bought the 179 acres but would have done nothing with that, so there would have been
99 acres of land lying fallow forever and a day, probably.
(Councillor A. Vincent entered the' meeting)
Councillor M. Vincent, referring to the asking price per acre that the City originally had in mind for
the land up there, asked if the originally initiated price was higher than $1,500.00 per acre, and if so, how
much higher. Councillor Davis made affirmative reply, stating that originally the Council decided that the Land
Committee should try to lease the land to the Department of Public Works; the said Department refused to consider
this because they felt a structure worth seven to nine million dollars should not be on leased land; the Land
Committee brought that back to the Council and the Council agreed that this was a valid reason for not leasing
it; we then multiplied that by the lease - he thinks we asked them $200.00 per annum per acre - we multiplied
that by ten - it came out to $2,000.00, and we settled for $1,500.00 - but he thinks we should remember that our
chief aim was not to destroy the rest of the land - to obtain rights-of-way - he thinks if you get the net area
that they are acquiring it works out to very close to $1,800.00 an acre. The Mayor added that the Council at one
time told the Land Committee to get a minimum of $1,250.00 per acre - and the Land Committee has obtained the
price of $1,500.00 per acre. Councillor M. Vincent stated that he thought that at one time we were in the
vicinity of $4,000.00 to $5,000.00 per acre. Councillor Hodges noted that it never was that figure. Councillor
Davis made similar reply.
Councillor Parfitt made the point that a definite name for this proposed medium security penitentiary
has not been determined as yet.
Councillor Pye recalled that many months ago he was strictly opposed to the establishment of a prison
within the boundaries of the City of Saint John and he based that on the fact that the vast majority of citizens,
being either fearful of the proximity of a prison to the area in which they resided or the resultant depreciation
in property values, were strongly in opposition to this; there were many other valid reasons, and it was very
questionable whether or not having a prison in the area would be beneficial in any respect. He recalled that at
that time he stated that he believed the only fair way to solve this problem was to determine it by plebiscite at
the coming civic election next May, which is only eight months hence. He felt that it is a simple matter for the
Council to defer action until the said civic election next May, and that it is fair to all concerned, particularly
to those in the Martinon area - those mostly affected by this move. He stated that as far as actual value is
concerned, he wished to congratulate Councillor Davis, who was very well-intentioned in view of the fact that the
Government offered a paltry one dollar for the entire project at one time and settling for $1,500.00 per acre
does look very good - but we must consider the land is actually worth $10,000.00 (an acre); if the individual
citizen were to purchase it for building purposes it would be worth at least $10,000.00.
Councillor Green stated that originally he opposed the sale Of this land for a medium security prison
and voted against it when it came to a vote, and that as a member of the Land Committee it then became his duty
to negotiate the best deal possible for the City. He stated that, along with some of the other Council members,
he personally favoured the lease deal in which the land would be leased to the Federal authorities on a yearly
rental, and knowing the fact that the Federal Government does not want to sell any of their land but want to
lease land themselves, yet they want to purchase the land in question and not have a lease-rental basis. He
stated that he feels the Land Committee's recommendation is a fairly reasonable deal for the City, but when it
comes to voting on the above motion he shall have to vote against the motion because he is still not in favour of
a penitentiary at that site. He stated he wanted to make it clear that as a member of the Land Committee he did
his utmost to come up with a fair deal for the citizens and yet, when it comes to the sale of the land he has to
vote against it, as well.
"nay".
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Green, Pye, M. Vincent and Cave voting
Read a letter from the Historic Sites and Events Committee with reference to a suitable observance of
the 100th anniversary of the Great Saint John Fire which took place on June 20th, 1977, advising that it appears
that major recognition of this anniversary can be achieved without the need of any grant from the City and that
the recognition events could involve participation by other 'municipalities and fire departments, and include
competitions, displays, parades, educational programmes, social events and recognition ceremonies; and noting
that an official observance of the event can provide the City of Saint John with an opportunity of attaining not
only Provincial, but also international notariety, through contacts with the many municipalities who assisted the
citizens of Saint John in their fire losses one hundred years ago. The letter states that the Committee is
informed that in order for participation by others to be developed, the City must formally determine there will
be an observance of the said anniversary on June 20th, 1977, and that if this determination is made, various
organizations can then be contacted to see to what extent they are prepared to participate in or come to Saint
John with respect to the recognition - in particular, such a position must be taken if there is any practical
hope of endeavouring to invite appropriate Fire and Insurance conferences to this city in relation to the event.
The letter advises that the Committee therefore requests that the Common Council adopt a resolution to the effect
that the City hold an appropriate observance of the 100th anniversary of the Great Saint John Fire of June 20th,
1877, and that the Committee, if this is accepted, will then continue to make the various contacts, and report
upon the progress to the City. The letter adds that the programme the Committee is preparing does not envision
any budget from the City.
Mr. Eric L. Teed, Q. C., Chairman of the above named Committee, was present in support of the above
letter from the Committee, and submitted information in elaboration of the Committee's proposal and request,
noting that since the Committee approached the Council regarding this matter last spring it has written to the
Insurance Bureau, the Fire Department, the Municipal Affairs Department and the Historical Society, and today we
have Fire Chief Clark, former Police Chief Gerald Wallace (who is fast becoming a renowned City historian), Mr.
Donald MacGowan (who could not be present) and Mr. Hill from the Insurance people. He advised that the said Fire
anniversary is quite significant because (1) it established the present character of the City in that the buildings
which are now part of the central core were all established or built immediately after the fire - there have been
a number of suggestions as to how the anniversary can be observed, including a vehicle parade inviting fire
640
",
1I/~1f; $/-/6'$ "I-
Et/ehz7$ Cbm,",-
Crenr$I H')?e
/Ct?#h Clhl?/ver-
SdP,j'
S,T /4r.5Pk r
R/d/)75' ;q,ij-
4>>$6'1'//, #'7&$ce,
41///;J7a- ~>>d't?~
aM,;, //m/6ed
c'Mt!6'$$ road
1?<i}I/w;;;;f tJrps5/h
c;'P1P.
M/>Jprary
r,;u/Pe/;j,!/
ort?s:s/ny Pi?
/'/J7e s
CAurcA I1ve,
C/-Iy /fJ fr-
departments of municipalities throughout the Province to send a representative, fire insurance agencies to
send representatives, recognition of firms involved in the fire business or insurance business of one
hundred years - one suggestion which might be feasible was to contact the many organizations and munici-
palities who assisted the City of Saint John in 1877, and history shows that we received contributions
from allover the world and the suggestion was that these again be contacted - this being a straight
promotion or publicity event - thanking them for what they did and inviting them to have a representation
in our parade or have a local person selected who would drive a car with a plaque on it, or something.
along that extent. He noted that there is a question of training courses, of competitions of fire de~
partments, being held over the June 20th, 1977 week-end (June 20th is a Monday) and this event lends
itself to a one-, two-, or three-day observance depending upon the extent; if we want to have, for ex_
ample, the Fire Chief's convention and the Firemen's convention they will only come if there is an of-
ficial invitation and there has to be established an official anniversary. He stated that the Committee's
request at this time is that the City indicate formally that there will be an observance and based on
this, the Committee can then start the letter-writing to contact various people saying there is going to
be an observance and asking if they will assist in particpating. He added that the Committee's object is
to get an observance with, in effect, no budget - the Committee sees that ninety-nine per cent of this
observance outside of the cost of some postage would be events where there is no great expenditure - the
Committee is going to invite people to have an opportunity of participating in recognition of the part
that Fire plays in a municipality: fire prevention, fire safety, fire training, and all that goes with
it - our Building Codes are related to fire prevention - Saint John has one of the earliest by-laws in
relation to tearing down fire buildings - we have some unique structures - we have all kinds of history _
people do not know it, but Benedict Arnold gave a contribution to one of our early fire departments - his
place burned down through no fault of the department - but this ties it in. He noted that the group that
has been formed has shown much enthusiasm and the Committee is going to try to expend it and see how many
people it can get who will contribute or volunteer their services for this type of operation. Councillor
Davis pointed out that a booklet was written about the 1877 Great Saint John Fire by the National Research
Council of Canada, copies of which can be obtained for fifty cents a copy. Speaking to the matter of no
budget for this event, Mr. Teed pointed out that the Committee does not propose to submit a budget and
that there may be some postage costs which he presumes can be absorbed, one way or another; the Committee
has submitted an application for a Local Improvements Programme grant to do some research - if the Com-
mittee gets that grant, it will be excellent, or if it does not, it can still carryon with what it has;
the Committee may have to ask the assistance of like the Loyalist Days Committee who have an establishment
set up, or it may not. He noted that the Committee is hoping that with an observance of the said Great
Fire of Saint John that the City of Saint John will have further international notoriety because of that
Fire, but on a better phase of making Saint John a centre for fire prevention, fire safety, and all that
goes with it.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the City of Saint John hold an appropriate observarlce
of the one hundredth anniversary of the Great Saint John Fire of June 20th, 1877.
On motion of Councillor Cave
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John Harbour Riding of the
Progressive Conservation Association expressing concern that the limited road access to the Milford-
Randolph area of the city, which is part of the said Riding, is crossed by the main Canadian Pacific
Railway line and is often blocked for extensive periods by trains going or coming to the port facilities
and causes fire and safety hazards as well as hindering the development of this area, and urging that the
City of Saint John take action to provide for better access to the said area of the city including removal
of the level railway crossing presently the only means of access, be turned over to the City staff for a
report.
Prior to the making of the above motion, Mr. Barfoot advised that with regard to the said
railway crossing problem, the City is proposing to provide $50,000.00 in the 1977 capital budget to pay
for the necessary engineering work to make such an application which means that the City is planning such
action. In reply to Councillor Hodges' question as to how long it would take to obtain the over-pass or
under-pass in this area, and the disturbance that would be required with relation to existing houses in
order to get what the people want there, Mr. Barfoot stated that it is not a simple matter of just raising
the road up and putting a bridge in or putting a tunnel in - it is a fairly complex traffic problem and
the people now living in this area will be disturbed when remedial measures are taken regarding the
existing problem. Councillor Hodges stated that his reason for broaching this point was that many people
were disturbed and upset because of the construction programme relating to the throughway which goes
through this city, especially when such construction was in their back yards, and that if the people want
the said Milford-Randolph railway crossing problem corrected they must be prepared to accept the ac~
companying disturbance. Councillor Cave expressed concern that the traffic hold-ups to the public when
the roadway is blocked at the time freight trains are going through constitute a very serious matter and
that it is also a costly problem, and he asked if the matter should not be referred to the City Manager to
discuss with the Provincial Government and with the Federal authorities if possible to see if some other
alternative can be arranged. Councillor Green, during the above discussion, stated he thought that at one
time the City Manager was exploring with the Canadian Pacific Railway the fact that it might go in on'a
temporary~~basis a road where there is an industry there, to the right-hand side coming out, a temporary
crossing to be used in case of a fire problem so that fire fighting equipment would be able to get across
the railway line. He asked that if the City Manager has not explored this possibility to date, that he do
so, because in the case of an emergency there has to be some access in that area. Mr. Barfoot stated.that
he does not recall that issue but he will certainly include that in his report. Councillor Parfitt and
Mr. Barfoot held discussion regarding the necessary action that would have to be undertaken by the City
and that has already been undertaken by the City to take advantage of the Federal Government programme for
expenditure of monies to eliminate level railway crossings in municipalities.
It was noted that at 8.00 p.m. on September 27th next there will be a special sailing of the
"Princess of Acadia" in connection with Saint John Port Day 1976 (whiCh is to be held on September 28th),
and that Council members are invited to attend this function; however, the Council meeting of that date
hich would normally be held at 7.00 p.m., could be held at another time on September 27th, if the Council
wishes.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Gould
RESOLVED that the next meeting of Common Council be held at 6.00
p.m. on September~27th next.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he would like to introduce an item for the agenda of this
eeting, regarding vacant buildings and absentee landlords.
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
J"'"
641
.
I
7c//c-e a/
F/re C-4/e
/Mcad4-
I ,(/!CJ?/ .5/h
ct-f' .>Ibsen ie,
/ahd/crds
. J)eI'l7P,;j6~
tl-P d/IOJ;:?-
PU'!ls,
I
.
LEG A L
~zySotc/
,#J/?-t0/c~
em,.R/o yee $
Isa/aft/es
rt?//- tfac-A-
/l177f-/ -
h-,e,4-,f-/l?rJ
7Jd,
I
.
~
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor. Pye
RESOLVED that the above named item which Councillor A. Vincent wishes to
introduce, be added to the agenda of this meeting.
Councillor A. Vincent stated that he wished to obtain a report from the Chief of Police and all the
other authorities regarding what we can do with so many vacant buildings and absentee landlords which are keeping
the Fire Department and the Police Department so completely busy. He added that he has noticed that on Prince
William Street, a couple of houses up from this City Hall building, these buildings are vacant with absentee
landlords and people are in there smoking "pot" and the buildings are unlocked and the people residing on the
corner are terrified of fire. He stated that he has received many requests that the City do something, and in
searching the by-laws he cannot find out whether we have any "teeth" or not for absentee landlords to keep
properties properly locked up. He stated that he would like to have a report on it, and that he could show the
Council about 70 buildings that should either be torn down or something be done.
On motion of Councillor A. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Pye
RESOLVED that a written report be obtained regarding what the Common Council
can do to strengthen the hands of the Police and Fire Departments and of the proper authorities on vacant buildings
and absentee landlords not looking after their properties.
Councillor Kipping recalled that Councillor M. Vincent had asked for a report on demolition of other
buildings. The Mayor noted that the said report is due next week, and that the two matters can now come in that
same report. Councillor Kipping stated that he agrees that there is a good deal of hurry for this because we are
running into other problems. Councillor M. Vincent explained that he is not really asking for the same report
that Councillor M. Vincent is asking for. He advised that there are some good properties that do not have to be
demolished or anything, where vandalism is taking place through people getting into them - they are good houses
and good apartments - as soon as tenants move out the windows are broken out and other acts of vandalism occur.
He stated that something has got to be done regarding the vandalism and we have got to show the general public
that we are one hundred per cent behind our Police and Fire Departments. Councillor Kipping enquired whether the
Building Inspector is actively pursuing this matter while the Council is waiting for this report. Mr. Barfoot
made affirmative reply. Councillor Kipping asked if the Building Inspector is working on getting buildings
demolished, tenders called, or taking other action. Mr. Barfoot made affirmative reply, and stated that there
have been some tenders called for buildings such as this, and the report as requested at a previous meeting will
be coming in. Councillor Kipping stated that it was our understanding, also, that there were legal tie-ups in
this. He asked what action is being taken to clear the legal blocks for taking action here; that is, title
searching. Mr. Rodgers advised that title searching is continuing. Councillor Kipping asked if the Legal
Department is getting any help for title searching - has the Department contracted any out to law firms in the
city. Making negative reply, Mr. Rodgers stated that provision was made, though, several months ago when he
informed Council of the engagement of a person to do that work. Councillor Kipping asked if it is proceeding
quickly, and is Mr. Rodgers satisfied with the progress, and Mr. Rodgers replied that some properties are very
complicated so a complicated property is not proceeding quickly - but the work is going on and is being pursued.
Councillor Kipping asked if this work is not being left, sort of, in favour of other priorities. Mr. Rodgers
replied: not left entirely; there are other properties that the City is involved in from the point of view of
land transactions where the City buys property, which also requires searching. Councillor Kipping stated that
what he is really concerned about is the fact that there are other problems that have not even been mentioned
around this table, so far - at least, one that he heard of just recently, which is a matter of insurance, whereby
people in an entire block are unable to obtain insurance in some cases because of a dilapidated and/or dangerous
property in the block, and this is wreaking a real hardship on some citizens - and not just a hardship, but a
great deal of fear and it could mean their financial ruin if anything were to happen in the meantime - and so
this is a very bad situation, and what he is wondering is whether the Legal Department is moving with all dis-
patch that it possibly can to speed up the title searches so that action can be taken on these properties while
the Council is waiting for Councillor Vincent's requested report - it is all well and good that the report is
coming in, but what is happening meanwhile?
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that this meeting continue, in legal session.
Councillors Cave and A. Vincent withdrew from the meeting.
Mr. Rodgers reported verbally that the Anti-Inflation Board's ruling on the roll-back of salaries of
the non-Union civic employees was appealed by means of a submission to the Board of further information on the
question of the fact that the compensation plan established for the said non-Union employees was established
before October 13th, 1975 and that, therefore, the Board had no jurisdiction whatsoever and had no right to
interfere in any aspect of it to even touch one cent of it. He advised that the said submission went to the
Anti-Inflation Board approximately one and one-half weeks ago, and the Board has again reviewed the case and said
in their opinion the Common Council did not establish salaries for three groups in the non-Union bracket prior to
October 13th, 1975 - on that basis those employees were caught by the Anti-Inflation Act regulations and the
opinion the Board gave in July, 1976 was not altered. He stated that as a result of that, a meeting has been
arranged in Ottawa on Wednesday, September 22nd, with the Compensation Branch to discuss the impact of that
decision on the operation of City business as it relates to the salary scales of employees in the Union and
employees in the non-Union group to show that from the point of view of the City Manager and of the Commissioner
of Finance it is just not workable the way it presently stands. He pointed out that the September 22nd meeting
in question, for the purposes of the meeting, is to just admit for the purposes of the meeting that the plan was
established after October 13th, 1975, that the Board does have jurisdiction but the Council approval should not
be altered because of the consequences of changing those salaries - however, with the clear understanding to the
Compensation Branch and to the Board that if the meeting this Wednesday does not result in a satisfactory set-
tlement the City still reserves the right to refer everything to the Administrator including the prior-commitment
question, that it was established. He stated that the said September 22nd meeting should involve, in his op-'
inion, the City Manager, the Commissioner of Finance, and the solicitor the City Solicitor has engaged in Toronto _
anyone beyond that he thinks the City Manager should speak on it and what problems he might have with respect to
the non-Union group. Mr. Barfoot noted that the three City officials referred to by Mr. Rodgers are the ones who
are presenting the case on behalf of Council, in the sense, according to the Council resolution that was passed,
and that there are approximately 90 non-Union staff who are very concerned that they are going to lose money, and
for that purpose at a meeting held on Thursday, September 16th last, there were many questions raised and it was
certainly the consensus of the group that they would be a lot happier if they could nominate a member - or, not
the ones designated, as it were, by Council - to attend at the said September 22nd meeting in Ottawa so the non-
Union group could be more assured that we were fighting the best for the maintenance of what Council had already
authorized, and he agreed that this would be a good idea - that they should have, as it were, an independent
observer, an independent participant, in this meeting with the Board. He stated that he thinks for the sake of
dealing in what appears to be a very straightforward way with the non-Union group the benefits of having this
64.2
~1l-I/h/tl/1
e/ll#~Y'e.>
sdlaJ? /e.s n:>//.
19#/- ..Ld/a7f//?/1
:Ed'.
C/-fr;! /1/,2' r-
Cbmm, /-/~>>oe
C/7 .so;; e:/c-p r
Hre a/ef?
C(lu/?,/If,01?t.'e',
~d-eJ?n /a/?d
af?$emi>(y /ec-
,
8ery/ces, .w.
<f- S eU/ tf'r
extra personnel would be fair outweighed by the costs thereof, and he would certainly hope that such
additional attendance could be sanctioned by this Council. He added that the said additional person is
likely to be the Fire Chief, Percy Clark, which would mean that four persons would be going to Ottawa on
September 22nd, including Percy Clark. The Mayor noted that, in addition, would be the lawyer who is in
Toronto. Discussion ensued.
On motion of Councillor Gould
Seconded by Councillor Higgins
RESOLVED that the Common Council give permission for the City
Manager, the Commissioner of Finance, the City Solicitor and the Fire Chief to go to Ottawa for the
September 22nd, 1976 meeting with the Compensation Branch of the Anti-Inflation Board regarding salaries
of the non-Union civic employees.
Councillor Parfitt withdrew from the meeting.
Further discussion ensued.
Question being taken, the above motion was carried.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that with regard to the eastern land assembly, one law firm has
called him about the problem that has been experienced by a client who was advised that he could not move
his family into a property which he owns, by October 1st, because the services which the City was re-
sponsible for providing were not adequate. He noted that this problem would apply to persons who have
given notice in good faith at their present residence that they would be moving out at the end of September
and who now want to move into their eastern land assembly properties that they have purchased and find
they cannot move into them. He stated that he raised this matter in legal session because of the im-
plications that the City was instrumental in having these people move out of their present properties,
believing they could move into the'City's land development and are now told they cannot do so because the
City cannot provide the services. Mr. Barfoot recalled that the Council members received a report in this
matter on September 13th last. He stated that since then, it has developed that the City is getting a lot
of pressure from people who are about to move in; just before this meeting he had discussion with the
Engineering Department and with the Building Inspector on this issue; he is told that since and prior to
the letter of last week to Council very good progress is being made now in the water and sewer testing
operation and arrangements have been completed to bring in a specialist Hamilton, Ontario firm on September
27th and 28th at which time the testing and leak detection operation will be completed on the water
system - the City is not paying for any of this - the City is co-operating in assisting them with the
testing - the developer (the Provincial Government) is paying the expense of bringing in the said Hamilton
operation. He stated that he has been assured and satisfied by the Engineering Department that, in
effect, the sewer problems are being solved - there were 20 problems outstanding two weeks ago, and now
there are only five - and on that basis he and the Water and Sewerage Department advised the Building
Inspector that they thought it would be satisfactory to proceed with the occupation permits on those
houses which are almost completed - apparently none of these houses are in the areas where sewer problems
are now prevalent - therefore, he does not think there should be any hold-up at this stage on people
moving in; however, we are still holding off the issuance of further building permitsc where people want to
start construction until next week, at any rate, until the water testing process is completed - but this
should not hold up those people who are on the point of giving notice or who have given notice already to
move out of their existing places into the new homes. Councillor M. Vincent asked: can the City of Saint
John be held liable for any hardships encountered by people who in good faith served notice to move out of
present occupancy believing they could move in there (the eastern land assembly) by, he thinks, October
1st. In reply, Mr. Rodgers stated that he does not have all the facts concerning this but the brief facts
he does have as a result of talks with the City Manager today, and several people in to see him, are that
the City has not caused the problem, and he does not know of any facts right now - of course, it could
change, with additional information and additional facts that would make the City liable on the question
that Councillor M. Vincent has raised.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
n Clerk.
At a Common Council, held at the City Hall, in the City of Saint John, on Monday, the twenty-
seventh day of September, A. D. 1976, at 6.00 o'clock p.m,
present
E. A. Flewwelling, Esquire, Mayor
Councillors Cave, Davis, Green, Higgins, Hodges, Kipping, Parfitt, Pye,
and M. Vincent
- and -
Messrs. N. Barfoot, City Manager, R. Park, Commissioner of Finance,
F. A. Rodgers, City Solicitor, J. C. MacKinnon, Commissioner of
Engineering and Works, D. French, Director of Personnel and Training,
M. Zides, Commissioner of Community Planning and Development, C.
Nicolle, Director of Recreation and Parks, and R. Thompson, Chief
of Rehabilitation Services of the Community Planning and Development
Department
",
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
"..-
64~)
.
$put-) -Gd
f1/~P6'd
kl)?, llwrp;,
I
l(e-xPP/J7j'
/lhdt?~sP)?
;zns~f'1PJhee
~-6a.
I
;P/.;;m>7, /ldv/s
Cbm/n-
.
;l?.;;>/,P,4 .T
Llre;',c#r/oK
Pel'- /-6/ p n
I-/'rnn
res/dt!!n-c s
* CoRU/';J
Stf/ elfa, dfr~
.
I
I
.
......
The Reverend Lloyd Lake, rector of All Saints' (Anglican) Church, offered a prayer which opened the
meeting.
The Mayor advised that during the last few weeks as he drove around the city, he noticed the great
number of old, wrecked cars still in properties, and that he is going to ask the staff if they will not review
this situation in the city and take action to have them removed.
The Mayor stated that he thinks the Council should know that next week we will be talking about the
Neighbourhood Improvement Programme in the South End of the city, and he understands that the City has not had a
clearance from the Provincial Government concerning the approval on the said Programme for the South End and yet
we have been going ahead and spending money. He stated that he will ask that next week they include this in
heir report so we will know about it.
The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising took place regarding the proposed re-zoning for
Anderson Insurance Limited of the former church building at 77 Coburg Street and the lot at its rear next to 28
Garden Street and across from 21, 23 and 25 Garden Street to "B-2" General Business district classification in
order to convert the said former church to insurance and possibly other offices and to use the said vacant.lot on
Garden Street as the parking lot for the offices. He advised that a letter was received from Mr. Ralph J.
Broderick, Barrister, on behalf of citizens who oppose the said proposed re-zoning.
Consideration was given to a letter, dated September 23rd, 1976, from the Planning Advisory Committee,
advising that with reference to the above named proposed re-zoning, the Committee recommends that (1) Schedule 2-
A, the Future Land Use Map of the Municipal Development Plan be amended by redesignating the lots so indicated on
the submitted print from Major Institutional uses to sub-centre Commercial uses; and that (2) Schedule "A" of the
Zoning By-Law, the City of Saint John Zoning Map be amended by removing the lots so indicated on the submitted
re-zoning print from "RM-l" Multiple Residential to "B-2" General Business pursuant to a resolution and agreement
under Section 39 of the Community Planning Act to be filed in the Registry Office to limit the use of the above
lots or properties to that of an insurance office consisting of (a) not more than 4,000 square feet of office
space; (b) a maximum s~aff of 40 persons; (c) parking for a minimum of nine vehicles; and (d) normal business
houses of 8.30 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. Monday through Friday. The letter states that the said Committee had earlier
recommended against an application by Hilyard Holdings Limited for the use of these properties for a larger
insurance business office consisting of 6,600 square feet of office space and employing 60 persons, and that at
that time the Committee recommended refusal as it would be wrong to introduce a business of this scale into this
residential area. The letter further states that during its consideration of the present application, the
Committee twice heard solicitors for and solicitors against the proposal and received petitions signed by many
people in the area, near and far. The letter submits summaries of the submissions received by the Committee from
those for the proposal, and from those against the proposal, and also submits a separate commentary on the two
petitions received by the Committee regarding the said proposed re-zoning.
Mr. Ralph J. Broderick, Barrister, was present and presented a petition, addressed to the Common
Council; the Community Planning Branch; the Planning Advisory Committee, all of the City of Saint John and to all
others whom it may concern - and signed by 77 residents of the Coburg Street, Hazen Street and Garden Street
areas, advising that the said petitioners have noted with deep concern'the application of Anderson Insurance
Limited for the re-zoning of the former church property situated at 77 Coburg Street and the vacant lot to the
rear thereof, situated on the east side of Garden Street for business and parking purposes, and that the said
residents do hereby protest and oppose the said application on the following grounds, namely:- (1) the 77 Coburg
Street property, being adjacent to numerous institutions, such as hospitals, a blood donor clinic, a church and
numerous private residences, et cetera, is presently heavily congested traffic-wise and should not be further
congested, especially in view of the necessity for ready access to such institutions by emergency vehicles, such
as ambulances, emergency squad and Fire Department vehicles, delay in which could result in loss of life and of
property; (2) the obvious necessity of maintaining, insofar as possible, peaceful conditions and a quiet zone,
near such institutions; (3) the whole area is presently very heavily congested, from a traffic and parking
standpoint and the proposal to establish a parking lot on Garden Street, opening directly onto the hilly and
heavily travelled Garden Street, is little short of folly - Garden Street is loaded with parking meters on its
west side - these meters are bumper to bumper and are in constant use - this leaves only a comparatively narrow
section for the two lanes of traffic on this street - it is often seen that the said two lanes are backed up from
Wall Street to the top of Coburg Street and back - a parking lot leading at right angles directly into this
situation can only lead to still further traffic congestion, collisions, and possible loss and damage to lives
and property; (4) the area has always been, for many years, a residential (particularly in the Garden Street
area) and an institutional area in the main and logically, should be the last area in the city to be opened up to
business uses - this is all the more apparent when one observes the over-supply of modern business office space
available in the city at the present time; (5) the principle of spot re-zoning, such as is inherent in the
present application, is a wrong one and, if allowed, can only result in establishing a very dangerous precedent
in that it opens the door to similar applications in this and in other areas of the city and could lead to
complete fragmentation of the Comprehensive Community Plan; (6) such re-zoning can only result in the flight to
the suburbs, with attendant loss of tax revenues, deserted residential housing and the vandalism which unfor-
tunately follows; (7) the establishment of business, wholesale or retail in the area will result in a reduction
in the demand for residential housing therein, in turn resulting in depressing property values and in loss and
damage to property owners in the area. The petitioners, therefore, petition and strongly urge that this re-
zoning application be denied and refused and that the present nature and zoning be maintained and preserved.
Prior to submitting the above petition, which he filed with the Common Clerk at this time, Mr. Broderick advised
that this is a matter which has come before the Planning Advisory Committee twice and has been refused and has
come before the Common Council at least on one other occasion and has been refused, and he further advised that
another application was made to the Planning Advisory Committee and on this third application the said Committee
reversed its previous two decisions. He stated that he does not believe that any new circumstances had .arisen to
cause the said Committee to come to this new decision - however, in support of the persons who object to the
proposed spot re-zoning, he read the aforeging petition to the Common Council. Mr. Broderick made a further
point, namely:- according to the Comprehensive Community Plan, Garden Street is going to form an important link
in the north-to-south arterial highway system which is contemplated in the Comprehensive Community Plan; as he
reads the said Plan, the idea is to link Carmarthen Street to Paddock Street, then down Garden Street to an
interchange or over-pass to replace the present Wall Street bridge; he does not think that it needs to be em-
phasized that this would compound the confusion which presently exists, to a tremendous extent.
Mr. Broderick then referred to the matter of petitions with regard to the proposed re-zoning, stating
that the proponents of this application have filed a petition with the Planning Advisory Committee and their
petition contains 100 names, and that he has analyzed the said petition and has found the following disclosed
therein:- 15 persons described as employees with no address of the Red Cross blood clinic have signed this
petition; 6 persons have signed this petition stating they are employed by the hospital; he thinks the most
important point insofar as the petition is concerned is that the opponents to this application (as may be seen
from the petition he just filed with the Common Clerk) have confined their canvass and their signatures of the
residents, citizens and voters of that area into the area which is in fact going to be affected, namely, that
triangular area encompassing Garden Street on one side, Coburg Street two sides, Garden Street two sides, and
Hazen Street on the back - all within 500 or 600 feet of the proposed re-zoning location and parking lot - on the
other hand, on looking at the petition filed by the proponents of this application he finds that 30 people signed
it on Paddock Street, 6 people signed it away down on Sewell Street which is far removed from the site in question,
64il
",
1?e-z t? J1 /)?.f
I?l1der .11J)?
LSU-Y'd>>r:Je
,,( +-~-
and 5 people signed it on Cliff Street which is not too far removed but still not within the immediate
area - it is not known where the residences are of the said 15 people who signed the said petition as
employees, but he thinks it is a matter of common knowledge that the employees do not live in the clinic.
He noted that when the petitions are examined carefully, it is found that we end up with 38 acceptable
signatures on the petition of the proponents whereas the opponents have filed a petition bearing the
signatures of 77 persons in the immediate area.
.
Mr. Broderick suggested that the discussion at this time and the Council's decision at this
meeting go much farther and deeper than a proposal for spot re-zoning for business purposes of the af~
orementioned Coburg Street property and vacant lot on Garden Street, but, in fact, give consideration to
the very root of the whole philosophy of community planning and, in particular, to certain what might be
called planning heresies which, if allowed to be perpetuated, can only emasculate the whole philosophy of
planning and leave no coherent principles of planning to be administered. He stated that one of the most
dangerous of these heresies and threats to the philosophy of planning is the theory of spot re-zoning ,such
as is here and now suggested, and he added that spot re-zoning is insidious in that it involves a sac-
rifice or principle to expediency and that it is, in fact, an ad hoc concession to special interests and
special pleaders and can only be discerned as a surrender of principle to the arguments, the sweat and
clangour, of the market place at the expense of the greater good of the public interest. He stated that
it is clear that once having opened the door to this practice there can be no foreseeable end to same -
spot re-zoning approvals can only create precedent which cannot be denied in subsequent cases - in our
democratic society what is granted to one must be granted to another on the same ground because the
granting of a concession to one if denied to another can only result in charges of favouritism, bowing to
special interests, inequitable treatment, and so on, ad infinitum, with an attendant loss of public
confidence in the whole planning process. He added that the allowance of spot re-zoning, carried out to
its logical conclusion can only result in a melange of business establishments adjoining residential
areas, of factories beside institutions, of fast-food hand-out establishments beside all the above; that
we will end in a jungle; that spot re-zoning can only be discerned as an attack on all accepted planning
principles. He stated he suggests that another most serious matter is: this must be considered in relation
to re-zoning and spot re-zoning and most important is that there is absolutely no policing procedures
available to ensure that the concession once granted is carried out as applied for. He cited an example
in this regard. He stated that he feels that policing procedures could well be devised by this Council
and put into effect to protect the public interest in cases which we are dealing with now, and he feels
this would be a move for the public good. He made a further point, stating that the practice of re-zoning
and spot re-zoning must indeed be a source of great frustration to the dedicated community planning staff
of this city, and stating that this practice fragments their plans before their very eyes - plans to which
they have devoted years of thought and effort - their sense of disappointment and their inability to
remedy the matter with no policing procedures may well be imagined and do not need to be enlarged upon -
one could hardly blame them if they threw up their hands in dismay and abandoned the struggle. He sug~
gested that planning groups should not be influenced by special situations or special pleaders at the
sacrifice of the Comprehensive Community Plan and, thus, of the public interest - that the Plan should not
be emasculated as these spot re-zonings do. He stated that the decisions of this Council can contribute
much to making our city a city of aesthetically pleasing vistas, a city with a built-up central business
core, a city of pleasant, quiet, green and airy residential areas, a city that is a pleasant place in
which to live, a city that is humanly enhancing. He stated that he beseeches the Council to avoid the
danger of local government committees and officials defaulting in their duties and allowing land use
decisions to be made by the market place. He stated that though the critical point is that growth is
inevitable, the way in which growth occurs is by no means inevitable and must be controlled in an orderly
manner; simply allowing the market place to determine whether and where growth occurs, whether for a home
site, a business site or a factory site, may involve extreme costs to the community - costs which must be
calculated over the long term - not just in their environmental consequences but in their economic, tax
and social consequences. He stated that the Council's decision should be directed to planning today to
solve the problems of tomorrow - not to creating at this meeting problems which must be solved in the
future at far greater costs than we can here and now estimate.
I
I
.
I
Councillor Higgins noted that 10 persons each signed each of the above named petitions. He
further noted that 5 persons who signed the petition live on Cliff Street which area Mr. Broderick did not
consider to be close to the 77 Coburg Street and Garden Street lot at its rear. Mr. Broderick replied
that depending on where they live on Cliff Street, it is within 200 feet of the said proposed re-zoning
area - he is not questioning that too much - that is a fair area. Councillor Higgins asked if Mr. Broderick
is aware that with regard to this abandoned Pentecostal church on Coburg Street the Council went through a
r~-zoning in which we were going to allow nine apartments in that building. Mr. Broderick replied in the .
affirmative. Councillor Higgins continued,-pointing'out,.that there was very little said about it at that
time. Mr. Broderick stated that he would not object to that because this is a residential area and you
would be maintaining the tone of the area and the whole residential ambience if we put persons in there;
he would be heartily in favour of that and he would agree to it if he were asked. Councillor Higgins
asked Mr. Broderick: would you say because of the heavy traffic situation involved - are you familiar with
the traffic that was created there when the Pentecostal church was there which ran services every evening,
sometimes during the day, at least three times on Sunday and most Saturdays? Mr. Broderick replied: quite
possibly. He added that he does not know the congregation of that church and he has no way of knowing how
many members they would have. Councillor Higgins replied that the membership of that church is close to
approximately 250 and they generated quite a bit of traffic but he never heard a complaint about it. Mr. I
Broderick agreed that it would definitely generate traffic, but only on church service times which,
hopefully, do not last more than an hour. Councillor Higgins asked Mr. Broderick: do you think that nine
bachelor apartments might create as much, if not more, traffic than a business insurance office would? He
stated that he cannot recall ever going to an insurance office to pay an insurance bill - it is usually
done by telephone or by mail. In reply, Mr. Broderick stated that in the Planning Advisory Committee
sessions these points were very clearly brought out - he does not know if they have been submitted to the
Council. Councillor Higgins replied that he has read them, and that he has them. Mr. Broderick pointed
out that it was very clearly brought out that there would be at least 40 employees in this business
concern; also, it was clearly brought out that the average attendance of customers to and fro from the I
office by personal visits would roughly run to an average of 25 a day - this means that we have 65 parking
areas required to service this situation; it was further brought out very strongly before the said Ad_
visory Committee that the lot which is proposed to be re-zoned leading directly into Garden Street could
at the most hold 9 vehicles, and that is passenger cars - he cannot really see space for only 9 vehicles
to service 65 a day. Councillor Higgins noted that Mr. Broderick would agree to the spot re-zoning for
nine apartments. Mr. Broderick replied that he would not be opposed to spot re-zoning for nine
apartments because they would preserve the ambiance of the area. Noting Mr. Broderick's question regarding
why the Planning Advisory Committee recommended approval of the re-zoning application this time as there
was no change from the previous times the application was turned down by the said Committee, Councillor
Higgins asked if Mr. Broderick is aware that it has gone from 6,600 square feet and 60 persons to 4,000
square feet and 40 persons, and this was the reason that the said Committee is recommending the application .
be approved. Mr. Broderick pointed out that it was turned down on those very grounds - the application
which he represented the citizens and interested parties where they made the application for 4,000 square'
feet - that was the last one which was down - the first application came before the Committee under the
name of Hilyard Holdings - it was turned down because it said 6,000 square feet and 63 employees - he knew
~
JI""
645
.
J(e-At:?>>/~
1.t9.hd6'.r$~)?
..L n:5 ~ pane.
.,(M_
!/ar .)-'!/
a~e//
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
that was turned down across the board - then, a new applic~tion was made in which it stated 4,000 square feet and
40 employees and that there would not be two storeys, et cetera. He stated that this is where his policing
argument comes in: who is going to tell what happens after they get there? In further reply to Councillor
Higgins' question, he stated that it was defeated on the 4,000 square feet basis and on the reduction in the
number of employees, and he finds it rather interesting to find when that application was defeated we are back
here again with an approval.
Mrs. Sl~tt~ry, a resident and owner of 23 and 25 Garden Street, advised of her objection to the said
proposed re-zoning, namely:- as a citizen, she does not like the idea of a parking lot when she looks out of her
front room, and in. the winter, with bad slippery conditions which can occur on Garden Street, she is afraid that
one of those cars is going. to slip and end up in her front room. She pointed out that her property is directly
across from the said proposed parking lot on Garden Street.
Mr. Harry Colwell, Barrister, was present on behalf of his client, Anderson Insurance Limited. He
advised that this former church property has been vacant for a period of over three years and a year ago the
property was re-zoned to permit nine bachelor apartment units, and that in that particular re-zoning application
only the Coburg Street property was being considered - that is, when the re-zoning was permitted for the nine
bachelor apartment units there was no off-street parking provided, whatsoever, as opposed to this present ap-
plication wherein the said Garden Street property is being added for the purpose of parking. He advised that when
the application was before Council in June, 1976 the proposal was for one of General Business use, as is now the
application - at that time it was indicated that the staff complement of the insurance agency would be 60 em-
ployees and that the proposed building would be modified by adding a third storey to create in excess of 6,000
square feet of office space; the Planning Advisory Committee did not recommend to Council that proposal and the
proposal subsequently was not approved by Common Council - however, since that time, and that was the reason for
the second application with respect to this matter, the situation had changed with respect to his client and the
proposal was made on the revised presentation wherein the existing building with two floors would be maintained
with an area of approximately 4,000 square feet of office space and the maximum number of employees would be 40
employees - in fact, since that time due to internal matters with respect to operation of the business, 20 of
these former employees have been relocated or are in the process of being relocated with other employers. With
regard to the second application and the requirements of the Zoning By-Law with respect to General Business use
and, specifically, the general insurance agency, he noted that the By-Law requires that there should be one
parking spot provided for each 600 square feet of office space which means that 6.66 parking spaces would be
required in relation to the 4,000 square feet of office space on the present application, and 7 parking spaces is
the minimum required to satisfy the By-Law - 9 parking spaces are available by use of the Garden Street property
and with some minor excavation another 2 spots for a total of 11, could be available by using the rear portion of
the Coburg Street property. With reference to the petition containing 100 signatures that was submitted to the
Planning Advisory Committee on behalf of his client, he advised that his client and he believe that the persons
signing the petition were people who had interest although they do concede that the employees of the Red Cross
area were not residents - but. certainly people who work in the area and were presumably concerned from the point
of view of congestion; as well, the names that are there from Paddock Street and Cliff Street they. feel are very
significant as they are still within the immediate area within the same 500-foot radius that the opponents live
in, as well. He noted that this application complies with the Zoning. By-Law requirement, particularly with
regard to the off_street parking. He noted .that with regard to the Comprehensive Community Plan, the general
area around this area which is proposed in this application is designed for future use as major institutional
uses; he believes there is a declining residential use in the area and that the proposed general use of a general
insurance agency does not seem to be entirely inconsistent with that use proposed under the Comprehensive Com-
munity Plan where it is suggested that the type of uses examples are given in the said Plan - hospitals, gaols,
religious institutions, homes for the aged, et cetera, municipal buildings and buildings intended primarily for
public assembly or for social or cultural activities - this is what the future is indicated for this general area
by virtue of the Comprehensive Community Plan. Regarding the principle of spot re-zoning, Mr. Colwell felt it is
a fair statement to say that any re-zoning done on the basis of any plan at some point in time is a spot re-
zoning. He stated he thinks that the principles that have been enunciated by Mr. Broderick on behalf of the
opponents are clear and correct from the point of view of the dangers of spot re-zoning - his client and he
personally are in accord with those general principles - however, he would beg to differ with Mr. Broderick in
his presentation that it is an unmanageable, uncontrollable sort of procedure - he would submit that the Community
Planning Act, particularly Section 39, is very particular with respect to giving the Planning Advisory Committee
and the Common Council the right to restrict and the right to control any type of re-zoning _ it is inherent in
the Community Plan - provision is made specifically for re-zoning applications - ln other words, it is recognized
under the statutes, and he thinks properly so, that regardless of any Comprehensive Community Plan there may be
situations that arise where a change is required or a change should be permitted, and he would point out again
that Section 39 of the said Act is the policing section in the statute which gives very wide powers of discretion
to the Advisory Committee in its recommendation and to the Council in its final decision on whether or not to
permit the re-zoning - to police and tie down exactly what type of use can be made, when it will be done, and the
whole gamut is covered by Section 39 - so he believes that the principle of spot re-zoning may be one that should
not be looked at if it was unfettered, but he suggests that the legislation and the legislators have properly
looked after that matter by the policing sections of the statute. With regard to the fact that this is a vacant
building, he feels that the public and certain members of Council are aware of the concern that has been ex-
hibited by the Council as a whole with respect to the number of vacant and unused buildings in the city and the
concern that is made from the point of view of possible fire, of vandalism, that does exist in that situation at
present. With respect to traffic, he stated that they have consulted to the best of their ability with officials
in the Police Department and officials in City Hall to ascertain their opinions with respect to this matter _ no-
one was concerned with respect to the parking lot and the access or ingress to or from Garden Street - it is felt
that the additional 10 or 11 vehicles that could possibly be parked there would be coming for the day-round
parking and would cause no problems from the point of view of getting into the parking lot in the morning and
getting out at the evening around 4.30. He advised that this insurance office is the type of operation where
primarily this office .is dealing with sub-agents throughout the Province of New Brunswick and these sub-agents
are contacting this office for the point of view of having policies written for their people in the various parts
of the Province - the firm, of course, does do business in Saint John as well, directly and through sub-agents in
the City of Saint John - but the principle job of the employees there is to sort out the paper work that is
required between the person who wants to be insured and the actual company who have their head offices elsewhere
that will actually be affecting the insurance coverage. He stated that looking at the present situation with the
existing office now, with the complement of 60 employees which would be reduced to at least 40 by the time the
office would be moved into the proposed premises, there are 17 parking spaces available - these parking spaces
have been reserved and designated primarily for the senior staff of the insurance agency and involved in the
people who have been relocated from the business a great number of these are of that senior level and the only
parking that is required now with respect to the present staff complement is approximately 10 vehicles - others
travel by public transit, they are working families where the wife is dropped off by the husband in the morning
and picked up in the evening - again, they cannot say that in the future the staff may not change and in those
circumstances will not alter but they do feel that on an average the parking provided as well as being in excess
of the requirements of the By-Law is more than satisfactory to look after the existing parking requirements of
the permanent staff. With regard to the customer use, he noted that it has been indicated here that the Planning
Advisory Committee would advise that there were at least 25 calls per day - he stated he believes that on checking
the minutes of the Planning Advisory meeting that would be found to be an inaccurate statement - the average is
in the area of 12 to 15 per day - the average length of stay of any of these persons is five minutes and primarily
for the purpose of paying an account, people who would be dropping by, paying the bill, and coming out again - so
646
",
we are talking about 12 to 15 people during an 8-hour day, or a density of probably less than two an hour.
He stated that the main concern that the Traffic Department had was the customer traffic - he has given
the Council the figures based on a staff complement of 60 - it would be suggesting that the business is
reduced by the reduction in the number of employees and that possibly the number of day to day calls by
clientele would also reduce. He stated that he feels that information that was given to him this afternoon
was very revealing, was that a spot check was made during the day to day on Coburg Street between Hazen
and Garden, on the actual block where the re-zoning is to take place, which is metered, and in the areas
where it is not metered it is designated by the signs, "One Hour Parking" - at 10.00 a.m. this morning
there were 13 vacant parking spaces, at 12.00 noon there were 10 vacant parking spaces, and at 1.45 p.m.
there were 11 vacant parking spaces - he uses that example for the weight that Council may want to give
it - it is only one day and it is something that they have not been prepared ~o look into for a great
length of time, but he thinks that it suggests that possibly that the congestion during the days, working
hours, once people get to work and until people go home again in the evening is not maybe what people here
have indicated it might otherwise be - they certainly agree that at the top of Garden Street at 8.00 a.m.
and sometimes at the foot of that street at 5.00 p.m. there is congestion but that is not necessarily due
to any use that is going on in that general area - we do have the other feeder streets, particularly City
Road, which do cause these traffic problems. He stated that, in review, that is the situation as they
have seen it - those are the application that his client has made and they are here at this meeting to ask
for Council's endorsement of the Planning Advisory Committee recommendation to approve the re-zoning.
/f'e-;;{p J7 iJ7 j'
Ifl7d e',I? S ~ n
J};SUfi5i1.fKe /6
The Mayor stated that he understands that Anderson Insurance Limited is going out of the wholesale
business of selling to agents, and he asked Mr. Colwell if that is true. Mr. Colwell replied that that is
not correct as far as he is aware. He stated that regarding the use as a general insurance agency that
function is still remaining. In regard to the Mayor's question as to whether the reduction from 60 to 40
employees of this company would mean a reduction in the volume of business handled by the company and the
company go down and go out of business altogether or would the company do the same volume of work with
the retention of 40 employees, Mr. Colwell explained that in the insurance industry in general, basically
what is happening is some of the national firms who write the policies in all cases are not dealing with
the middle man or the general insurance agent - they are becoming direct sellers and as a result of that
there are certain clients that the middle man is losing. The Mayor stated that he just wanted to make
sure that we did not get stuck with a building there when a business is going from 60 to 40 employees in a
short period of time that they are not going out of business. The Mayor stated that as a result of
telephone calls he has received from people who said that this dealing of spot zoning is a religious thing
or a mixture of a lodge he would ask whether or not this is a fact and whether 11r. Colwell believes this.
Mr. Colwell made negative reply, adding that there has been no indication to this effect.
Councillor Higgins asked that Mr. Colwell and his client are sure that Section 39 of the Com-
munity Planning Act means that they have to file in the Registry Office to limit the use of the above
named lots or properties to that of an insurance office consisting of not more than 4,000 square feet of
office space, a maximum staff of 40 persons, parking for a minimum of nine vehicles, and normal business
hours of 8.30 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. Monday through Friday - that is the only reason they are getting it, and
they have to agree to that. Mr. Colwell replied: that is correct and these conditions are agreed to.
Councillor Davis stated he would like to follow that up and point out to Mr. Brown that that goes on all
the time - these restrictions are there - the building can be disposed of only under those conditions, Mr.
Colwell replied that that is correct.
ft/a/zf-~r
~/""/5
Mr. Walter Harris who resides at 10 Paddock Street advised that he is in favour of the proposed
re-zoning, for the following reasons:- he has only been residing in this area for the past six months but
on at least four or five occasions in that time on walking by this building at 77 Coburg Street he has
seen vandals there so he is quite concerned with the vandalism potential of that idle building standing
there and he would like to see something done with it and he thinks an insurance office would be an ideal
building; the other reasons is the fact that if it were zoned as an insurance office then at least he
would have a possibility of some place to park his car at nights because there would be none of the
insurance people who would park there cars at nights.
Councillor Cave stated that he supported the re-zoning of the said properties in the first
instance, but since that time he has had different thoughts. He stated that he has had calls from the two
Dr. Zeds and people in that area who are concerned traffic-wise. He stated that he understands the
decision was not unanimous at the Planning Advisory Committee's meeting, and he asked Mr. Zides whether
the vote was, or was not, a very close one. Mr. Zides replied that with the qualification that very few
items are unanimous, he will say it was not unanimous. Councillor Cave stated that, in view of this, he
will have to oppose the re-zoning, and that he will vote against it at this meeting. Councillor Cave
stated that he does not know exactly where the new eastern access approach will be and that he is con-
cerned about that and is afraid that if we go ahead with this re-zoning we may have to purchase that
property a few years hence.
At the request of Councillor Higgins, Mr. Zides gave an explanation of the sequence of events
regarding the re-zoning applications made for use of this property for an insurance office, advising that
the present application was before the Planning Advisory Committee twice - the first time it was with the
revised figures of 40 employees and 4,000 square feet - the first time, it was turned down by that Com-
mittee - the Committee was asked to reconsider the application and this time the Committee reversed its
decision and is making a recommendation; at another meeting of the Committee both sides (prononents and
opponents) spoke again regarding this re-zoning matter.
Councillor M. Vincent stated that although he has the Planning Advisory Committee's correspondence
regarding the application he does not have the Committee's reasons why it made the recommendation (that is
contained in its letter of September 23rd, 1976 to Council) which would enable him to more beneficially
decide whether he is for or against this project, and he asked if 11r. Zides can speak on this matter. Mr.
Zides stated that he thinks. what really happened at the meeting is a free-wheeling discussing with both
sides at the Planning Advisory Committee bringing their points of view forth and he thinks the very
argument that the Council has heard at this meeting in part was one of the arguments advanced by the said
Committee or at least some of the members that you have the group that was concerned about the removal of
a business activity from the central part of the city into this area - you also had some people who felt
that there was a lot of activity in the area and that they could not really portend what would happen _
and they voted - and that is what really happened; a rather free-wheeling type of discussion, with, in the
discussion itself, no conclusion reached until the vote. He stated that at the second presentation before
the said Committee on this very present application Mr. Broderick filed a petition with the Committee
which contained a considerably smaller number of names than is on the present petition. He stated he is
not sure where the additional names come from, but it raises the point that he thinks we should have a
chance to check - and that is that there is a rule in the Planning Act that says that if the owners of
one-third or more of the land within 300 feet object then the Council has to have a majority of the vote
of the whole Council to override that objection - at the moment, he is not really sure that applies
because he has not tried to spot where all these additional petitioners in objection live - but it also
has to be owners so he is not really sure what the situation is but it is a point that he thinks needs to
.1
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
I"""
647
.
I
I
.
I
be checked out. Councillor M. Vincent, noting that comment has come at this meeting from both the proponents and
the opponents of the proposal relating to traffic and traffic congestion, asked if the Advisory Committee in
making its decision contact or negotiate or discuss with the Works Department who control and look after traffic
flows, and with the Police Department who have to enforce them - were they involved in the decision-making? Mr.
Zides replied that he was not present at one of the meetings because he was not in the city, and that he would
have to make negative reply, from his recollection. Councillor M. Vincent asked if the Mayor was going to accept
the petitions that were presented as being the final and binding petitions on which the point Mr. Zides has
brought forward to Council will be examined on, if, in fact, there are, as Mr. Zides says, a third. Mr. Zides
stated that what he was trying to say is that the petition that is before Council really is the final one as far
as Council is concerned because the advertising requires people who want to file objections to do so in time for
this hearing. Councillor M. Vincent stated that his question, in the interests of eliminating confusion later
on, is: if there are a third of the owners in the area opposing it, and if Mr. Zides is advising the Council now
that if there is, Council has to have a certain majority vote of Council to overrule that, then the Council
should first of all determine if in fact that percentage exists on the petition. He asked if that is correct.
Mr. Zides replied that it is correct - one-third of the owners. He added that such vote would be before final
reading.
Councillor Kipping stated that as far as the community planning philosophy as expounded by Mr. Broderick
is concerned, he agrees completely with Mr. Broderick's points about community planning philosophy but he would
point out that under present zoning - zoning of major institutional in which this property now is - a nursing
home, for example, could be set up there which could contain conceivably from 20 to 30 patients he would es-
timate, or occupants of the nursing home, which would generate, he would believe, more traffic than the proposed
insurance office. He stated he also believes that in this case the General Business zoning is in this case only
which is limited by Section 39 of the said Act compatible with the major institutional zoning, so that one of the
objections that he had previously to this matter has been removed by this fact. He made the point that, here, we
have an instance and it has happened several times before where a matter is brought back before Council and,
indeed, before the Planning Advisory Committee several times. He recalled that he has urged in the past that
some limitation be provided in our legislation, either by by-law or by petition to the Provincial Government, if
that is the way to do it, whereby these kinds of appearances can be limited. He stated that he thinks it is
wasteful of time and that he believes it goes against human nature to do it this way because he thinks if you
brought this in five times on a matter of such fine balance as this one is in, where it is really a delicately-
balanced matter, as indicated by the fact that the said Committee has changed its mind a couple of times, on it
and that the Council members have, indeed, changed their minds once on it, and may do so, again - so, he believes
there should be some limitation and he would suggest to the Planning Director that some move be made to limit the
number of times that a matter can be brought before a Councilor before the Planning Advisory Committee within a
given period of time - that is not to mean that it is to be denied forever, but within a given period of time.
Councillor Davis stated that on that very matter it was brought before Council and Council turned it down. With
reference to Mr. Broderick's plea against the heresy of spot zoning, he stated he thinks that everyone knows that
this Council does not take spot zoning lightly - that is why the Council is having this discussion, right now -
however, to say that there should be no spot zoning is certainly not true, and he does not think that Mr. Broder-
ick means that because to set a rule that is carefully thought out, no matter how carefully thought out it is
situations change and if, as Mr. Broderick says, we were spot zoning this for an apartment house there would be
no opposition - so what do you do - you spot zone - we discuss the spot zoning, we vote on it and turn it down or
we accept it but it is carefully thought out and thoroughly considered and he does not think that the Council is
taking it lightly, but, rather, very seriously and he thinks that the Council is going about it in the proper
way - the Council'has its rules and is following same.
Councillor Higgins stated that he will move the following motion provided that Mr. Zides will bring
back before third reading directions to Council with reference to the petitioners who came in at this meeting of
Council - about one-third in relation to the number of votes required by Council.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Parfitt
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
~e-;?<?I?/J7~ The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the former church building at 77
;,7/,1~I"~t?)? Coburg Street and the lot at its rear next to 28 Garden Street and across the street from 21, 23 and 25 Garden
Street from "RW-l" Multiple Family district to "B-2" General Business district, be read a first time.
1nStd"aJ7C
/-t-d
.
I
I
. J? e -;:<tJ I?//?:J'
/l~L6'rs<?J?
r~ SKl"a/;iCe
--<-6-'L
lll....
Councillor Green stated that he has received several calls regarding this proposed re-zoning, and that
he has studied the area in question and the correspondence relating to the proposed re-zoning and has given
serious consideration to the matter, and knowing that the present building could be zoned for nine apartments and
looking at it he recalled that personally he would rather see what was contemplated than an apartment building go
up there; he looked at the Comprehensive Plan for the whole area and he recalls that when the Plan came into
being he asked the question as to what could be done regarding spot zoning, et cetera, if we wanted to change the
Plan to have spot zoning, and he recalls that the reply was that spot zoning would be the answer to it and even
though the Plan was adopted it would be meaningful until it was changed. He stated that in looking at the whole
area he believes that this spot zoning for this insurance building and office would be a much better business for
that area than apartment buildings, and he will support the proposed re-zoning.
Councillor Pye stated that he cannot in good conscience support the re-zoning, for the following
reasons:- having spent 32 years in the Police Department and having spent 13 of those years as a Traffic Sergeant
he has a fair knowledge of traffic movement and traffic conditions as they exist within the boundaries of our
city; he has noted time and time again that the area extending from the junction of Garden and Coburg Streets to
the St. Joseph's Hospital is prevalent with traffic violations - people parking in restricted areas, parking too
near the corner - day after day these violations exist, yet Mr. Colwell cited that on certain occasions between
certain hours there were so many parking spaces available - that could be, but any time he himself has endeavoured
to park there or any time he happened to walk by there which was very frequently he noted these violations which
indicated lack of proper traffic facilities - so, if you are going to add more fuel to the fire, you are definitely
going to worsen the situation.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Pye and M. Vincent
voting "nay".
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint John and
Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of
The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns re-zoning the former church building at 77
Coburg Street and the lot at its rear next to 28 Garden Street and across the street from 21, 23 and 25 Garden
Street from "RM-l" Multiple Family district to. "B-2" General Business district, be read a second time.
648
.,
?/.;1/J/7, 19dv/s.
L'cm>>7 .
$<<.11, 1Ya~
2J'y-A~W
/ll1de~~J1
LSkrb1m:Je ,.(-z6
Zt?>>/h:f .ffy-
q-me/7~ .me/?r
ra prt?;#e/''y
CJ4.11ds $; $.
$rewey /~L
t/r,6a~ ~/?eR/Oi'
!?pco.;J CrG'u-'p
,.<'-/-L
S/t-e ~f("
-<eO/ses
C G: #. #c/d/n:1s
~~d.
S/te " ~ "
Question being taken, the motion was carried with the Mayor and Councillors Cave, Pye and M..
Vincent voting "nay".
Read a second time the by-law entitled, '~ Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that in accordance with the recommendation of the Planning
Advisory Committee, Schedule "A" of the Zoning By-Law, the City of Saint John Zoning Map be amended by
removing the lots so indicated on the submitted re-zoning print from "RM-l" Multiple Residential district
to "B-2" General Business district pursuant to a resolution and agreement under Section 39 of the Com-
munity Planning Act to be filed in the Registry Office to limit the use of the lots or properties at 77
Coburg Street and 28 Garden Street to that of an insurance office consisting of (a) not more than 4,000
square feet of office space; (b) a maximum staff of 40 persons; (c) parking for a minimum of nine vehicles;
and (d) normal business hours of 8.30 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. Monday through Friday:
AND FURTHER that authority be granted to advertise the proposed amendment of the Municipal
Development Plan, Schedule 2-A, the Future Land Use Map, by redesignating the lots at 77 Coburg Street and
28 Garden Street from Major Institutional uses to sub-centre Commercial uses.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that the above mentioned correspondence relating to the
above mentioned proposed re-zoning be received and filed.
The Common Clerk stated that with regard to the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law for
Olands New Brunswick Brewery Limited, by inserting a provision in the Light Industrial zoning regulations
which would permit the Planning Advisory Committee to allow a brewery, subject to such terms and con-
ditions as it may impose, the necessary advertising took place and no written objections were received.
Mr. M. Barry Roderick, Barrister, was present as solicitor for the above named company and
advised that he found this summer that through accident, mistake or inadvertence the brewery was a non-
conforming use. He pointed out that the brewery is not permitted, by a section of the Zoning By-Law, to
make alterations, add to, or struc~urally alter the building, and it is a matter of almost routine or
housekeeping measure that his client is making this application, but it is a matter also of some concern
to his client that the company is prevented from enlarging or improving its premises and perhaps creating
more jobs for the company by its present circumstances.
It was noted that .no other person was present, to either speak for or against the said proposed
Zoning By-Law amendment.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law
f The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns inserting a new clause (da) to
follow clause (d) in subsection (2) of Section 131 of the Zoning By-Law to read.as follows: "(da) a
brewery", be read a first time.
Read a first time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By_Law
of The City of Saint John and Amendments Thereto", insofar as it concerns inserting a new clause (da) to
follow clause (d) in subsection (2) of Section 131 of the Zoning By-Law to read as follows: "(da) a
brewery", be read a second time:
AND FURTHER that the letter from the Planning Advisory Committee, dated August 31st, 1976,
recommending the above named amendment to the Zoning By-Law, be received and filed.
Read a second time the by-law entitled, "A Law to Amend The Zoning By-Law of The City of Saint
John and Amendments Thereto".
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that by
Common Council resolution the City entered into an indenture dated July 19th, 1974 with the Rocca Group
Ltd. to lease all that parcel of land known as Site "K" on Main Street in the North End Urban Renewal Area
at a rental figure of $32,980.00 for the initial fifteen years of a sixty-year lease; that discussions
with the mortgage companies have led the company to request that Phase II of this development be a sep-
arate mortgage from Phase I and thus the company will have two mortgages containing the identical con~
ditions of the existing one, with rents totalling the same figure of $32,980.00 per year; that the Par-
tnership has given its approval to this request and the City's Legal Department has reviewed the necessary
legal documents and is in agreement; and requesting that the Council approve the surrender of the existing
lease and give authorization for the Mayor and Common Clerk to sign the replacing two separate leases with
the Rocca Group Ltd. for the development of Site "K" in question -- be received and filed and the request
complied with.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Manager, advising that Site
"L" at the corner of Metcalf Street and Lansdowne Avenue in the North End Urban Renewal Area has been
included in publicly advertised Calls for Expression of Development Interests and the City has received a
proposal for th~ development of a one-storey prestige office building on this site with provision being
made to add a second storey on the rear portion in the future, should the need arise; that the proposal
which was submitted by C.G.M. Holdings Ltd., has received the approval of the Co-Ordinating Committee and
their plans are being reviewed by the technical representatives of the three levels of Government; that
.
I
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
~
,...-
6~9
Vrb.i1/7 ;Pt!/7~d
. $/~-e ".4"
C.C/Y!
/h/d/~s ..<.
ecause the acquisition of the necessary financing for the project is viewed much more favour ably when the
deveioper is the freeholder of the subject property, the said developers have indicated their need and desire to
purchase this site at a figure of $74,105.00, based on $2.00 per square foot and the said company forwarded a
certified cheque in the amount of $7,410.50 representing 10% of the purchase price as evidence of its good
intentions; that the Co-Ordinating Committee has approved both the value of the land and the sale; and requesting
the approval of Common Council for the sale of the said property known as Site ilL" comprising approximately
37,052 square feet to C.G.M. Holdings Ltd., for an amount of $74,105.00 -- be received and filed and the request
complied with.
Councillor Davis asked if $2.00 per square foot is the current rate for that part of the world. Mr.
Thompson advised that independent appraisers have provided appraisal figures in this regard.
I
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Davis voting "nay".
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
/l.NII~r
Cr.?J/,,?/) '/.-fd-
I-~~~::::;
~.
Seconded by Councillor Hodges
RESOLVED that as requested and recommended. by the City Manager,. approval
be granted for the acquisition of all the freehold interests in F-6-19-8 and 9, 53 1/2-55 and 57-59 Dock Street,
in thte total amount of $299,439.00 from H. M. Hopper Co. (1961) Ltd., free and clear of all encumbrances and.to
include business disturbance claim and any and all other claims of any nature whatsoever by the present owner,
and settlement to be subject to the normal adjustments for outstanding taxes, water taxes, et cetera, this
property being required for the North End Urban Renewal Scheme and the Partnership's approval for the acquisition
of the above noted property in the total amount of $299,439.00 having been acknowledged.
On motion of Councillor Green
Seconded by Councillor Cave
RESOLVED that the letter from the City Solicitor in explanation of the
~ ~/ L'_/.- 'L. reason The Church of the Nazarene could not comply with the Common Council requirement contained in the Council
/Z';f~/It'/~ resolution of June 28th, 1976 that a certified cheque for the purchase price of the Annex Property on Sand Cove
.~~~~~ &?~ Road be delivered within twenty-four hours, and advising that on August 26th, 1976 written correspondence was
received from the solicitor for the said Church requiring that the City arrange for a proper right-of-way or
~d;(~/,~)7e easement for sewer and water purposes and advise when same is ready so that the transaction may be completed, and
~ J ~t' further advising that the required survey of water and sewer lines serving the site as well as lines through the
~1,7~ site was undertaken and is now completed, and that the New Brunswick Housing Corporation has given a firm in-
;p~ ;S7~e')( dication that the Corporation will convey the sewer and water pipes and grant an easement for water and sewer
~ ~~~ lines to the City without cost, and that the solicitor for the said Church is aware of the current status of the
~ ~ JY transaction and has expressed the willingness to proceed pending completion of the relevant grant of easement of
the City, and submitting a resolution that it is necessary that the Council adopt if it wishes to proceed on this
matter and have the Legal Department close the transaction, be received and filed:
I
AND FURTHER that the Common Council resolution of June 28th, 1976, respecting the sale of the Annex
Property on the Sand Cove Road comprising approximately 3.04 acres of land be amended to delete the reference to
twenty-four hours and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute a deed conveying to The Church of
the Nazarene the property with the reservation of an easement for service lines.
The Common Clerk advised that Councillor MacGowan has requested that she be excused from attending this
meeting of Common Council.
On motion of Councillor Hodges
~<<~ /I,k~
e'XCg~d -If.
Cb~>>tJ/'/ ~f
Seconded by Councillor Green
RESOLVED that Councillor MacGowan be excused from this meeting of Common
Counc il.
Read a letter from the Municipal Planning Director with reference to advertising which has commenced
for the re-zoning of property, the former Nelson Vale, requested by the Rocca Group, advising that the requested
re-zoning would create a business area in an area slated under the Municipal Development Plan to be used for
light density residential purposes and, in addition, although there are no current plans for the development of
~;r, the proposed business area, the proponent's intention is to ultimately develop a shopping centre there. The
~ - letter states that it is, therefore, necessary to commence advertising for the required amendment to the Muni-
e-;?~)7~~ cipal Development Plan and it might also be.advisable to re-commence advertising the proposed re-zoning to show
;f't7Ct!.;;;> 01"'e>t,; that the purpose of the "B-2" zone would in the long run be for a shopping centre. In explanation of this
~t?Af. matter, Mr. Zides advised that the Rocca Group has been proposing a development known heretofore as Nelson Vale,
. and that this is a piece of land-locked area which did not have any access and they have been looking for access
~~I'or;'e to this piece of land which is separated from Manawagonish Road or any other road by intervening land - they have
~<<~~, been looking at several different areas and finally have found one that they can acquire, which is directly in
/V- front of theirs, and it is one of the Carvell family holdings. He stated that they are proposing therefore to
I (4re/s&>/? extend a road from Manawagonish Road towards the north and this gives them a piece of land of about 30 acres and
~ ~ ~~_~ they are proposing a road through it, some housing towards the back part, some housing on one side of the road
~ e / and a 15- to 16-acre piece of land for business purposes and they make no bones about the fact that they do want
a shopping centre there but they are not asking for permission to put a shopping centre there at the moment; what
they have agreed to do is to come back whenever they are ready to attempt to put a shopping centre there and to
obtain permission at that time. He stated that under the Municipal Plan shopping centres cannot be located
except on the basis of a market survey which the proponent carries out or has carried out for him to prove that
that size of a location is justified - that has to be approved by the Planning Advisory Committee. The Mayor
noted that the same developer is saying to us that we have to build up the centre of the city and in order to do
it we have to bring the shopping people to the centre of the city, to the core, and the Mayor is wondering why.
Mr. Zides agreed that the developer is saying that, and he added that the developer is talking in this matter of
the land off Manawagonish Road in the time frame of about three years before he ~ight turn his attention to that
land. The Mayor noted that it would be about-the time that the developer would start building on this other one.
Mr. Zides replied that he cannot answer that question. Councillor Higgins pointed out the way that he reads it
is, the advertising that is now being made might lead people to believe we are only talking about the development
of housing, and that Mr. Zides would like to make it abundantly clear that when people are going to be either for
or against this building development that the proponents' intention is to ultimately develop a shopping centre,
and that should be included in the advertising so that nothing is hidden at all in the advertising. Mr. Zides
made affirmative reply, stating that his reason is because later on when they come back, if this thing goes
through, for a shopping centre proposal there is nothing requiring anyone at City Hall to advertise their in-
tention at that time.
/f!u/?,PI67nn_
.
I
5~t7 f7j7//?!f
(Jf? /?-Z:- ft 6' S
,?tl ;'/ c .Y
.
On motion of Councillor Higgins
Seconded by Councillor Kipping
RESOLVED that the Common Council give permission to re-commence advertising
....
~
650
l?e-:;;:t?/?/n'1
'Rpoc... t:rlfu,?
.,( #d,
ft/ed- f/O;/e S~-
> d///"
(/Ve~>> /4/e )
$t41J-d/Y-
$ht?j7j?/I?ff
(U)J-tre $" ~//cy
,(,,;fnPl 1 Cp,mm,
(?~~t:-rf/'n. /?e /'
c7Ps//73 PT
h:?aL /'leal"
?/'?//?7Po:>e
~J%r ~/ff;nd
. vy,;;;i-ers,!;;;d
j7t:?//~7f/1!'17 /7e
icInd s~-d/I/.
~,PI: ~~uPdl
1f6".5.t?u~&S"
,......
"'-
,
,~
,
"
the proposed re-zoning of property, the former Nelson Vale and land in its vicinity, requested by the:
Rocca Group, to show that the purpose of the proposed "B-.2" zoning classification would, in the long run,
be for a shopping centre, and that advertising also be authorized for the proposed amendment of the
Municipal Development Plan regarding the said property,
The Mayor raised the question as to whether the above is good planning, noting that sooner or
later we are going to re-ZOne this when we do this, and we are saying that we want to build up, and the
only control the Council has is to refuse this type of re-zoning and not allow shopping centres to go out
around the perimeter of our city, in order to build the centre of our city up and put some life into the
centre of our city. He noted that we are discouraging this by pulling people away from the centre of the
city. He asked: is this good planning? Mr. Zides replied that he has his reservations. Councillor Davis
asked Mr. Zides what is the purpose of this advertisement - does this advertisement commit us to approve
the shopping centre, or does it not? Mr. Zides replied that it does not - it is obviously a step towards
the way but the point is there is not at the moment a proposal to put a shopping centre in - the recom-
mendation when it comes from the Planning Advisory Committee will be that no development be permitted on
this property until after there has been a market study as required by the Municipal Development Plan.and
that market study has been accepted or otherwise by the Planning Advisory Committee; if it is accepted,
the Council is going to be in for no voice at Council level under the present legislation to prohibit or
support the shopping centre - what will be required at the same time, too, will be a change in the over-
all planning concept because at the moment the Municipal Plan does not visualize a shopping centre at that
location. Councillor Green felt that if controls are put on we are helping the outside areas to attract
shopping centres to those areas, which would also have the effect of drawing customers from the City of
Saint John area to those shopping centres outside the City.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Davis, and Pye, voting "nay".
Councillor Davis advised that he voted against the motion because he does not want a shopping centre
there.
Councillor Davis asked that an item from the Land Committee be added to the agenda.
On motion of Councillor M. Vincent
~
.
I
I
Seconded by Councillor Kipping .
RESOLVED that the item from the Land Committee be placed on the
agenda at this time.
Councillor Davis read at this time the item from the Land Committee, which is a letter recom-
mending that the City file with the Department of Natural Resources an objection to the closure of the
reserved road near Primrose, within the Loch Lomond Watershed, on the grounds that such closure is being
considered to facilitate subdivision of the land and that such subdivision could cause pollution of the
City's water supply.
On motion of Councillor Davis
Seconded by Councillor M. Vincent
RESOLVED that the letter, dated September 27th, 1976, from the
Land Committee advising that the City has received a notice from the Department of Natural Resources,
concerning the proposed closure of a reserved road near Primrose, within the Loch Lomond Watershed, and
that the Department of Natural Resources indicated by telephone on September 27th that with regard to the
deadline date of September 24th, 1976 for submission of objections to the said closure the Department will
hold the closure up until the end of the present week so an objection may be filed if desired; and further
advising that the said notice was referred by Common Council to the Land Committee for a report and at a
meeting of September 7th, 1976 it was resolved by the said Committee that it be recommended to Common
Council that an objection be filed with the Department of Natural Resources to the closure of the reserved
road near Primrose on the grounds that such closure is being considered to facilitate subdivision.of the
land and that such subdivision could cause pollution of the City's water supply -- be received and filed
and the recommendation adopted.
On motion
The meeting adjourned.
Common Clerk.
~--._-
I
.
I
I
.
...4
II!"
~-,;;;.....ur"'?."7' t i'"'--~ /'--/ I .
.. . 1tl964~_tT; r.-...;y.~, $E'/trA 'ee/
~/'1ff" seR'l'/ee. /(i.~/A ~s _ 7# y-.ald- _ 7,,~{A:1"%:~ '1
&Jj------
- -.,- ".-,.-~.-
';;:.:'~-'_.::':- ',-;,.
-'."~ .~_.~." . ...
- ,.-" -~~~" ... ..,
- "..~. -- " "
---_._.~---".- . ---
"..~~- ..." ,., -.
..;w~"~, I _.... ,_"".."
.w__ __._ .___ _._,
" -~...~.. ~_. 0' .. .,,_
- .-~-~_.. -.. .-. -- ....
E-;''''-''''''-h- 0:" :'
-.... .... -- ._~ .- ~
.?i~Jt-~'~~'~0:~~~-C
>,_...._~~_...._. "_"h'_~_ .. _"
"._~.' -~ ,~. ....~> '. .-
<- -" ,-.." ". ,,-- ~,
. *_......u._.v_........._....
i:~""" ~-_.. .:.~~.. .,,~.: ~ -."
L~:. ,;~r~_.'~;~~ii;.~:~~-
I,";;' ; -..: ? :~:?;:~{i:~:;- ,
~ .'-- ,,' .-.~' "'.". .'.
[_.~. _.;.. /..- .'.",
C "
;-
.
\;;/
.
-,rrz f}~p$(7" 5"~ ~-l, ~a.:%Z~f!s-77"
74 t/f?
7 wft.t? ~u en
f9//.)~/JdsCJg#ch, 7e/;?;
.4~~d6!~~~g~
ttlip.e~~J~ 'fJl-ff%7~h 1
/J/t-Il1fn~ ""en.l:, f~ /132,
~~(;1/ub.s 7;""..- /t?2, /o'?' //4 /.:t~ /.;7/; /.a~
~t:U7Ta>>~ N_?:
_. /Ii/ad/ria7/; :J3a:)e-6~//%d/'7t///OhSh7s /r7C: /.;?~
!l-tf m/p..:d -g~:t #df?t /~~
IlI'1'l/rI? ff'e;;.~Brd~il7>>~y.dp./?/s /rL-/:( Ii;
Iln/ave $t/)-~I/,I /i3?; 5~
/j,.Ie;/at ES'k/'~,/.EJ~
/lflbhJHlod'..;d-/PJ? $ta;r6/d <;" ~~ /~~
_1..L9{"~; a t?Rdr-'JdoflS .../~L, /.~~ /~/, ~(}6,J~%
_ ,fno..h/7fed; /h2.,.2:l~~4t-2~,,2 ~6(},..:t~
Z;;~~~/;';;;~(f€;trr,-6-2~ E3hJe:;:~~ J~.:l/&~~
42). g. /4J/L/>>fs ..I-t~ D2t?4
.4/lpoFf; ';;'/0 TuI'.rdJd/~),.,:{//(d,;J,
=I :;:/[fZ~~~:2//(bry~<7>~~~
~;;1~'~~;':;2M:~~;c~
4$s~C'/~s ah~/:'N"';> ~.yoor;6;;.6,,~ d:l51f
~ t7/tA , ~.
--
:;;
/lndensPh -Ins u~
f/,."eds" .:l7fi:
/l.b~#bir {!Ph;~/.s.s/(,~ .:/g4 b/?:
I1l~J'!r 196/_~t'~ a",m/~..:J fJ/,
/Il;!i~n, :Z;;h~ .::I fJ /,
/?l?lRNmJ? --9vkN1d~//e ,.9~S"C6'.... 3".3,
/I",mCl/ ~sr.ue "(e~vl1,, !J3Z 3 ~51,
It
....
tf'
e
. ~J?tLa Q~e~~!I ~/"{7~.;)J?~ ~!JI(.
.
',I
.-
.~
,..
-e
.Jjghk ~ fit~o3Z /(J(J,3.7~
..&~k/{ t~Wt/lle//)~,7~) .y:a~~~
7brpoy,:70hn, ~~7~ .
.l3~~Apre '/PL" /~~ /f"-ZJfJlr .107:;V~2-1/J,~~ .:)#~ 2?<,c7_ ?~,e
:l3a~er7'-v-Sf?d;r/ro /~/, /~~
fiDlPI?I?S- //o/?A-ihS /4? /5h; 3/;'.
/
'7J;;;/~ .7Ohn SzfeL';;'p'l!; -2.b:Z
7dA7/en?a.l?.s; ~.';U:7C'/s. d?9~
e ' C1'.
:J3.;n.J'9/#u /~ C/.;;;l"t?heIl? J; ;? -< &:
$..?fI';;'~ ?Jr, 3~~
.7J.;u.krs ..)~D""
-~~~~~~ ~5"~ h/P/~//p;:!~r
~
~~,.. -/bY'~.J'" p/(
'Jkl?/<f-.,;J~&( 5J'.:2..t,05;
~1/.,4e<< b~1L
~A-t?/'f~an/:..dL 'Pd~ /a'~/ //#.3" b/~
.
=I
=I
~e#; /If~I"/PH,-Sub-pf;l/., :?~~
'3~.K~ ~/kr, .asr~;~~l!}g~.
Je//..:/kl"..>>p ~~Y.5~R7 K. _
~5Z
3=-esb~ ~u~ 5'.24
U1. .~./k&~-"?;n.J"- 5".2~
'.S~."ff{Lfldi!!P'> ~.pLy S:~~ ~7f
.
C'o ~
'Y/~~~.3S.~35:9, 31J'.2,..fl ?;;JY6. /fll~ /M5; ~/~ ~~4 ~
"'.'
. (
,~
,.
.
,
.
"
e
',.e
,'{~S-,b:;l7,b:;l6,6/3 ,c.r
.
tl
.
I
:=;;>
e.
L/
I!.;msdi,;,n :llh../HLt!qJs-c-/ I7f Cor'pu /~?
6wur4 :Sd&t?/771fe> 7. S :,,~r> /,
~~ - &? :qo h;...f';',~Zl /~~lrt!! _ J
"~;:r~o.
,-,
. i?~ pF':!J(?Ujf>~e,J-;r~~.n; ~45;#4~( /d.2.. ~7:..~,~p"tfs~~C/~
......L._
"
"i
~\
.
,\
,
,
~
,S"7/ ,~'1?~~~,~6h,~ .z,~59.~a~:N7~ol.,B8:4:.!J8/,3~ ,:.%.z.JS9,8~:.!J~.z,333,3/G,,3/~,.:J()g,~ 9"?,':<'9t' .
5~f~?~,6~/- ,
e.<<.
~:'
r-..r
.Ci'-~"'~~4>bf~~ -7,'~//,B,/~/~3p,3/'~Z'5;G1?7~7/'~48:Z,ff~8'-~~5;~~-~ ;?,/t'~ /tJ0'/t'-~//~//~//%/';<4/c:l~
, /ff'~ ,/92.,/f!/,/744, /6~/67,,/~!J'/6",/!i?;/~$,P~?:/~ //~~,/~/,/~,/.B?,/.ab, /3~ ,/.:-;t:N/.;(~,./.:?.3,/.;z.:<.
-- ---/9 ,. /S-s;. / '?o~-/~{,;. -:/'7, :/??: if2p/, -;J.-/?1f,;.Vs;;.z::r~ :.:t~.2, -.:l ~5;;;<S:2~~3"&:.--;;?~;:l~t:),-;;?b/,;;?b2; ;;?~~;;'-bi!i;"~-7~ -;z 78',
_ _ - ,3-Z1',.a Z4plr9~5;.a~L,$5D,3*3 ,!W-~_,331Z, 3.3 7-,3a(?-,~~.?:.3~ S;3;1..&>,3/~_,.3P~.3t:).;t,!;U/Jp,a2-?~.;ef?~ J8$"';.:{~o
31~ .395; 38', 3W,~~~~/3,.~/',WZ~/8,"H~~~~ .y-~fT,'Y~~,y~1If~-!S;-7L3~~7,~.;z,~5'.3,~~.y-~
- - - - - - -;$'7',5'78,~(j$7/) ,~,~~ff'S~S-53;5"S-/.s~,5"~2,!i3?;ff37,5;':l/,~(),.5""()?,tn:JK;S(?S- ~8'F :1L31/. ~/ ,.~6D
?7~I~, 5F't1.f~hd;>J?, 5V,{ ~"g,f~.2, .13Z?,_6.t24-60~~/.2,_b/1fb/7--h/Y:~O, b~/'_G.:l3,.r;iJt~ b_-Y/' ~.y.2,bc~ _ \
- -1~~if!t-'~~.'1r" ~1t~a,w; 7a7!fKM/'~ p.sl1!ji:d~'::$)Il"%.P% f"Z/oi-/.;; ff4;;%/~ /$6;
,/'1 ~,/ $',/ 5;i'79,/?7,/7h.17!),/7.3 '/7(;1,,/6~,/(;/ ,/60 ,/59;,75'f?,/5'7,/5.;:J/5"/,/~7,/-r-6 '/~If'I"~.z ,I"/t'O
--- --~.f:?-e1T,-.;(()~AP,1-~';.:l,:r'7,-;fl~(?, ~~;Z~~/,-;fl~8;-;:tb"tf~7~-~ 7$;~S5;;;?3'-;,r ?~~?;(~?.:e.;-;;!P~-::?P$;-ap2;.30.3, 3/5; .
- ----- ,-3tJO-a7ff.i77,-p7~.9~s;,~~6a,~,-36/'36o-,5!iF,~3~g,~~o:Z.3~5;33~ 3a3,g~:?,3;1.?,.3~/-,3/P '~~r,$/6
3 "5:.3,,,. ~.4/(;tf!~/.2,.~/8,.I/-~f! ~.2.3,~!}1 ~7,'.y-.:?B;~~, ~#-7,.......,.,8: 9!>/,~, ""'5'7, ~:P,~3.,~~~-S"7/-
- ~- ---_;597 ~9;5$;j-5'n-"IiG.J-a:Z-f:l,'1;t:~7jr~,~#/,53~;5"ap,~';]7,S"n;-S05:5'"03~$'O::t..:~~?Kf':~34/~73?7~.:l' I
I- - ~6~,-"6e1f7;6()8,6/(),6//'-6~j,-g ~-~~o,6E;:-6~/W.2,-_-_ ------- ~------- ----------- .-
. . - (!/vie.k,m~eP?J.efft.,r~I4T:{J;gG;,i'k~L1:~/'_7~L~/~3.2Z~d ?,'.35f:~~~.:?4-'%'~~78, ~ffff 5~$P; $74
. ,6/3,bt'!>,sy.,z I
-~ =ei~%f~fflf:f?ii!f';j~-~~i1:~jr~i/!1jtljft*jfi~?~:-{!~lI::ffi~/f;~~~i~~~
---9-GS"fj '*7/---' -~-S"~w;~';?~~ :il.7r~~rWI:IP/~h~-%/#,~r;'fe"n'!'1,~'---..' --- - - Vi - - ~. --rr ~. ." -. l'<>?J
---t',-1f~;CJ/t1f'!:;:r,~:e.'7-$.I'ln--f;,g:4:;~&;:~--;;/~"~h~~:;,/~tf/JJf1:71/G~!f;.1:Zti,915:~. ,[~
___~_____;--- fhr.p,_ 9/fiQsftD.f.';J 5'/' ,{_1/=i!::~~'?ib9,y6S-.tff1'::?N.N~~/V7,[~'?; '3~~l~~~ $~
_. _C'Af!l-~/rL~~k~Z.2/.3,~'~~7~1~1f7~P2eh~f,_aijt a.3..:;z,._3:J1t3sb,.3b43f1'3,..38~ ~B;5F5;b.2t,~.;J.7:-6B5,
- --C-,<tj-Ik./t/o?I2C"Y.s&I:)-//-5;/d'-~5:-u_----- ________ ___~. _____ __ __. I
__ ~_ t'1,~,(';;UI1lt"r~/~d.,-j.:lb,.____________________ __~______ _____~__u_ ____ _ _
=~;1t~:i;:::;;/01Z~/Z&h/a/1--~j"~zf$/L~,--- ~_ ~-~_-_=__=_=_----=~===~=-~=~_ -_ -_ u
_CJl-/:YS_SlZe,.:1otz.:1./.r4- __ ___ __________ _~ _____uuu__ u_
~ ~__C!IE!/-'s_~p~_al7l1/"er$;l~;Z/~ll_.3(iJ,. _ __u_. __~_~__ _____ __ ___
. -_--t?r.t/;r.e//$-fl}!JJ.t!s-a#/h?~-p?a~_-_-- ____un_ ~__ ____ ___________ _____ u __ _
__I_::'C'1!I-~/(J.$::"41aVedi:S/~_ ~e,-,J?_~3,._2.!#--?- --]iij~6-r-lyr.B T~~$-;'lf--l u__ l~~]. -.._-
u __C'lit'C's- _a~ 1Ib:8.,.,gt'/,.3e2~ 3.2~-dP,fl,-1!,f~.?~Sffffl~~-;r~.J; 6/.?1~~d/, 6::?~ _~iY//_~_____
.-__()L'V/:e_,or/~-g~~~~ftJ,--'1o/$,--~ __ __n___ _ ___________ ___ _
_--elty/I.;Jl/tp/~iJ37a37~3f5;-~/..2,~5; -__ __________ ____n___ _n_____
~---e'ty-~L/~~5;--'Tflt.S/&',.-6Lt;- --~~----------- ------------- ____Un. .
___8:ty_//J!(7p!'d/,t?.s_ma/.i1k,I?.iJ~_~7eJ,.___ ~~_ ________ ___ _______
'-_ .._ e,:o/,4I1~~a~{u,s~/uf(yL _ __~ __~~__ _ _n_ _ u _-_ __un --r ____ __ __ ____ ____ ____ __ . _~_ _
.- -eL6Jdr,"bbJo/e]:6J.e.,j/,-L(~, -----~ _~______________n . - - -~s ---------~--.---~---- u
--eleOJn-="?--e;JP)p3o/!7-Ltf;-'$?h.~-~LB',~AP,Y>fl/,~~~~7$~~~'.t1.~l-- -- -~-__~ -- H.
_._ctal'lr,:lJlU~mle_'ff~.,_"1U)~.f,~.7Iik),'P{~3.:l3,_~____________n__ _ _.~ ~_ __ _______ __~
_._-_.-- ---------- ---------,.-----~---.__._.- -------- -~------- ------- -~--~--.,- ~--:o;-~ ---------- -~-~---
____e4/l?I(jL%.27-3,-.t~''-~/9,~~4b/fL------- ----- -- ---~ --~- ------------s
. -- ~-c/t;.$t'~ _d.$$-/'~ds/j~,L~/6ti;/f.:z,. /f~~I1~~L~-2.2#,..;l:y4.:l~ .21/.2,.2fl~~8'Z ..<ri',9?JS; "/-5"S;6tJi'IJtZ5
____ ____ ______ n_________ __ _ ~__~_ __~__ ____ __~.___~_ ______ ___ _ __ _ urtitft:,,)_._6S-~4!J.
. ~_~eMJ1A;1!eI"C5,-~I2~,,;lO?,~-___ __~__________"___.________u__~ ___ n
-1.(}la/,!k,1?pkd,,?~/, u___________ __n___ u__u~____u_ __n_~_~u~_________u_______ __ _~ __.
. -c/.:J~J;g/ltt!?;(~~----- __"___________ _ _ ___~__ ___ _ ____ ____.___________n_ __ _ -
_ __ ~kJ~lr.7hsur.,;U?~IJPh7/n/s:#n=dors,J~t2b,.-- _______
-nC/d$;dr~I?#.$,~~/d,~,;fd,__ ..___ __ ___n~_____________ _______~______n.
_ n-~/.;J:J61,'-7(esa:;lI1cA-t?.ss#i<il6eS'.6rL,-~, --- --____ -----____________ - - ________ --__
1.~A?~;'l-ZA~~h4*"75;- }-- -- u_ -- - -~---~------------~- ------ --- ---
....C!I/J?k_~~III'ZZ. c>6//eUre~ ,~()t---. __ ___ ______~_ _____ ________ - _____n__ ____
.. --t?/yde-Sif"s/9,-_______________ __ __ _____ ___ ___________n_______ _~_____n ~~ .
_C/.;mf,#,dPP/d,-.~/,u _ _ _ __ ___ n_~ _ _ _ __ _____n__ _n______ __ ___ __nn___U._
- ffPFJ/1?f i$S.<<e,(;'ineep;po/ees;. ~.:/~- -- -- --- ----- ----- ---- -~-- - ------- ~ -~- -- -
. f1ka/lI";.f-ddr4Pdlfs,.-~b7r_-- -~ ---------------~-- -------~--- ~------- ----
~1"J_$l7,tbl"~J1'.,.Ij::k,. 6tJtJ; ... __ ____ _~__ u. _ _ _n _____ _~n~ __ _~__ _~__ _~ _ ____ _ _ _ _
~ c,IiI4-6;3,6tJiJ;:::g;~~~1,=~~ _-~~-~ ~~-=-~~--~-- -~=---~=-=-~~-=-~-----.--~-~ ~-~-~ -.-
~,
'-
~
- ~
_eOh,WIPI?_atQ7-e/.'t-'h!f!Pl~s:1./.pJftftJl-6/ !;~~JftJ.!/::'OZ<el /f~!:tf:'~~}~2.z/:;~1 ~~
._~~~ -,t'dP.)-~~7-7.(;t'4.l~74te~~1t.=<!""''':'''!'~)3-7-3,.'~''1~~J.8t5:,~i~e:~/kl-<'~~).2~~~-~~.3,r~)
r. Po S-.:?/~ . ~ .,oon;,~' P-Zf1.i'e:uPS e=. /~~ f,e~~ .
. '. n: --., "'_ 6-
s-~ 'tifC'$lf/1hS'. J?Il ~-. <=1 - -- .;-; 7.f~'B." ~ ~t -=~ _,_'_7_
. --- _OUheL/Qt!'d/o/$I'.:1~1~%7J-hf/_~.~~I:;/~?e;;_.,{'1>>l6~U"'" O"Si_...e~,J,~I:;:;..:;y,5~4f1}'::sj_
et?A7)7l~~e..dL. RlIA(Jk,ZL(),/5;/$,.1~.a1f~~'tiZf,_Z2J.:!L:;;'k5::..1'19'7j,tS'2,_8h,_~ t?,.-//.5://-Z/~Z-L7!.3,/S8,.L6~.-
I 3//3 ,.3d 7,.3:/6 ,3/9 ,307,~t1::l,,:NI6 ,dl7J,.A6o '.:?:;>7>.:?.;?tl".:l./,fJ,.;l/o,.:lt:J? ,.:?o/,,:<pp ,1?8,../89, /8(;,/83'/b,:Z
-'3~ff,-.J-1>5;-37.3,-3711~79t-;a8~-y.&i?:~76,.. ~B:"'.u... ~.3lJ, ""'37, 'Y6X--"c7/, 'fLe'8;-S-07,-STo,-S.:i.-S-Itr"~,.;;;J,-S3?,5"'W),..~/,-
, ,a5:;~
e"-mb?<<hd-y_7!;gl1h/Pf-4c~8,3.~,.~~4_~~~8/,-
- a,N#.~"~~)~~~~.e.L1 ~'-;
1--~i%~*~~;~~-~~~~~.21p,.er2~tf&i), ,,,' 1-
~{VJ~/~-Mr,~' ~.'L .;(h,p;r.,:t:Ph,_68#.L..:J.?;_';t33"S:1I'~$~5"6S; ,
f.:'f.!d.PP/. &e'~ 'ln9. 78,/-p.,':;;'Z). /?_ ,I. ,~ - "
OJf/i;/J~7i;s::j)~jl~iSZ~U;~':"~~P_JlL~/-/ZC:':r//-?>,/d~
-8/~"'-epr-~..oel"~o.Pn?eh~eZ/t:J/.:z/~. .,-;-/
ki~-(?jerl1'eh~ /11~su;res: J?r.2.<fIh/ .2.>llf-/oh,.. e5l/7;
~r. r:q;t=- 'Wt//:50r!/J-.Pl-.g~-
~ "'?!$- QJIoV 1~ - 4/-:l~
M 1~-C:6f-t!~h?/ -35"5:~a t 1._
~/d'e" .,.""~ 7?~: SPO s.-, 6
c.,"'J - ilD,,(l- _ _Nn. ~- OIl -~C"Hj~S~~5=?~bP:f?- /~
111,g .~t,..De ....e~~6, . 5"(,5;'007, €OlJ,
-,;;y.::. - _ ~;,S.iLCl>J!V,'e.;y_5"65;6o.7,
,
..
.
.--
--.....
-_a~nl,;j1-4C'r.es_05U'.J.::d/.k.f?~
--aL'~~rL,.L~~.35:/tJ.~j/-5; .
-. _._~h7q/~~l.;'her,_tPm~~R/.o/-&.w.~4~.1,_L~-t~-'Y.2,f~75;5P~5?/"b~Z-
.- 8 ~_/~."3r
- ,_P.lfffr..;Jld6/cr~/.PhS,~~5".;'l,_Ao..3,_S.~~
_.&&/7missipl?er.,.&biilnce,.'&%8/,.~t!3,.*/5;_~~~~$'tZ$f:k~
1=
.__~rLe.:rhe,.~.2,
,,/ ~
--_-C~hser.AQfl~J?_Z~H..e,_"I'Jp,_~z./T-8,~'tt./.,;lI:/..z:z,.
1f7.1f,-!:~i'lll-"iil .
__e6!um/'fa~~&f,.5.0''/I~lj-Et- - _.J,.ff3If4'kI'S~2t:~-~), - 17'- es:eo,/- 2--.-
/l ./ /d..r y' aop'- 11'. b.~5-;;-/'K- '6tJt: v;/ _ V. Scpr- ~l t/ j.;;/l?ep--7 :7''' r.<e- . i7
--(,. J~R.<<I?C/'/_'.!/.ll'l~f?s,.22 .~e:Z,.II.'_ 'V/fl/? V01PJ'.'_~Z'i~(tt'f'-~l. ',;/.s:.II!tl'.~~UJ../..3.'K.2d~4.~-:l",26.zl~ ~6'1'HIk( ,.&3..Z
{.P1""utes .r- /,J_) '/ r/'<l:5"/' oq> rJ_) ..,II "B5"/roN-/o'"'j
, c<'Y'I'ec J ,(1fCM ,Z';;"17en. -, ,(~ r,l va,./i?<<'
tJ;mmiHe.es ~/' tP.glleil:=-s..9(6P.m.s_~f .f..9.'~~),
__Ei>>'Cl~e_:=~./..a.z
v.)
'1--
Wl?J!'KS : - S:~L2.7:...:/Zt1_~'_~7k!i:*~
~PhnJ!:f:=-~,,"/.:?$;/2~.2fl9:.~"t(t,.,/Z
- __,(.;JI?~ ; - .2:~j.fl"t
1_-
--
__l!P.'~ 0;,: ~!7,.J'.i!.Z-1f~.3,Jr-!i'/,.~!i:."/-Z_6tl',.6tJ~,
__&d"H..e?ee:=5:9:.7-/,.Z2,,,::?~_3..2...f,
.-
,~,_.
-----
_a"m.i.J",J'/P/lel:',E.~Q.~m/.e_~4te~,Pm.el7.-&;_~#,7:l",:llt
--_a,A'"..~d.,;?L&,IV.$,~2.~
,-- -t'P/'JiJI,EJ;6i,/g,U 3r./Lb,./..?O,/-f//r/.:lt;
- _1J,,///:el:',_{!~'-'/SU'pAer,JLZ
. --Cb/?l/?lth~_JJ/e$.e4-/.,;?CJ,..
_(!o/Ols._eh1u4it:J~,j7ff:, _ _ _ _
-.-
A
"7
r;,0li1meJ'lflk6e/~r4~{f::l,,2Z1~,-~9'~.3d%~.5;~~~~/,.e--{ - ---- - _u.. -.--------- _H__ - _ __u
"f/*~t;r?~,.Plal'PS,~-..!!S;3fD,.397.6.y?/1Q) . ';;1a!"aV~J; _nuL _u_ ________ __ _n_ ___ _ u_
-(!(J-t1rd/nd1o/ a/ll~/~e!k1};e9/1;~~- ~ -~-~-~~-------~- ~-~ ~~-~---------- ----~-~-~~~ =--~- - - ------ -~ -
e {'p/J1lp1Ubim-ioJ?$_;:wP#;??$,S-,2/,-------,------.;------------------U -__ _n__
-- (J,h~/~;i~s'rdl'f:t;B?/~ -- - --- I
- -(!{/Cte1;Fred-&:-//-9: __ __ __________ _n --
-- -- - Cp~;?/'/~e(?I1..li1.5"6'tU60Q<iV'~~ydl,..Qlz.Lr3'r 1':1"'~,-~---- --- - --- ---___
-___aI4/!r/()'-Cm$,,./~-_-_--- __~-- _______ _________~_ _n_ "____ _____________
____C'oHlP1ISsiPQer; E;,~~'7'=-~~fs ..L~~j5"f:/b4 A/7!db~~P~.3b2.. ~SS;~5Z~?"'Y-8'%S"311~3,6L:tb/~h':<.3,- - .
-1--- ---- -- -------- ---- - - -- --------- --- ---- -----~ ____u_____ - ------- -- _u____
n . a>hI~Je'b$iV-'e-ab)'l2Ik>>/.9; 'P/an,/7.I'g.3'(J~.:Iff/'el?i?W)'~'?'6Pf'~) 6/3~.),_ u __ _.__ ___________ ___
u_ --Cpnsu/~<iJn-c;-/7,g;~f)~~if:;J:;:~$ ,~~~J,-- -- - -- - -------c--- ------------------ -.
- ____(J(JrmieJ'>~~/?I'l/$,jf~_____________________ __________ _________ ___ ________ _n____
~._tbul1ei/~/;;r/e$_$y~~H1..7.:?.:l,.:u5;------- _ __ .._ _______ ________ . . _____
.1-~/?k,-~/P-'7.e.c~3.;?,---------:---- --~ __________________n___________________________.--
17h7m'/$$IP/t t?1?/lt6ohc~SH7,.d?s-Z----- __ _ __ ________________ _u_ _ ____ ______u____ ____
.. __ -tJol7vidl/?I7S,.:l75; ____ ____ __ u. ______u_ _ U u __ _ _____ ___:_ ___ __ ____ ..
___ alJJm/o(/7i&_/l~/s 3!ev/6WJ!d,~r/~htJ~- ___________..____ _______'__ _____ _~ _ ___. _.. _
-u-Cox,KY.;.-.:?$/,- ... ___ ___u_ _ _ _._ _ __ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _u ____ ___ _ _ _ __ ____ ___ _ _ .
---C()J?~r.5ld.5,-?$b,S()ti;-.wZ.w8;~.:?g,-"/3~5'~3~h/:d~--- _ _. ___ __u___ ____ _c____._ u._
- ____tIJbSOJ7_ C'ove -,Pr&ed;,;z~?!6I~~30.3~).3jjZ~b8!#:Z~3h;~1~~}$?7~J..-- _.. _ _ _ _ _ __ _ .
-e-&mIPJUl1iZe 2J/S.i1sUr ~!/-c,(.;;}w, gtJ4 ~tJ/, 3P5;3/)6,. .. __ - ._ U H ._ - ______ - __ __ .. - - ..
_____el7l1drlfe jOh_WP/9!-&~e#/elehCY 9-,f,#.t'.3,cJlJ-tf- _______u__ u_ _. _____.________ _ ____ .
_j~=~:q5~:~~~~~~--- _ __ ___ __ ________~_ _._______ __ _.
=-- thmmIJJ,;de;Z3': ~--;p'.s:eJ";;- .. ~- .~~~ . -~--~. ~~-- =- ~ ~~~- -~-= ~----=-~=-~--~~-- -- -- --
______a~$r.;1W&l/'>~$,~llfless.w!/ -J,..- _. ____ __ ______ _ _.__ .._____.__u____._______ .__._
.---- _el7/we//.~I!,O/, ~94_~?/,_~,~ ~/.!l, ~ --- --- - _ -- -- ----- _ --- ___un - --- - --__ - -_ . - -_
-_ _ -C0h7'pder, ~7'-J!,- --- --- --- -. - __u_ _ __ __ _ _ _. __ _ _ ___ u__ u___ _ ______. _u____ ________ __ ___
-~I~2.r~z~~~=~~~ ~~-.?'~ -~~=~~-~=-=-=--~~-~-=-- ---=-~----~~ ~=-~~~~ - .
____ _e~::~~-~~ _____~ _____ ______________u.__ __'__ un __u_______L_
___(fp,9, . ;$:-:JJ/.sr$~/fffrt:;4~ -- - ______u_ - -- ________u_____ -- u_ -- - -- -.
- __e~~Ilft"e'/ B"~j.8;ZI~t$tper -- j,j~Z Wa),-':<Z?(;6;J, dtf?/ ~),..$..I/!i: 5"i'.2r H_ u --.. _ _ .-- _ _ U I
-----C'twlVlJlYi;4!t!S.;?tll.,j/t,/~J:~~------..-u..--.----- _u ---- _ ---------- ______._u__ _ _ I
-. -- -er.;}ll~/ll/f/,f/,<;f-llssIJCI'.;)te.s,.;ZO~..7$'1f.:l76,.;?ff~3~.3'~JdfiJ1,-~2~~:z,60-'t{.63b,_ __ ___ _ _.. . u_ _ ._ .
. ..... . C'I"bSS-r=Ik,.:e/,;Z,.725;.v..,-^#"1f"tW~503~J 3/1E> ."L*,'-"'~5M~35f~::J{at.!.
. __un tJ~/lrt-,..2:3fi;_ __.______._u_n _. _'n___ _____~_ __ __ ___n ______ ~~~'!/~.:_~~~,!h~ ~7
r: '
e.BIb1d?-p't"l'el1.fIP)tI'~.f~~;:?7.?; ... -- u ..u_ _ u_ _ __ __ .. _._ __ ___ _n___u. q_ _ _ __ ____
-- -t'l'PIvi'k 7QP~$r~/a;--- --- _n . _ un _ .__ ___._. __' _ u _ _ __ -__~_~_____ ______ _ ___ __ _ __
--t'f8I1~/l~,-nt;~?!~,~y'f:--n-. _ UU__ ______u_ ___ _____u______ ______ _ _________
-_ . 'c;.~n-%.r~7,-- - -- - - - - - - -- - - un _ __._ __ ___ . _ _______ __ _ _ . _ __ ___ _____n _ un
u. JyPH~d/PJ?R/l?rk_f/hSIol.he:hff.s,5"~,iJ,~~ ._. __un _ _ ____. ___.____________ __ _ _ _u_._
.- -Crime Str4dyjee4J?lb{~,5"~?,5:6~ ---_ --______.._. -_ ____ ~___________ _ -_ __;_'~ __ ___ ._
_1- amP1'=Hel?s,fff'.yi''l;$~6r:tt?P.) .... - ___u_ U - - - . -.-.-- __n______ u_ -- __u___ --- _n_ -
.. Cb.l7J7P/fs,.7i'Se"PJEStdcl/(/.lb//:- .___ un _ . ... U______d__nU_ .. _n_. ..._____
. ~1-~L1~..7&c~;.;~~ -. - - --.-.~ --~-~-:~~ ~ ~ =---=-~- -~=-=-~~~~- ----~=~=.=-~~--:~ ---~ ==
.d_ CasJilJ.f't-?ron$-&;':/;Jb, _ _ _ ___ ___ _____Un. __ _ __ __ ________ __ ____u_u_.
- - -eUPbiRf: ?/7p, ~I, ~5t ~tt, 6.!l~_ _ _ _ __ __ . _ -_ n u_ u_ __ _ _.________ _ - __ _ __ _____ ___._ ____ _
_ut'ahe~_~7~_ .___. _ _ U _ _ ____ _ _ __. _u__ __ _ ~____ .___ _____h_________ u_
__CU//ln.;]H,.7JQI?d'J/d4~t2~53..z, .__ _. ________ _n___________ ____Un _.
- C'ubn/Y4ip~/~ek//~h?,53~ ___n ._____________ . ___ _. u_ ________
e-Cr/..1!~:k;6../I7""Jh:Z;/:ff"/d-~/ts-~~ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _________. __..~ - n ____ __ __ _ _ n
-.CuPd-/.s_~,S~-...------u _ n_._ _ _ __ ____ _________ _ . __ ____.____ __________ ___
~
--
L
.
:6 ,tJ.
. .7JUMj2. /-Iottle.'., .{.;;Jk.
~
_.
.
-
,,". .
.
,.
,
1,-:".-
hdt?rJ? .a5~/~s-
Eg.f3; ~f)~
~/?7e1Yt'5'Acy COA .
..f-("'(J Y/ 0 11? I 't? Co -1?J1<1.'/ n,
h,<;1fs/d e hk7/'/ses ~ .:z5".:L -'/~~
V$- VD/c>e
-4
ll....
,...
,t::/ ~ p.
ripe e/,;et; /'/1f~P~- 3/5;-.JP~~%~:J/., 1'S~ ~7S;by,(b~.:l,
---
~/Q.;Jhe/~/ , sr.;deA?fZ>>H1!!..~ n>7Dh*h&,. tJ, $~.9'4 /~,,? ,21J5;..1J:'f"-,:'/.J)f!, ~.,:7~ ~S44 5"71t h~
k$!(i?j?';:,! Covr., 5; /~/,~~ 7Z'f~/~~..:J5"5:".aG/, g~.it.3
(>3.S'~ ,~,,/ .5"otJ ,~7,~ ,4/%,+'7~.y.73 ,~c :~/p>,3 11'/, .3'6,~ ?7
/;:~frJz~~ q~ t'~~;;? 4f 1f!fl a?% :;-ts,
~m/x $erl//ees S J _h;'e., /I.?t.?
,C;.eed.mDl.h. _ Z>r.. ~ tJL
'17I?Otft,;ff/?4/ /3%
~;1L~;;:t1:/~ff!f;;::.r;;;-:j bCJZ t;off/;lY2~
-e
il:
FVPIJ'e. E//ee/2, fr-?~ ~?~ S()8,
<i?
.c;'/i!NI / ~~I?h3HPPM;>1fe.S' /jt:I1IYOn.e/ ~<ae.. #.3.3.
,L8yvson. EtJt*.7<<nL .x; ~3~
-~
,
Ph.
,-~
. >.~'. .
:~~)r
'/'), PO~~ 5a7~(
"'1""'"
\
~
L
":.-..
1=
.
1=
.
I"'"
--
t:ll!eh t?eP"
. e
E;Q~/YiE/r~nly ~~/, 4{2~J'f', /t?ft /?~d,j3,~74 ~g
~!i;?e' L7Qh~ruld6b~ ~ p~ I'(J~ /7~-2{)3.~:J~e; ~/4 ~5;af!60~
-0;; -
t4
~:--~ - ...
~lH!t .22. ,21)4 ,2~/, ~7Z ~b(C,...- $~:~~ S9'~~U4
=I ~;:;:::;::(;:6g~/?
7t:;:t;;=;:f:1~Jfffj;~~:f~7~~:;~~5;;~~;;~f(:~::'f~iJZ
~4 ~~/ .
~ t>h /t"a: ~ /tJf{ /':12, /#4 /,~ g~ ~~t;~?;?.t.( .(.:1$
-----
Iii;:
~
L
1=
,..........
.-
~
"..
4rrc?IJ't,~ ;?~,.t:J l:1o'2 :zkr)/
~Mp/~:p, .&~/st/~~S-3. !?~e<, /dra? ,~~ /54It8,. /7g;-2~4 -<:2.t,f~~..75~":?,?'Z --2?'1J :j~~:J~1f.,9~'2'
,637,{d~6/~6/o ,573 .:S6Z,S-()5:~3o '~"'.3
__ ~No/' /Gd-/;~e 'iPEpIM< ~ ~(g,( 3.At .
:: .;'~,'>:,.
l~X~7~ '- .
.~i;j~~:'.::,.~<~ ~
'~~-.._"':: ..:
"'.co-
. ~
~.;;~ J:j;:;f~k ;(/:1/. /,r( ~();l,
I/o, . ~~~- "/'~ .
, Y$ff~. .7 -,.s;... r
, eo r- ' - ~ //.2, '.3
'_h/ s;. . , ;V opmeh'l )
rv/OH'Y - /.. - ~ C?./,
~~
~;~r~%;'SV-?3 !'$"'::;,:r-j! /3>;.:W;{frA'"
~~e.~ $1"j'~S ,4'r:~ /:2 Z
~~:I:: s;~~7;j~~s !/.-~tfff~~<;j /g5-1.~:;~'J 1/8'6, ,2:l~ ~~~~. ~~7~J.=1'7~~ ~7(!Y~~
#Jo'Y!bUI"~ SH:.I-v4x, 1117:'- ,s-n ,"rf?~ .~~s;("t4)"r/o
~bJ~ .1JeP~/Vb-~~
#/%/Jr/c J;~-$y-Eenzfsa/m7?/~ /~ /A41'1J,~!%:~lh#7w-P,{
~j1!JeJ'ty, #/'/~~I /~
IIJ<PtClh /1"f);t!--s, er-e. 17-f? ;?7e~~//=,,f/e-'7~.s. Pr~,
1/e-/Pr'<'Y'I'7,;;mt h? '7; /44
~s'Z
-e
--
//<<~/s, ~
/k"P/$. tI-4/-eeJ'l ~
.
//~;unA>ft'md. E7~p.;;. .:?1~
~:2. ~Z:..:;};:~~S~tUI.Y.f!;;:f".;J~~;1 ~//,?' :j7~5;:/1bl?g,
~~~ ~/B ~P?~/~n7e'ht!-l
~'dbN~ ..r#e.sv hent!s ~"",,/L'~~ .adZ .gFf./, ~
~
~
....'.,"....
.....:;'..,
c.'. ','
L
~~~')( ~~
4~~ /fq.6rs 4~ Q~7~
~ff"'~~ ':0.1'9. ~//,
/P71?n. k~~;j~;".2,f':~ ~/.~
#, A/ t.:: s ".1f'~, ;J';" ~f(
~::, ;~Zj~;J'~
f/n7"'Y-~W6J?E;. ~
,
1=
>.
~
t']~F . ;'l~fl}'~~, f::!>PI,
r~~?(~,:.\:J~::'':. a;tJ'1 {lPW~P /~,,#~ S.:Jte .,-21: 5"3~
I~ /l'V-Rs/./.s;Mh~~ S~~
/4-~ftL, ~J?, 5'~~
aW/'.,~A ~~ 5~
~.;}JoJA'~rJ//'- ~~DW.w~;:s- /l~{"Dt:'., ~5"~
#.,/h;~~ ~~p/Ift'f/ 5'58', SJ1./;
#nke $, ;7;5~.I, p,{/{
l/adtm t!:J1TL~~, {i"t',Z
~-<~~ ~~~~/~nH~V..%~
//uAc-eJ; J'a~_~ 60/,
Ifr>.)1hr,:ilM iPa:1/7f'A'~9oh ~I'~d-~r~ ~
~:o/k/H.M)1, U/, /{ ~1J5; .
/1!/3Jz!3~~./:u/f;
.~
1=
.-
1=
1=
.
~
""
hdusp-/:.?I ~sfP'1/p~.,.(~ ~,
I;,,.~/~ 1: /P./~M.9~ aff'J{2o'~t!f -?d~,3~~~~g$3?!l;
~I//J?f' I(: ~ 3~ $.1. ~ftS: ~~
__ 0'1P2f-l :J:..7J..t~,,y.~ $'(1, ~~:<t>~-d/'v)
-LM/""5 ??t?c//fl'JI~ AM., ~~ ,~~%
T do)( I~Rd' ?6P",sO/?s. ~~ '7Z /62. fa'~~ol?.t .:157-
Iru/ "'f /n;~'PPR$zfS', ~4( /.:I5/:J:;:;:=t /':<b~J -Y7~ ~Jj'W~ ~~-2?!:~~yJ,5'.:J.9.5'~2.
=I ~lfi$~ed' -Pc!'rS4I?S.7J~/.9n~/"; 7'% /~..:?..:z5% .
7{1e' PR.,~~~~/J?~/lfes, 7~ /2f!..
~:-~ff~ ~~~;I~~Jk:'~'cfc!f4~-?.22..3.:1it i?3S;~E:Z,:?~b; 36'3?h f-J~stl E'% 5S~6/.':(
=I . i-:;:-:"::::;;:/.:'1MJ!.ftE2"~7'l.1?4-'?? ..7/,.2-..?1'4 1'7$"f<-~/;,d ~~J. #h/,a.J #/!r.~1
/4!a) 6/? ,~7/ .~,;..,) '7
,
"'1i'~~'~}_~~j,~:.,;,If_:
7i??leJdf?S7!-s tzj:S"~$U'fl'). /'1'0.-
?;,<;u.h;:m~e ~roj-e.rs qU:/V/SO~d ~.,;,;.d.- dl'7t
-.L -' ,
.Jhp V<;T yee-P(7~.I?7""~ /rbh?or-/ o~ gpff
Ihj'LL/./'?/iP.S" /h7f pO;?'
-. 7nSg~hee. ~Pl'h;4., ~..:J1f ~~;r
~~=~:j;Jhfl:;:1&~~~j ~~
TIV/'~ ~ /Cc, N4?;
~1iE?e~~~~;J~J.~'V~J.
~ _.-1.' ., 'f/~O?ffl
/~YiW:Z7I>.I?~ ~dr... tDr r/>-I,
=I' !...~~/. ~~I!'PkolJ(ff:t1/~k~;~j s~ .j"7Zc;"U 60,3.. ~a.
.L~d07 v~~/',o$, blJ~0tJ6, .
{~: ~:.,~<":r :"':;:
-"';~?,:~,~
,~. . ....
'. '..
. .~
-e
=I
=I
-----
lri;::
--.
-e
=I
=1-
--
liO::
,.-
,6/7 ,S.:?.2.S";;:l/ ,'jiC7~,~5:"'~'of<t?.3 ,37$,'37/>,.86$'
.
~t"
.
.,
r/~//'::r_nf/A/l., h/~
.
"
~
L -
~',;",:,~'V"
~'"'~:"~~~~~~l~"~\~
.,,;......,;;
,.
.
--
,bgg4"6'!?C ;r. ~ ~/-
/~~ftJ'es.$~o/? 7: 5fJ
t?
,38'q,3 7(l,3~5:g 3 ?;3~~3:< I> ~3~alh,g/!7~/P,~~/,~B~ ,;;?g/,.;z~, , ~6~.,gti'?,.:l~,eR5"?;.;f~S;';?.:?!i"",.:l.:li3
~~/, 39.2.~ 3?5;~/,1ffS,~~4. ~3/, YY~~5,.yS.3, ~/, ~7/'~7~ ~'/~~"/:>;::U)6>,~QP,~~.2,5"".:?r,~"jS/f531t'S~~95;
,U&? ,6afi',63~6/.:l.,6P8 ,6o/,57.3,5'33,tiY.2.5. , ,
hJ;u/ e;reu.;Jl?fe; ~ /1l1f.~?;/.2t;.2.9'.z ~7tf
~~~~~~~
~' ~ m:. "::~l~3~fI~5"J'~ ~7~S-7~(2,;,~pJ
/t7~//~~ ~~ a,h7--'7J'~~ /~(,.
Lf?J'-"It'd: 7l.,,!/<.z;;~. 33~ 4:t/!/,57.~
~~
. . ..<dpfij.. ~l5;".Mo.d~l, e,,~'" '
Lpr"h ~omPdtf 1I/1/.;" 3 t~sJ .?'f'{lWJ %,9(/;0.2"z/- - f ficlL'::;'l~l2.2t,-?5"7f -<.?4 .-:zS% 2t)C f.~;"/;.e 1 "/5Jt. ~/l<
, , ,~~f~s
,
A2
~~.".;rt~:d
4:1;,#1 dJ$seft,t~ ~~flt/~ .:l.2~,.t7( (K..zseJ.-3P/~~l $/511&.1 3/7~~~~O{~~~1.~~d-J,~;~;i~l:fU(~~iJ
?:~s.../?w<;::.;:} 6~-Z (l ~H..ZIt'! I)"'... ." "-. .,". .-......
=1~~~~t4:;4322.323-~5;~3% . -~. . ~~~~j
L/-uI e ~/V.G'P' ..J~. t:2-
, '"
~~25es, 77:7ff. 7ftU/(}7;//4/75;~~tl,3?..?, ~;14~/;( ~
,.(p..;/Af, Ie, /tJt,/S-1:~~/'
LdlSffey, I? #"9<4 ~$; /174
I - ~ ~i~OH fI/.9;d; t~3fl~dg,
. oL.fer S~ ffa:S~p*"
14kewUJd ~$ a~ ('liWf?-?A~./rJ_~au~j{~~~~/:Z-
Lal7~~ster ~<<'YR 4jlnO~ ;?21./l.fJ:'<Jb t /7"6&,., ~4d' /~ ~a2 ,27~/dk) 2 At: ~).3#O~~ ~"fI.. 3n/dt:>J.-W~
.G41)b~ ,(( . 6/S,t2Ul 6"~,atb.)~?r~4.)5'l.Z,r<<'IP.)S4U~J ~t' .c~a/~50
,.(~1f~ 6fe?~12:/;l,1,p:{;- i'tJ;2,
'/Pma flm '
'arT ,~/.z ,S'9C,5'5'1/~50
.
.I'.?~A ,(0.
.
.'7
, 6:l3 ,S-""7.~';,~ ,.~) ...
';.:....
I
~
II"
1l/;>Pf'Mh(?l?"f, '7l/'-h, 7't
. 3 ~o
"fA e> ."if - oJ?~
.7" /I /:
.~/", ,~,~ ~!i,S-o#ff'{r",~7r,t'4cP->"T'77,"J'<7~/db.)~~ 2! ~-'J~b3.,.39/,.37$,.3S?,a""P,.sp~d/4';
/If';'i"~'-hi>?e-7if?pWrOlJ~ /~ /T49'..
---1;;;~~~~t~~1%;t::;. p~~ ~Z~'7f$~s?f7~{~i'~~/~174 /t1f: /84///~ /~~ '-;?'~~~~
. ,6p7,6~8 ,6/5"",~P~,fi8',~,~,~li'P,-w~.%Il,~,3~/,~76
, ~rfJk2 ' ,
e:e f.!f'" '3P8,3p?,f/6- '3p~,fDJI,f,/1:' ~??,c:l"6,~8S,cZ~7,~SV,.:?~~'/33
~ 5'(5'i-a'd~ 5'Q~ ~M, !1o.3,5"OfI~' , Slq5-U, ~ ,51, ,
=I #/. ~4T;Go< 4/"",",~ .~../ ,<7<<""'_ ~ ~.'r
;?1~bik j(Jn?e $/-fe~/~.
/If'.Hpo,:t/n?e7?e1!e?// ~'iDhi?e j?e1~I'"A.s:s~, ~ //C.Z
/lfep,,/~ j?j>.....HC1/d; ~
=I ~~tr;~'i~fj~.a~,,;~.t .:If?Mf'-2. -fi',_wg:'~/plUff';3*
IIPwi;e 7h/u%~~+-~h~;";J/-$.:;.k<; ~ g~ ~
/Jt;uJer e#~/L.t"~ 7ft /~ ~f1'1J".:lR,t3?~ ~K5"2L~/Z
~,.ffd-.~--A'a~b/Z .!..~/,(2:l. ~~11,
- lIf~pe, n$'Olh7Ue( Jr, 78:
. 17/~I1e1tVBj!,?>>I:Sh~, f/h"
/lfahchex.er. /lve,./L4~/P~ .32Z
.iI1drk 7)rlj/~ /i3g,/~~3'.2.
/i!c?eff"gy (ftj'h,u3< /h~
~er,~P'I/.e,. .2~7:
41-<1rl-; Y!, /1.7;.2 S-A;
be V/~
",,,',.
_'." ,,_n_,
>~'''~'''c ,',:., ,,_ .
,.....~~~_. ',._._ .0. ..
_~_ ._ .,~' ._ un .. ~
_. ~. ..~, ..~ .
/IIdskY'~_krs-//ep~~p~ ~4~e1h~P/frA(J "T~ti;" ,:'~~--~~~
ff;:;;;~ ~:~::ff/~3; P/i:? r;,.':".~~i:
!f/e,ief.lf/- <'eed~rtJf Pf'q/tffl'b~1t /h. 3~ '1'?{ fig; //Jf! //If,. /$'4 /g~ /32" /9't? /~b, /f'Z /f7~ .2~ f/, ~:jff ~.3f.: ..;{34.....
:fi:t',,)~gY'. (Ojil/I7Ifp.f"S;;,l)63?,~6 ~7/,3~.2,3~/,a3~3()tJ ,~fl5"; .:?8~,.;l8.fJ ,..? 3fi1,co?iJ3', ~ .37i
:::~trz; :e;;:~ ::::/;!5:/::r;?;:~/' %4{;-~,::~P1f~~j
: . ~~' ~~~5'O~
=I ;:~<:frP; L<:?tplL;: 7i6"t
j;fii7/~1", /I~~ 7+f~$"% Af~ gS[(-~~4.y-sz
/lliJ?/..der, ~m/7?aH/C'd;oJ?s, /t?~
/J!ibI'Sk,. .?;;~:'-.,,3L4 Jf3~.aS~ .3P~3?~ ~51lr"/8Z' $""~
/lfin/5kr"Yb~/3 7-~
=I :::/:Z~~~~~Z/fi5;S3Q,$3~t6:/.~
,$~/der, ~zf"m;i1/ ~Se>UP"CIti?.r; //S.1;
Ilf/~~ -?P>#~ 7#
tt/iss...JiJb1r~Ah /;?7~: //5;
.
#I/;;ypl//~ if.
__ #/kh,.u?/ 6r~S"l"el77'7 /.f)ff, /'-:f~o~~,t,
/J!//J1f,qyrl?, tR?!ij~17?, /~.3~4
1?!J~~ev;//e ,$~~p ~nl?hlf-mn~ P7Jl, /?j;,.2/Jt ~~ s-o'S~~SKi',h.:lK.
4!//l/djf?l//~fddl-e$ ,.('6(',,, /fff? /f'~ ~5~S:!J*
t?t/. tI1.'s~ J3~ .rpr2,SO~
... ;n 7?:s: 44~
'l7a,f.:,f ..~, ~{//;"/i!&t' ~<!'C"4'3S ~
w~A..;>6;"~~ ~lfl(,qi'~/T--<~
~
L
\ \\
. ~ .,
,6/S- ;.6o~,$""77,5(;7.5"6/ 54/.5'/7,"8' ,~s/ ,~3,~
"
,
.--
~
,3'-3
,
oj" a
:;~ 4'!hrr/,-;p/7 1lIf/.. ;3P/~h$/l'!ml
~ ~r';'h/?V~ ;f>p./?,;,/d, at:J~
$- ?f&:,C)"'~ #ve~.,G,~ 3.:<3;84%
J/o;rI?P~a, hv/n./., 3:< g;
tPr9 se_~
.-
!$,
tJfuJ}'/e~/7'~~-~ -kK( 4 "/4.~Z~ ~4 ~7~
, 03 , {,tJ,Z,GtJ/, S9'z ,5"9/
,..
. /lfcd/fi:derJ),f't/ye,~.,h4f /~l!(PdJ, /h.:j~). .~#~a ),5'~~-",,~S7b.k#')
~4 ;;'1/1lffP..dae~ /e:q 3.217,
/Il("'I2u./hH, .:Tohn;::' ~fli;
;7/Q}(! t9/~~ /fP."l?e~h, ~/$, 4ht',-Y4h
:~~r~ ~~~/.~
4/~.JJv~ '4:-'r~ #~-3;
/11i1(!~l"e.l?,_~/Y~ ~R'~
/)fe:1JriJ?ir<; //frs, ~e.s; 5%~
4!~&I'~/( W J; 5~~
/ltidC' CoWan, ..:z>cmCJ/d .t=;. ~t 6'F7f 01Yh~
~:l~~~~~~;i~
4/t'~..;?~ ~'t;Ol7dt 6..22,
~<'-"~f-Y,,~~_': .",
".-.
~
,
.~
-e
=I
=I
ii:
--
lii;:
II"'"
/Ifr;~h ~tL l!/~ho/UOhlJ6d t?-S:S'~" * 5;~/)fi; 4L5"~%% ~ ~7~ M"fS/ef
___ IIIoHH~/.J?f aMM/",!ke, 9,/(~~JJ,~5"j;' ~&'#,n?.fJ'/, ~'~S~~~d~
IJ1:'-1'~~J.eadern SAl'lne4oSS~1 /l./lo.".v. /Jf~ /oC'dJ/ eoh>h7." ~
;y,~~ ,t;u.rf-h t1N'..hestfn:>1, / tJtJr
IYo11d/JuOiLehlfroYt<?es; //i/6ff; /(4//a /~f1,~I?Y1~/f),~~a5b~MI1I~:5"71~ls~kiJ,~/~~~ h~.~ .(:?t;
l('.gfinJ1<ilLJJh<f9'-t!~~/""aL..-a ~&/1,-9~A~ //7: ,6~:z ,6~/
~e-ltJl2aL//:;Jr.bl7~rs 21~ /.;:>4 /~.2,,':<5~~S, s-~
=I ~~"V~~ ~;L'
/If.13, Waier'l{lbl7rl~ /~
/j/1J(oJ'J, ;::;'';/n~i.s, I~
1*22;~~~::i{z;~~~ ";Jf:el?7F;Mk 4U
/!Ion f-A)f Y'€ve~u~ .:? Par ~~*
A/.-'lf 1I<S17C' hr #d'~};./d-ff a.h-<hP/.::q,.1P/~ ~ 3b.,
,#'.;1f-;t?~1 :;2krtJkServ/t:-t:; ~.3t; )
-e /1//ee". Z>~.o/~ -2//-2, f
lIIu.fe~ ~t'A; .:159, .-:l5'{t ~ 94 ~
II/t;r#;ru~ $Nr/~t -?g'~b!3~
~ -f' ~2.:(
~t-iE~;~~'/1/i . 7h ~ ~". e~
.~:. ~~;~l
i';~~;'~~f j" ~~I::":~:."~~~~:
,.' .. ,--
, . . --
;: ?~~- : .::'-0/ )::,~j~t
~ '- - -'::.' ,-' 'j-, ..~.:
.' .- -~,...-"
-:;"._-----.:.,..,'-:;,.",;:",
~.~-~" /,~ ~1~~;::1:~'~C:r~:
'<~-' ~~:..~I};j~
-' ':,,~,. -""
''''"-_.~. ~-"
f?r 'h?a s r. . /~e/?s C;U 33/,
;ye/sPJ7, TV..m ~.3Sz-ghff
=I ~#;~:; ~
' ~ ~~ ~;.=s, 36P/IR1;n-;.j
1Y.2,(p~e jJ/P. ~t, JP/l.(J.:B., .~~~
/lfrJJo<~heJo<IJ /J?J:e5zfrvd/(JVl f'1t:1+r 3"J?
i/hl""/'j ~d:. ~6ff
II/i;"J~.:z);II'Y{ 3"';'
~:~v~:;:;~~~,
North h/ ';'fl~ -.y.~(
/!/.;:r&'/ htl'?/ -~ ~rJ.I76/~,,~?CJr
II/..#:L~A O~h.? or:'t::J~'-Q> .5/4
/J/'1/ 'Z!_ 1- J.. J ~ / ' // -' 1"> ._tlJ~4
I'Y..a 'f:oJ'7 ~ f:1:,/he/; d2 /, -,
-- lYlei'd;. ./. i?P'lfhdU", 6'"~
/lhJ?-;.Tl'Jd7ft J J A /J" 1I/7? ~//) h//
I
%4
....
JI"'"
~~~:~~;;1u~b;ti~1fi~~}jf:;~~;z;5~q~<~~~~1</,3~a'~
0' lJn~ ~~e/ /I/., /d. /4 /1f/%-~4 ~~J(,
OIL :Bkk~/VeJ" 1?~ /$,3ff.~5;/tJ7f
. 04t' If/e.s-Emo~~ 'Jf~ ~
~;;r;~i:1ib,~g~
0/15,. /'15;
o rp, .Mn?e.S; dl $ ~
o '.,( eti1~I'.s. ,c!1>lhC"/S, .:R If/,
=I ~;:;;;/?r;;::1:; ~~~"?ep1 ~L?Z !/~~
~'7QQe/th!ep;y:e ~ 611':', 3~.3~a ~g,"/Gjf5Y.3,.5"3~
t?hy~,.Z"~~ ~ ~/~ .
Oce.a>> 5't"~R/"'" C;J?,~T~/~ .<<~ ti7a
/J/.d~ d <:; /Y. :l1-JJ h?Wtf?y ..(~..t; 0/~ h~1(.
=I OO;:;~7f;JJ;j;:kt:l~~
-.
=I
--
-.".:::..:-,
t};~j~'.f:.,~r
"~;;~~~~1~;:~ 1
-I
=I
--
lil::
I"""
,
-e
=I
----.
'.
- ~NI.f~,f/P~.7Jemd~' , .~
.. .. pJI'PiP
r.:
?hPJ/?//:t 1/d/(//<Af1.a~/r~e, $,~/I),/cf. /.!3,/~3(),M 32.~Z$f(~~'Y1f.4<6;S77,S-/,~ 'es,
,/o$Ls-, / ~,/~/,/g ,/3b,/.:?9 ,/:z:z. ,N? ,//6,//5" ,t'o!i;/op ,/0,2 ,/00 ,t1i1,c~qqt?s,dcJj,97,~' $~9.3 ,fJo,7'.
/~7, /.I/~ /~ /StJ,/js, /6.i:1,/{, 5, /6" /7~ /3/, / $.;c, /M, /8'7: /SS: iJ1t!P, /P/, /?2, /yx .z4..://d.,.<.::14 .z~:<,:r~:r
,J97,-3~2. ,.$';/?;3:t~ .8/6 ,$()'f',.Jp~,3{)1,,ft~H~.f< 8:;--, ~"a, '~f~ ';'~ 'Z~'-;:i,':::{;:'(3~:t~
~Q!:In.35'"5;35"Z,~~3?48'~ :j'~J7~,3~. :'/7.5; !I&'5; 3j?..t f/ . :9. ~
~33,.53.z .5'.:l2.S"..:l./.5/.,!. 5'/.3.. .!)//.!.w" ,~f' .E03 ,5"o,:l .~.3 ,.y.,!"P:~S:5':r7~1' 7/,~S-,~~~ ;V-:>~:Y~8 ~b ;~3'
$""7~ 5"~,~5"2.,$'S~~~3,.;) "t5;d6',~ '/b-:> n 6 '/?'jl1o,:'Y/,:J >I~ ~ y.3,~JY~,~7'1,,~O/,60.2# bOg, "67Jb;bo9,6/.f;f,G/B!
,b$"'S1'.6--rJ,C33,'a~./, b~S- ~
-I
-..<.:.::.-:,'_. 2.::'-.}
~~~~i:".,.~~" .~.~- {::..s.;p ,
-:c:::~_::fi:;?': ~t .~:~7: _~-,.-.
..>;.~':,::;':.'". - ... .~""- .~
--.
.. ._'-. -~ <
. -" ..',-,-
:';".:_~:.c ..,_.".~
- .
~...
.
. f'.,.i .5'o/,~5/,t:.K?,'/fKlH7,.y8 / :1/19 ,'T7..3,~~3.~5"8.9-~,2,~as,~-< ?,~.2 ,.~/S- ,3'3 ,3,/.3 ~o .E.s-.
"P~fte ,ap-?n<;e /.:m/, JT,/..:J~..2~~ ~~( ~nod;P.RfP)@
'1're/??/p.r, //$, /.2~ /5.z,~~
.Pel"~ pe;e; :;i' . i
l!.Y,s ~ ~;, ;I;.ff;L~S'(2,b.3, 7a /d~ 11)5; //~ //?-3; /%/;f" /,q'q ~.2f?.:<S'/. --2Jl.5;::;5'4;f;~~i 3fJ'.5; y.2~ ~:'/*F~Z.~
.' , /?5'7/.S7t?,S'oO~7#;~7s
~J -
~'''''ne?$ ~
--
~~~
7I.:1/mer,.tJ'Clmne/t.( ~"J 7W-hk~ ~bu.// ~/Of{.~~~35:7-. /'O.s;
7l;,/~"', ,~n 'l':-a;c.,a:t. ~Z"S"t:!-
Ii...
......
-~>-,,~
.,c
, ,
1=
. '--:t.
.......
I
1=
,5"~J?,S3/,s::t3,~J?o ,~~
,:!>7/,.3~.:? .3W,33~,iJp",..:?3
1=
P#Cs khffiJ?~i?P/hffeoh~d .(~~ 7~
~.s;Clh.~,-3~. ~64~()'7-,f?g/, :&6'"5;" .3B'P, -lira. ~.31f ~2.2,
~;:::,j::fjl !:Jt!!til!::J:;; 5"1t79: /53JI./$ /7( /$<{ -'-',,: .2;tJ-"~'?-7,;;r ~"t!JM~""'--1,P-2. 3"4~"
~ 6~6/7 , r~ ,~Ob ,ff"il" /l5'~5;~,~//f~8S"",~S"~~.:i
~ 8d5tf, ~~ , '9"3.'," .
~j ~.hh't:" ,P~~frsP ~h~ l~.a. 355;-3~~ ,yo2. .v:32 174 5l?~ 5"YJ: ~o4 t{.:J?(
i:j:::e -1
~ ' 3~.Bs1f ~g2. ~3-t/ff;~-:; <)~~'JIeQ/F?~$!
JJlen:e,//o,YL:2)., /05: I~ /b.8,/67f /fJ:z..~gO,
-. P,pll?h~~ t7,t~~ /26;"'?Sb..S35;
Pebv>HM 6~01 LrLv ~~ ~Dl/dl..221J.2.lI,.hI~4. .2~~,261i; -166,
'A>lt.he,E~"r-h. 'r%
'7t> i5J'1{JU1, /l'ele;z 6'/,
.-
...
./
T
_ 1erlOrl1l.i#l7ce kl?~ al~f'/.3.2,.:t/~~3ff-Wo,- ________.:._____ ________ _u_u_ _________ ____ __u_
PrtJj?e~Pl7a)Jde,(7fL,/,/(:;; _______n_ _ _ -------- -------- ---_____________
~ulJ'~~~/,g~:~(}~- -- -,~/~- -3 u -:f~~~~(?; - Yi-------- ---- - - -- ---
~/I?ce ~~#/a/?K--(J/-v-;,-j~~~~fx?~f?N~ P<jl te-::t~)~H-;:;p~.je.i.;i,..h;..l ---$'---)------- - _n
. rr/nce "f"Rt'w..,nrt $yH<T/1e/~~~/nf-s;a<'ceJ/i"ff:'(dO. //~I -'"-hf--S/j?hnJ,/bo.lCl'p. ,.384-- ---------
- - e,- -d/?' - --- - j;zj-c/o::."""d'l Mf?; v' :s;
- __ A~e. _ _ j dl'LI1/.;)!!?_~uH-h/~r;..:6~Wa//'?S}~~'Z~1$7P/'d~?,).- __ _ ___u _ __
- ~,RF-s'~j'l?o~-~1~ ----------- - ------------------------
--- Pre~~~-?IXd<<dsL~vL,_~%----------- _ _
-- ___]~ds..b~ Z:::l?s,-L.t'tJ,- -- -- - -- -
.1:;,~;:;:~:.:~f'tif:~t<1.r7(l7,"!:~'-::Mft~[~I~~di!i1i.13r~}~~,t
. ..7'1";;,"/f/'e"JHit!~~~W:/.1~--... ,~)~a, ~6H/:..7?:,,';,ff;.1j6/7 ,~ ~ 56:,:i&V.f~~;r.-J1
- - - - ~~17-:a1'7' ;a:;-~':.~CJL3,--!7ffr-__./---- 7c~.is- ~e 7-- - -- ----'------------ ----- - -- - - I
1_/'.:.,.Pl/II1C/.;)/~/YfU'l?/.a/p __(...t:?UHl?/~-<<,;(2;5"S"~l_".,c-t:!Osc--f,--- _ _ ~~--- ------- ~- _ I
.. . -'!:::t!,;~1;;;~.1:+::Iird;Z<~..,~ ~$z:264;P[;'t;!$1;~ ~,,:?,-~{.,--~ - - .
_ ~---1fz;;;;::;ZC'~~!__:_~dr-_n ~-=~-= ~~__~_-_=_==_=_~_~ - -____ ~= =~=. _
---__/PeIohds,_41.af?/,U?,d?~?:--- ------- -~_~____ _____ ______
~.-~;~;~:i~~p.<~~~~~'r?1ff~1i1~1~~~;~--~=~~-==--~-~--
__-t:.,}IY(II7I'-~!!:fs.~~".;f- rtlfi-:t1~!)/(met:"QqI7/.Sh?$/, .2751piil/tC-t?1'" (!'cO?hG"6'4'ed':,~?,"j~ ??----- --- - - -- -----
-_-PluPl.5ihf-~e =-~~5"~dffa"fl~5;-- ___ ____ __ - __u_ ---_ -__ -------- ------___
----]/u~k/lf-,.oel:'/Q/ /-Aftft1J.i!/'*l{{PR1fk/I- ---- --- - -- - - - ------- -- -- - -- - - - -- -- -- --- -- --
-~--~"s.-.:l)c:?YS,d.!i~!&Ln _ _OhhL un_____________n____ _ ______ ___~__________ __
- -----71tJ(yf/:!il.f'h--~u7HlI?/2Jf';-d275;----- ---- -- -p----- -- -- - --------- __ _______h_
__ __ _ _Pt'eme,.22<il1:fl1 Ut;e:li'~ _______ _____ __ __n___ _________ _______ __ ___ _.. _.
---?t7U-Ie,-/lr6{ut;~3~-- m_ ___________~_n __n ________________n___ _ ---- _I
=I~~~;::~~aj:i--- -==~==~-=--- - ---==~_=~==~=--=u==_~--
-_ _'Pt1r~-Llle.el7,-e2-$/, ____ __ _________________ ____ ______~___
-- _ --7?fj7//X2x,.J(~ff,~~--- _______ _u_ _ ____ _____ __u_ _n ______ u___ _ ____ ____ ___~__ _ _____
-----'R~sC_oCELee_,~$"es-c$/Le;,Jf?'9'".:l.3/,-~P.:e,-- ________ ________u_ _____________ ___ _ _.
- ___ -1/(I~-~del';$.;1/-'d-'ZO,JH,_Jl?g;.a.a~~Od, ______ ____ ___ __n__ ___n_ __m__________ ~____
- _7Jod~$_k""'_G!ehen>l'_.:? ~fi(?.;zr __ _ _u___ _ _ _ __ ~_' .. __ un _ __u_ __________ __ _ ___ __
---PmViHe/:aI--/lk~?7j.ksk'21d.,-./(f'$,-----u---- _ _ _ _ -____ ------__ ~.,.---~$._ _- --- ___ _ --__
---- -7?(/ln-c-:,( 9J?e2u,PJ"l{/ed;R?7'~d:?:C~),.30~~23~.:I~.;(ti_~8.i!yJ.%~!;pfi<<-g;~1-- ------------
-.7/~tJ'~J~~ zn~~o.i';_gdZ- __ ____ __ __ ___ u___ _ ____ ___ _ _ __u_____ _____________n __.. ________ _
-----iP#}>k/j1,Cet?~e;~.:l$,.---- _____ ___________"_______ _____ ____ ___~
____~rdr;Wh 7.i//&ns-<-M.rP4,~---------------------- ________ _ u__n_ _____ _ _
_ ----pr/je~4911,_85"~-5'71f-- ___ -____ __ ____pm _u _ _____ _____ ____n__ __ __ _____u __ ___
__ - - 'Rl?k~/S"c;,<<I"'7f;i3~~---- __ _____ ____ _ _ _u __ ___ ____ ____ _ _ ___ __u___uu____________ ___ __ ___ ___ n ____ _ ___
--_u-].JjGJYffr~t4J?dC1~rg5'~-------------- -------- ---- --- --- - -___ - - _u_ u_ __
-I- P,./mej?thi~t'e1..3_63,--(] -- -- _.___u_ __n_ - ---------- _____u_______ HU___ -- -------- --
_ _1!,.'-n6~-a(.$1'i:;;;.~e~5"5"(),---- ~__ ____-:- _____nu_____________~__~---- _ _________~__
--- 'Pl?:2ffe~:7J~-Ir;;,~-.35',;'l,-------- _ __u_______________________ _________________m _ __ _
__un _ 'PeJl?ti/.~"'lS,-tirl'J?t?J"-a"hry-dP7;?4yt!?eS;.3.Il~.----- ___________ _______~__ _________ ___
- - __7e-n.r/r/yb,_71okd 1I/'~~,j',4.4.38Z-~.25;-:;:~.3.----~--- _____u___ ___________u__ _ _ _
- -1- -;P.;JI'/(?t?,J)r.--II7il:'eece,-33'P/.~___ - -- --~--- - ------ -- - --- ------ --.- - ---
-. --~~1~1l~~:~/Jrj~!:~~~t'~j-hCeL--:-;--- '--- ____~------_-----n - --- .
- /Gll'. .zn.ff- r4C'///.-,;y'-liu7a'i?r /f7Wjf_.$.?- , 3.T""~'r,-- ____ ____ - _n_ _____ - _ ____ ___ u_ ___
~l'ki"f~(/d~k~/Ii-c;-;t1f.---n- - ----- ------------,.....---. ____u________n______ __un -_
-7l<1hi1me~e. -t.U?rt-i$';~j,~~'7f 3.5:5',3?6~----,~------- _______ ____~____ ___
- - --?,6!/:fI'OUP?/L~/P#ft?b~-.n?,~/,- -- ------~-- -- -~------- ------ ---- -- -
. -?/"iI7/e,-L.2., ~/,~~s,.- . _ _ ._u __u _ _ _ _ __ ..__ _n_ _ _ _________ n _ _ _u__ __ _.
.-74Sc07I1.:3rdAen:_a.<rR'., ~~t,/,(6.~~~6,S71(6M61)"l,6/.)1.,u _. __n_ -___________ ________ __
. --;l??,?~...IZ~~r;~;)~/% -- -- -----'--- n_ _ __ __ _________u ____~ _u_ unn__. ______
_ nJbh~~e-{~(?;d/eJ/?s},.yA;r-_ __ _ __ __ __ ___ __ ___m _n _ _n___-:-___ _ _ _u _U_ H_ _
7>~kh?~7f/"n~~32., H_ __ _ _. __
- J1Jr#-i;~f'; .dl"Jedure,/pM'et!-$f. ~/V""'ct?_ 'ht!-l>e, ~~, . - - -
~~,~.I"';Ph..8k~~71f ._
"-
I ~
-1!eec~-IIfa'9u.t?,-,/:t-e,-<Y~t:- - - -~ - _.
--7>rIJ7ee--~M~kS'-..JOI~/N7, ---~-/l - -1!O---:-1--~ ~---
1~~g-~~JEt~~~~;;~;:!Ig'~~4~~$#-
, ----e-
~./. )p("/OI#,""'~rl
- -'Q"'t!.Y"f/r.~Heel-b~7d''''hf.s J,-~8/,-1ffl.:2,6f$3,
--PURj>Srfiaa(Qexd/Hf),
~ -?tP~fi~G',..9..1~CQ~em~~,
-l'lp-(j,-~
_7!ens/PJ?-,Gh456/,.
~.;PUI!IlI!'./t,,(uh?.;}nE.2),bt?~_
t, ./ . ('S'-t;) . ;fWii'ki!rrl
_lkll!. _e~f1/ /JI!B.,._btJ.5;.6iJb/$tNve,r-.--/;.
'"
_J!iI7~/L/I7ac..6;I7t!'~J/..3-~
-~~I!'fv~-4tU(6?if-b..:uJ,
. ---Z4N7.1?/../%l-<=o/I'I'!Ov....L.W!~da~esrG./-9:
-;Z;;./ #f-i!'!tZ
-_Z'~/.Q)?-&-;l6~Ce~b86,: -
1'1
_2&>h;;.y-r-e-;I?k(/f.~;J?f-,P/!()S/ed/ye_eh1.P"'~ee.~ b.3tt;._-
----1-
--~--- ---
--.--.I~
-- -- --- ._---~------------- - -- - -~
---.-
----- --
--~.~--
-
. --
-
-
- -- .
- - - - -
-
-
-
_. -
-
-~ -
- -
- - - . - -
- -
- -
- - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - -- .- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - .. - - . -
- - -
---~----
---reo
. -
-~---------~------.-.---~
-----.....
-.-------
--------- ---------_."--~---------~-
~~e-
_.~---
-=--- ---- -~.- ----===-=---=-~=--=I=~
---
-1-
-------+ ----.-- - -:-
-----
_~ _______r______ __ _~ ____ _.___-+__~__
-~-~--- ----~---+-------~--
- ----~+--e-.
--- ----------~-------- ------ -~--_r___T. -.-----
--- ------------ - --- ----- -----~- .,....- - -
.. ...
,...
6JtA;D-t-.q"~-/C/I7--5 ~a':'~~ 7~ fJl7. /s4.3-?f! ~
-lJ.u/l-f:'k/h?.:lJee~ :l..:l6; C,/:?,
""'llueeJ? ~7JA'n!~JoD?, J3t>~~.f).2>
tl",e/-.;;I',(-/OHS D.J9D<"~~~ .IJI</f:
/1 OJ ~ 512-
__ {tl}LeeJ? (r.;..ve ;n.u~ ~ .
~U?R"7 O>fMilIve, ~~
=I
=I
---.
=I
,
-e
---------<,-
~~;::'!t ~~~~~~~:~!.~
: ::~,::~~~\~:~
-I
=I
iiO::
I"
r
"".. ot'.-c
---
1?1?-:/~('>~/~/ f?6'J...,J.ihr..n$b~ /I~<~/rr3!-.;J.P7rP ~.nI~~ ~ ,a7J~;t::l-1~1)5/g-f/:;:'j~/, :?/Z 2/Z, ;{/~,2~
l1~hes~'y /lVI?hUe; -2f{?I;:~/~.o-'71.3F~t1Y~/~5~6;
~I ee~':'6<<{.r~~l'J'a
;foeail~~, /.pL~/p'~, ~.y~~ s-a;~4 5"%f:e //1/ /3ff.2~-y?5: ~ .y??;Stl4S0' ~::JS;h~$,b~h!'>4
1r~a.:1, ~ 5""4 Sot
~P.~.!i1M.~-~e~ au4
~,y~ ~/"Id~ p~., ';f.!:7;~':; j,/5"~J, /$V(tJ,.~~-W-?~j b#l:l~~,;1
-. ~I/Fdaf~?~HS, /#Fe~i~Nll.,r;aJ, /t'~J. ~7$~~{J/,::.e;1 ~h'/SI'%Ce}
~::~~::h7~~;:;1:~~~ ~~~, ~1t;35;
;=:&:; -;;::d;Ue; ~;t::.:;~;.::::::;;~~s:;1f:1#}r6a$;
if~d ~.% p.!l., /5/1, H5; ';
~~ ~h5~d-iDh.(l<<, ~";(''-~~~~ 7{ 9( 9'4L.Jf /7..i:-/7f:-2I)".3~g~~fl4/3~r;:.':;,':;:::1 ~vl2l ~
,b/s-,S-7B' ,S'6f1, 5::'lt:. ,-Y-?!l,ff?,,'Y?6
.:l
~pA)tj' ;qRI),;c.gk/1!~ ~5;7<<
=:;;;:;;;2:;::;;;;:1f?f/.i':i;.2~~~h,-2~, ~h, sJ/, ~~4~#z ~h, 1<-?~ ~~s;~it~-3Z~"'~.! ~~f
lIa.1-/FvP~~.3~'4 /7~~o1,35;.~'1J, '38%S!~~.22,
i>:
,.,
,~,
L
1=
.
ifp$.$; .r~,2 ~:?
. '11 ' /, r-~Bt::'~
;;;;; ~~~~;:~~~ ~"" ~...(
~~...." .(,j"""? ~ 22""""'. .:1K7/~h}..AY~,.2
Jlpy.a/ ~"'7~'.y.-'7 ..t'~~~ ~/7~~/8.~~~
TILL/iff t:!1'b1~.s /~~ ~/.q
, ;tt:n~It;:;~#1~/z~3S:
"~nt4?A"ff: /t:4f~s., /N~
~,,7f...,j' (1~ /#8;
. /j/,.. ap"'~ ~.:2~
;f,~U" 4/P$j;?~.". $h1H6(7, ~:j5;
&7'~~ ~J:fa9o. ~ ~~) ,
'R;:'~~:~ ~enz"' ~~~~~:1~~ .., .
~p-.07r ~.n~/ /Td: ~~,
;rrP.&.,A'~~~/'Dn n/"~.s, ~:2_
??eeRiwY' CeJ? H4'Yi/JII.::>. 5"1J~
7?,~~ .7ose,Ph ...?&r~ 50[(
NQkP2fso~ S~ 5/,3,D/;f
~,Lh"',,9:, gg:, /
'jff2.....,.'r- ~S+es;,,,,V/~.5'~ 5:~B: ~t
il'~ #".s'pcR( 5;3 a, 53~~~.2.~b.,(
~Z::37;~SA~
f:..c;)~~, ~~~.nL.s; :~~ #"~ff.
':,;c,,-~"> ~.~ ~ A ~
i~'~~j;~~,~~f!Z/7--;~-' ~~~
.;~';~!~P.PY.~/~f ~-0- ~ $'7~
;~.,_, ~.~~;:~Z;~7J/~
~{.1: ",~~, '''"t':}
--'--'/
~.'
1=
.-
e-
1=
1=
-=
~
, S.Y:lf!qbp..;1/S~r"d-y.. ?r3~ .
j ~a;!~;[;,J'J;;e,t:p; /ifJf~:::;17&;1 ~t~ 8/g,$5;z,.3S-~~'1'5;~~,34~#U'Zf,":r~~"7;..~i$"P/~~b/a,
I'.
_\ 5.Ihtn/y If.,,/Ph 7Jggli!/o/A7f!n~a.~/5$/()IR,,~/~/~//N, /~~,/~~/~~/~/h~8P1f.
=I.s.'z13{1f: +CJ,hdnLd/M ?;.,;U:/I!?.s-aUhr:'//'~n
I s.J;.JJ/S6"1~-t-M,6biW"&M,"~rt /Q,,/~ /..7.~ /7..z,/J~~--35'8, ':33~ .8-'3~~~
.~~' . ~ -
i .J;=1~ t;;p~~::;:;;'~(){t:3/;/. i3g~ /.:l3,/7~. -2f!/' ~-2% ~~~f1$~~': l.8h~~.23.
t-
. tJ;;P>-fB. 7hq~o/f..~ts
f)9~~~el
~5' TCPAQ~p..J'('P-",:7;,d<<sq."y Coq/Q/:r$fbfl. /4.2 3/,
.s~4 -1~t .277, ~~
S.:IH., /f. 3aO/~/~S4?,
n).'/11.,,/~/41r..J~.'&/.,.!)?32Z )f(u!.ln ':",/t ")t.Mf ,bt(fi.(J)
$.:1W~lI~~".,~ ~.t.~~Z'~t:~s-o,'/l,8t ~/,/~~ /.2_~
---. .ti.7 8'we EMp/~'rh,/()~ 1Itb, /fI': .1f!-{ fI7''':~:~'' J, .2.2.:j, 3o~ !:::::lj'~~) g~oJ, .rUg ~ '~/~~~'1/?",'
. ~~::t:1,~,u,z"'fil/f .33/ ~aO I'~~~.s /'
t:' -r~~ "He, I NP,w Olt:a- ~/~'!?9-'t'I?'
.-.Ld ~ . "': . 33 ~ ~-8.~~kl
, ,. ::'e 6/2,f ~_~ 5' ,(~Pk'I'Se'S,~.:z ,SB'~~fJ?,~:Z,~() ,~~ ,.y!)g,~~/,~8 .~/7,~~7,3t?",37jL
~T hp<pr~' #SSN., $0,7'//: '/'~-Z/I'J..t #/6A9% -Y-.2/
-S,X e~J1I/a//k~~ rJ;11&.1f/p,~8b:'8i!:;:1~j7.2.?~ .J/5;.ft~~-2(~
~g~~~~2~~~~J~~~~~~~~~
\
.5.,T .5:o~e?/ of 11f.,Jio/fft' 7ffhH()~~Y, .6"z..2/.1". 3 32,
g,TS~b2/14~De. ,,~
~-~7:f7;~7f1t;::;~ZS't37* L '/
ftWarle$.,?o0uPe/J.///, /--25; /1"4 /6?; /bh, /7,;;t /'8', ~P~2/tJ,2-2().~.A:lISit%~esl$~.$/c2.SX-1. ~/~h.;?4 ~3~6.~hKz
s.7:~o.~r~~~r/s'/~/4/0(). '
~ -r -r" J.. . /._ / -r: S""/SSO?jY cCt?.#e/?&~.a"e; l ".fY,-"''''''h~)
""""',J 11I-:U '~r;.t;1~):J/IS .A7fd., ~po l/ey-J/dJO'v/roP jJ7#~~~ r,t()9~roxy~ .
-. $.~ 1!-o/"rf/Uer$'vff!7'r/Pf'F,P;;:j,:jf;Ir~I/~fl~,J /~5'~,~ g.:?/,.!J~
a).,Tppnt .7J.;J!/5', /~l~5'~m:; f:/dj
San~ r'/~us ;Z>p1r...;uLe; /~~ /3/J,
s,;,~.,.::J r'~aS" ~"~e a/?),/?1/~/~ /.3~
_ISJ::7Jto/'ent?~ ,{~I&'y""/'.s I7oh.,tP.rP.t2f"'~ /.::?
_ .s~ ~rlP( S 7>.4ce: /:3ff,
S~d!f Af._Rd... /6~f5'tWt:} /~/~~
SeiI/v...;n!rim /lrm~ /~,2,
~'J!~:;';;: 7l:1~~:/f{.~hj /b7f /65;
=I fa::t~~~::e~e;;~~7;
S.;;u7tf~ C!-bvs 'Z~ Ch..w"?//tf~ /b~
t;;::;:~;I:;;~f4:Je~ /~d...272.l123{{$j/;~~4 3~4<<o..~
.. 'R. -a-Cb. m/#e&'. /0
St:.~el'ine g ~ .
'sand C/?Ve Wd ph;,Pt?dy,.R//J3J:;-::t/)~~o/j.;137a. ~~...,~ ~:t#t:.//d~' !~6qUo.t~7~~%;;J;'tDs(/h15'o'
, , r ,6~5'~8,S~7,f~~i~~o.:?~,b/6 ,()/!J,S'/~S'/3,rffA)
i~i~~ ~~~,~:j~$'2, ~E.3.5'~~/,,:[,-;6e~/$'.yIl,S'~/P~),SCh~J.67.e S-7/~2 6/,~
fJ<;:D.;..",.k/~ a;;;I??/<,&/bl1r ..2,?~.a717, 3f.o,,5ll2.. ?'1J,?;6/)~ ?,()Z
9t. Ce&1l:f~ . g t1~ ~,.
$#, ;/fh2h!vJ$" ,f}p-f!
Iii::
h,;A~
~i
:;.~, ':"~""". ,., ::".:-:...'
_ ; "~J-~. .;:_;
{..: ~ .;:~:;::~}
M ._ ~ ;".t.~~'.r,.
. -;-,:,~, :'4'
".'-r ,':':'""',~~
'~~:~, ;\.h : -" ~': '.;. .
'<.'~~:!-:7':',;:::"
'-:..:..,.,~, ':' ',,"
"~--'_:
-f
.- ;,/",
( . ~~t~';:~
~ff"':i"~/'V';"P '~,~r:;-;:;:7~ $"//'_"/.2 ~ 5Z~5'4..q,
-.:-. - ,.."
-. .--- <. .^-
iPPl{~Z::~#~ft..,
r:,~i
""lIIIl
. ,
.--
~
~4;f.:z, $ :?~,.3~;l. ,3.:l / , ~ 76.
, ,
e-
1=
1=
,~
Shod-hr;y7?Lv,f?H/ t:!/P.se.2),2:?5; u____ _ ____ _ _ _. __ _ _____~n __
Shel'J'r/17; ~!7J7IU~dJln.-S~l/.rd1!-'c2,- __ ___~__ __ _ __ u__H___
a5'hiJ~ /11.;J/9I//n, ~-,/.2, - __ ____ - . ____ __ - ______ __ ___________ _____ ___ _n___
Sh/~k!/,~h?es~c:J~,__. u_ _ __ _ _ __ __u___ __~ _. _ _ _ __ _ ___
_. Shea,:T;:; .:l~f, __ _______ _______________ _ _ ____ _________ ___n_________ _ ---
.1h/e/$, If/eha'''~d?S~---- ----- -------- ..- -----------~------- - --
$AQ/'>-t:.S-t:.,_c287,_eo1/lJ7,JtJ~ _______ _____________________ __ . _ ___u_ _
__ $'tJw.:>,33~~~,./UA7J------------- --_______ ---- ___n__ _~_ ______~_u_________ ____
--SkpPJ?#ye,~/p, __________________ ---_ - ---_ _____ ---_ ---
__ -Sh.m4:Sr:llr.,~,.5:~7,-~f/ft~6;/,------------------------ _ - _ ___ ________ _ _ _u_
1_ $~e/'4 /1t/e.,57.3,.57% -- ~ - ----- ---------- --- - -- - -- - ------ --- -- -- -- - - -.... ---
. _c$/lIJt/e'/$, {,2f',------ _______ _ __ _____ _u_.________ __ _ _ _u__ _ ___u _n _
---$Jo/;j'l'h~6'sJ?t?~t~1i~4!d-T-~- -------------------- - ___un ______n_ - __u_
u __ _ _uS, ~ ~.;J~S( Z l't~(-t~/'Oss w.;;/lrj,33 ,..8b.z,5".:I'~.55; _ -- -- - - - - -- -- - -- - - - - -- - . - - -- - -- -- -
I
-------. -----------~- ----------- -~--- ------------------------ ---------~------------~-------_._-"------- ._~ .----------
I- s:/ilf)n,C?~61,(!!::t, /O~JIb,/~I'lr/~t/3b,- - - _m_ ------- - --- -- -- --- - - - _u_ --- --- -------- . -:
- JlhlO/fe,^;st-,.Lrel16;/tJ&'; _u_____ - - - - - __u_____ - (pll"e6'~ __u - -- -- _ - - (,h ;;~~.s-- - -'. .
_ --J7(~IlS,/.:?% /.~/-0g;/64 ~f?%.3~('se4t?t?t't?;>-DS$/hf), ~8"{Trd]7i'/~ },~U'7Ub.257"'?h ~,i?t'-7f6,) 6.3~~)
I
= - _. _$i/~~rb/ is -~;k :r~j -~~r>9$,;;;~;5"~';,~!/1-~--~ n_~_ .~_- -__-_ _ -~~_--_- ~_ -~~ -~_~~-___~:: - - - .
. . __ $/h7?Stm-GlJstf'lte:fl()n-~-M.f-d03,~/2-,~&'~8J?~-Wp,~'as-~~~~ S.:1a;$'h~:?61tG/";; ____ ___u__ -_-
_ __d/mMdsL/OhSl7ub, ';<//,:U~.:1t)~.:1.7~______ __________ ___ _____ __ u________ ___ _ __ __ ,
.-S:,~e;GI/.s~1"4.7J1!Ve'/o~h~a'Atfd.,.::?/5;fre~~-l"e- - r _ . -- --- -- ---- -- ----------' ~~-.: -
--~/t"l'fjedi/!?,~75;~.:N/r;rGJh),~27~J~5.I(!/V/e'~p~./, - - - - --- --- ------ ------
_ . $/!to'er.N//s_t/n/tfed_e,lH~.5J~~__ __________ _ _________ __ _____ _ __u___ ___ ~__
___ _$I/11()h"SAl()hSS'r,{3:ti;:(en$/3~/;___ _ ________ ___ _ __ ___ _ __UU___ ____ ____ . __ ____ __
___ -$//?7t?ndS~r~~D~/p/-C/OI'?,~~.3,------ ______ _ ___ n____._'_'~______u _______ _
_ ~Simms{brP7t?r,~5".:l.,-- -- ----- ----- ----- --------- ---------- ----- -"~-' -.--
. _ _ -$/hJjRSt?"~rill'tf',#Z'11-- -- _ ------- -- -- -- _ _ _ -- --- ---- -- ~ - -- ~--- --- - - -- - -- _ ----
x......'(
__-1__-_ -- _ ____ ___ u___. ______u_ -------------------.-- _u_ -- _w_______n_ ----- -- u____ -- -- - -- -- --
- . ----~- ------- --- - ------"'~-.::_-- ----------- --_.- --- --------------- ------- -------------------- --~------
_~ _Sk.av..I1,_E0:a.k, 32g;___________. _ __~_----~-~ _~-_-~--------~ ___
~ .
~- -- -- -------------- ---~-~-- ---,- -'--- - --- ---- ----- --------~~------ - ------- ---- ----
. - .$/e~$ett-!l-j~~ /-'Ts, /st/b4;1.- -- - -- --- - -- - __nu
- -- -$Rtte;y~~nC~;pe.,?~:'d::/2, .57~5:3.J.SY2, ---
-.-
.---Smflh,/YtlI"p;.;Y:/E;%?5;S'--u------ ___ _ ...._______ _______nU___ __ _n___ ______ .
_ ---Sl1rrHffs-1!~;(6i,-P4.;?~(J,-- ___,_____ ___ _ __ _ _ _d ___u n___ _______u __ .__ _ _
. _ -$m/tJ,r_7?al1.;,1d.23.,/a;r _ __ _u __________ __~ _ _un _ _ _ _n u___u _ _ __ __u_ _ _ _
-1~:;~:~:~~&1~;~~: -~ _ _--:_-___ -_---__-_ ~_~u__~~=-=~_~-=_~-~~u_-~=u----
. _ -J'mi.cA,It!I>>d())?S:f.3~.2,.?~3,_ _ _________~n___ ____u_ __ ____ ____ _________ _ _ _n ________ _
_ _ _ -Sh1/I>>,'7/~n.;Jhl7"-../er,:% ~a/,_~pJ,r//",l_________ _ __ ____ ___ __ _u_ ___~_____ ____ _ . _
.___.5PlTK.;;.deIo~),(r-~,5'#-__- _ .._ ___ ______.__________________~u___u __~___._ ~u_ _
_ nl_ .~.-. _=__ _. __ -_ _-_u--u--_----- /- --u--~.i};~/~;~~~~- - -~-~-__~~_-~=-=__.:.-_-~__=__=~=_-~==_=--__=_- ~-=--
. _ __ $hJJU/ C'pmfroi ,/~frm.;v;f6;)~>>7k.;JJ?/4;,~i~.:?~fa'p,),.:l~7~ldtb~ .:lhft-:27O'-.330G~~e),.w/(t:/a)$b1t _ - u
_ .$l1bW~'(~tZ~#~gf)5;_ ____________'::.._______ _~___u____ ___n_._____n___ ___ __ __ __ __
._.,5t,b-cKPI'~/1e~/s..Q~~~.fB,: __ __ __ ____Uu n______n_____ __u_ _ _ _________ ___ ____
--SotlS',-Jl,.:l~/,.:l1Z~s/PJ?hJ'~J/eru.r~aJ,------ _ u__u______,____ _ . __n_
. S~j,Eb.ll.7Jet"e/t>,PmeH&-Cbr/A,,~ 12 Z~/t, .:IIZ~/~.;?/y: ~55; //5"b,~Z, ~~ ~5"3. :;5"~.ti7~ fff!}
$. ft/.;JP"4-et-WJ~ c2i .. - - - - - . - - -.. - -.. - - -- - - - - ~
c ~_M~o~l
.,JfMi/1hd '"f7l"e.:J,68,./~Z5'ff.r/la,"/~ <tf/~fS' f, ~ . ----:,-
.$p// /e.s~$'/~?f .:l//, .5.:11/, 6/br. - "
....
I
1- -a5P~#;PI1,~~~s,-2_.ag;
1--.,5ph;'er-vi~-41r-.s:_~~_elf;t;-~3/':
. .s"mel:'$d:.$t;,-gp.a1-~~.J: -
. ~-$()<<-th_hd_4I:7d_CJsSG?m6(y...3P.~315;.3/-~g~!i;'Y?3l:~:::4j$~~J,~2~eJ.fff!f~
_S~~/'se.~~,-"A;.3-~.a,--.r: ":}
_$()e/.;JL:?~h~;~-$udf.l:(~ ,-3?-1':S35;: -" ,
_S6t:"~L$~~_~~Z~~~s:.z;_a9a,_~5B,
._$pk~s_2~~~,2-%P;_~.3/,
_Sf7H.t-j,_EI?Lf:.,e':~~~FJ.::.i~A4_~.y,5$,_,,#,S,_~$:~,_~~_b.3~_6-~
_Sfll7j~l'lJr.PIC//'T;ted&c1Jkn_L-M.,~58',.5"'/o, ~4.5:7?'.5Yt-5Y.2,
_So~ci.tZ>I.:'..[.#es_g-kk~.$74.~h,gZ
--Soa'd/Hfi_6/-,!
Spef?n_;;iql&;_,(f:L~J;..2~?~o/h),_~~i.~-b.3~
_.5f'IVLee.. _kke_wcrteF.! $<<~.6.til;~e_'e),_7~),_/~I'Uo,),_/~_g~),_L?53~),j~'6:~/1!-~c:2_/!.~~o~.),-~S.3,-I~
,5'pp
. .~
---~r~f-L/PJ/L~efI.~t- . ---:- .
--Spet:"/-tie,"r./()hS_-&.J02--eehKe~.,. ~~/,
--$,Ppll?klel-"-$!/s~e~~$/,-
-o/l:riJf;hf-~!ItZ,~:h.l!~$R,~p8,_5"JP'
"""'Ill
.-
1=
.-
,
. ------
----.-.....
-
-
_J'1fe(/.eQs".2I:ke.e-..L,A~..33,~3,_~9!.4f.. 1-
-
~$fe>n~_;fbn.;;,ht' /4-38/!- - -
----St:f?/he/lahdl-"ttd~ ~~"r.d..-.3,.~,5:2-,S3"7~?,,,2,.LI16,k?6,'j~6,:/6.Z/;:5;.2t2b,~2.~.d.ZZ-~%-fl5dP'_~~Z-
,637,6.:zj1,6.:?tJ ,6/0 ,58&' ,578 ,a7.5"~,S.l/3,t>/b /~~8',~?~3
----
r:e1ff~ ~7~1:, {//-Her '1 ~up- 7. !tex~~-l 1f!fj~-
---S~l'!.edsr'Z,g,6tdflJ. ,OI?_f7.e :l:C:. ,is: _,.da(),.3-'c%352C'/eGJ~~<<'p' ~-Y.a rj'~h!J ,$~5:. ,1f/.~_k ~b~~-t'h.1:- "
~ ' ,(4"i4w/~ 67{'
- -e-
----.str.iKe's;-g,z{f;{f:i~.?tS2jsx..i!Sh?-'kl t;. 1: 1 t:;;i:!.id. f:' '-T]
,. ~ //73 ~ .5't!f;;)- "'''''S.$'- ~NS.- ePe,w
- _$Cu~!/,"'//Il !;lljJ~"22-l~n~in_ee~l'T!t5'~),j.i* _lY.q/il-.3P~ .wCllh. ,3ht'J. _/ ,~~_?.48h'% '
,_~ ~16.~/i7!${f,:tJS~7,{; ~:':/"715'3?J,e.ft:Ze} ,y$5:~)~~~.~~~ ~:2,fe;w"1ftdl~~~
-
--
---~-t-dJl?~II/~;;,e~~a/p~'G~_~.a, --c --
-_sr4'h/~-$t'.,-7.3(k/.ilffe-r-€'h7P-dJ,.7.3[CV8-~~1____ -./- - - I
__s.fl>ll..t!!,_el!u5q~_Z7: -
-$-f9bl7,hu/s'-F-~h~' .
-$l~ed:~;Y-/d-;hf/;;t~I1/J;j,/ga(~),2Z"_6.g:;;
- ,-
~_' r:-~"" - - -
-$~ct'ar-d$-t1$..'eeI:;_L1f4.
c '-1
~
___aLeHl,;;d.t7<</:?#:y_tbh/h7to?_,/.2mI7Cil."./.If3. ..d' .r--
#' -~--
_st~)el7r710J/'pb_:Z;/t:y:..:!8'6..gp.:2,.adP;_3.7/,-",!(?.:z,5:08, -.---
_$tC!ll~-f?ipe,_.;t/-.7{.,12_7,-5:-4tS-6Zh/~ " - ~--
, --
_.$t~blUIe'l'd2-2;.~5; l-'!f$' 7.
-.rflmuU/..p.n_t2m!2.7f$,':{2.Z2:?,9",J.:l'z"';;~m4'd: r$:~t -
- -~iJ'!s.(IIa~~'/~~=-Ih;{P~$7t)~:;:~ ------...----
- -cSt-lr/lIlft_,ift;J'}f.PI1-K-.:?5:9', ~--e-
. -c$6,P"-eI15/)1?,//,[;JJ'}"hL~_.2,&:L~3.:z, ----
-__S~eer$,_6!.dOo/&;_"fl8/, ~
--$I61.EI171:Jtt;-g,~p&;.';?24- ------ ---~-~-- i
.Sic"e42?R:pJ-E; 38:- -~ ~Yl- - ~r~- n .- r- - _:;;:iN1/(;;;;' -6"7-
. . ~nlP/,_h -J.,2,Lf'l'~~e:l9tii/fJ;3/,i ~~es- - - ;a:u ~_~r.d-'-(;>h , !J3~(;6J,.14$(!Ipi,;,;:l~5:~r;;f. __ _
-
~
....
F' S6pl?s.t:'PJ7, ~/t:>, 5'"3/, .
_~cr;z;'~'k:f$.,4~5;~~/It~ eP~ ~"'c..~~_~~), ____ _~_
St-'=N1kff-Cqll1f&?/?$-~.9~- - __ m _ ___ ____________
S~CJh~PJ?, Rd-er 7?.,-~~-~f,4<<P,-~~h--'L6.2,- ______ ____
StDJ?e, ..(e"?,~{,s, _ n ____ ______ ___ __ _ __________ __m_ ____
.e - .$tef/Aen,2Jr.LeoJ1C1rd,_~~~_______ . ~/
!_- - SteveJ?$,/lI&ed#.,5()~- '"
- --- - SteyeJ?S()l7,2?#I~c6/i?eo/-L'-&~,s-~
- -- -.$ke",/11/k~ff~8,--
-- , - . ~ ees. - fl{f,{cesZ- l~~t4iJ"~-l ~"..:--~ ~ ---
- --- SUbdIf/I-SlQJ1.$r3/VQ/i'!~ 'h),lll~c,~;r)'Zl.. .2~$L~//~s$ '" a2,5:'tJ.{; .a~l5:3, ~~g;"fJ K._,{f:/p6,/~
I 1 ~a>~50 //3/ ,$'?o,JjIJ tP1:J.:<$'.3 {,S'J;/;~:r .tl.~,~~~"/.z.<:Us-,;;:?o~,/77',/?~,tA!P.J/6s-,/~~,/e>7,iJ:&12t:'1!"S} /.3:<.'
- -.'- ~54f;-~7/t'dD;);-5QP,-S";;"{f(sej:iWaes'/'o/':;j,r ~~~:),-S-~d'.4~~~6:2Ud.-);~"~~3?::W","-5"877~~~ ~;q-~~},
- -- ------- -- nn____ __ ----,~*6/~r~/L'r;t'p)-60Il,t2tb.)-~/ ..~.)S:90>~)~
_ $U$~I?,_#J:t'6~/~ _____ ____
--5UR!<<l?Jf,c2/'-'l'/,./~~~:l5;c3()1, .81+f1Yt1f;len),"L6r------- ___ __ nu____ . ______ _ _
-_$~IJ~ise-~L~,.tl~--- _ '8
-I SUIJJ'l/se7/a~k ofuJ~pU't/'/.:l"?f- --- - -
I --J'W>~s-e~i;?m~7-6-gZ-~ _ __. _ ______~____ _____
~-~-SUI'J?P7I'.~JlJ'>I.~€',1~35;8%rj;'t,//..z,//.J,$5~(74 sy;J,_~O'IZ.~n__________ _ ____ __ _ H__~
~SUhJf!/.5e-:tJ?I7~~n-a.;('_4L,~~/.J2.,/5%~?h,,f(.~/,.fIY6; -- ---- -. eljSi!.-T -- .. -
-S'ddll/,:.s/oa~y-41Y,.//:z,./L3,-/~/6.9,.gtJlJ,.30-{,,3P1!-$/lI,gc2s:3~~.5"~ -~.2.9f!s~,.;;,ff'.l!iYlJ~~$P/~aJ..
,UzP) ~~.g~J6.:?/
--~-$u~/'l//jpr,frJ#Jjt!fth1./L6r//i~~--~~- -- ------ n --- -- --- --- -- -:; -
i ~.. J'.Uj1OP;;-()r.-fJ~5CaJ?el'de-~()Lad_s-.(VL'.r/.~Z- ----
, ~~~~n;;~707~en~L/~,~a5;-- ___ _u ___ _- ~_n.~u___ =~____________u_______~~~--
---~uj1j1//es, -~/3-Gt?/E),----- .-- -----. ---- - - . -. _ - . __~__- ___-.__ _u___ _ _u_ n
---_u$UI7~!/--COHdru.c:b:f)n-WI?nf,-!i'~3,S~- _u_____________ ___________ ___n_
,
--- --- --- --- U--$;--.;(.;--1--u--------- ---
--1- S{l:t~pr?r,-7'3-7~lfc- ,JIftJ,--- -----
- -$W'-HlR1iQf -,p?t?{5"d-5;5".26,.5:.'~,
j
" -
-- _._------~---_._--
.--------------- ------
-e-----.------------ -- ---
- ---S5al?e.ySt:,/~tJ,/5%---
- -----0---- --.._____________~_____~_ ______ ________.~________. ______ ______________~~__~_ ___
---- ----- ---------.------------------------ -----------"-- -----~~----_._------
-~I-
-~I- , --- -- ___u.__ _ ---
-e---.
....
,..
,60!J,hb~ ,f'~1/5~5'-V-8 ,5'~/,5';I.~5~~,5"/',~ :Y-7~#65;.y.5"o 1.y..y./:r.:?1l:~7,~ s-,.y.//,?P,t},.3~ ,iJ.y.p ~7 ,333
~J/0 ,pH" h-Z/, ~;?/, b.;(9';
-e ~~t::i::::;;/:~;;;~~;~7{;:;r1~~~i:;:~is:~t:2?fffN~/
"Thal>G(? /1d~e;we s'If,.~ ~/X
70~~<;: 'e.,tb.r;U?~ ~7-2.
7MR"~'h~A{I( #L:,~eP-s:. ~~!f"~ B:>a
=I~U~~/~ .
. 'e" vi.&e;c,/~?~f!:;!~~Js-l/,y1?/ba/f'Jl/f'~,2/':;. ~?~ 2.:JZ3-2~_:j_~~ ~3t:,3~~~
. ,S"7P,S.;l./';5""/B ,5'~ I~B7:~fJ ,.,..gS;""~ 3 ..~/~.
=I
~:;~::1::;1~&~17~~'
~f/'e / t!?Kp~1?5e$ OI?Hcl/', ~( iJh~
, ./
-. 7h~/ 'pfc,~ 'a,
,
\
I
!
~
~-
"k1-/l/rL, ~'hr Mh,'S;~'6ft
. pgJr/ I/l=lPH$~ 1~ /f'//(Su-5oe~<;/oJd/"5"~/? 2 //~)
~}(/:Jly-/1~ 7OrI"17 /(/:i;//~
l?o
.-.-
7iJ~FCl<5J S T wU-" dJ"':O/~ w~ .L'-c4!-. 75; b.:? 8:
/C?h.,,e{ep.s "'tilRI~d, 7Z
1ftbm~ /l'anfOJ'Od /i?:C'/::19$e?lr<td'l'aJ?a~~, ?a //~ //f: /J'h;37a 3?4$~6;"5?5;~4
~yz>p~.sr6~ ~c~ ~~f"%~-2t,-2S~ .;261), ~ 7.g, ,,2f//, 3,3/, ;JB.2. :J3,%e~d,.!J~4 39ft .y.a3,.y~$;~( ~l(,
, ..W3
~!:z~,u:1.~~~ ~/.~
-e 3ho])~~r~~./~ If?, g-~ /-2ji; /t'/Z /fft;
. ~;:;;;:;;:;~;;~~rt!,.!!l!f~/;Hsl
7fdm~ 1I.J4 //t,d/2.,.2:l~.2.26,.ef(~~~Z %'. {)#7/~::!~;');~1b/;rdJ
=I-~;~e::f;r/d~rf"k/ /~?;
"llI'.2-. '7', '...J.//~_ -~ '" /,p ~ ./ 3,
--~~,l~5-/'r'/.~~'Ot'11/~~_'!j$',;J~
(2Z-S~K
n,l}r~r~ct,h s-t ~ "sa -, v:.
=1= ~~.~~qS7/'
~~ /n6?r..t;ed/G~ .;;>..:?~
~: ;;;:;~ ~7;::jt:;~~~~
7UPJ2er. #"ekh.. :l.5'~
~.t;%~~~i' .;;>?~ .R6ff~73,
7fi:...( v/"., L." .,2$( 57:Z60~,b.?f:
-- f!l<-~jf~!!::t:!!!ir;/f!'l~I"/2 U~"S~;;::;~i075; 6:<.,
i>~.~:, . ~~" : m . ,,~
,. '.. ,,,',,.. ~
.' ~ ." ",,:;,"."':-(' - ;._.~u~~;~
',~.f. .;>~{~~
,',.... _,0" 0,
" ~..." -:., ':. '.. .".. ,"" ~..
.-..~..- ".-...... -"
...._..,,~. - " ~
8::,'}1:.: ~-.'."'4.-
~M'__... ,.".... ,._
--.. ,-". "
':~~"~{:"f"~
'~
7P~-'p.I'mt?' I/i/e, .3P,I! '//J'];; j, 3~(dnJ
TMrL$.- Ea'~~l" L" Jot .
...
~"'-
_t:>I'_ oS:
. .6/~ -
:~ ~1'!1J':::U~v:~~:~nc~l$~::l.
~/tJ. ih//,
i'
.. ~.! . '
~'(r'./ /
\~ '.
. . ::'" ,~.
~ .' -- . ,."
- .~ ' .'fiJ~';:':
, . ,-, ~ ,. --.-..
-. ~; ~,..:; ',;. -~~.....~
~7
......
L
, '~- ...... "
\
e-
~'-'
.")<' .
1=
.-
~
II"'"
Vel,rrp"f'. .3 (~ 1)4.trflt.
/{!IIICF/VT: (bKneif/orl1., IQ,/( /-#JS;Ib,3~4,62..'41~ I'M, //.2, //./i;(/~/Lf!.a~ /.3.4j~~3, -':~~/1if/~
,.;1.~'"9'/~~ 1~3. .:l~1 ,,;l./4/,,/U.2.-. ~/() ,fl-05",/t;'$,lfl7,/fl!;" ,/82.,17'1, /7C,/7!J,/'7~,173/6 ?t'~7t>/~~j6 .Jb~
,;l~~{t4eI'/l:// .SOl/"p".-. 4t eYpt&7se qa.__ /H<:-re"",.~.e), .z~7, <:U;/,.;(6~ ~'/'7f oZ'/5; ';;(1J'(h .;(S'tJ(3~ 3?o;;,;?~~.;f~3&!J. !UJB;
.' ' 96~ ' " f.:2~~ .J~~'#J~t1:p~At:;!~~~/k~;;,;Jh;~~:~.l;/sfa,1::
/ -: ,~? ,a~,S'6:1>
(/d:' Z;;Jr;~-td //5'~P.~
(/Ineefft; #r~4/rs ,c/blnA-, /t?~ /".?,
VttvCgo;(Jx~I7c//~r41., I:J'~ /t,g,. 226,.2~'Z2..2~21'33?; ~7~ ~9.'5;~3,J#;r ~!!2a-~2b..!i'fUJ,.5"~.5t~_b~-2
~ ....., .......-._.- , ,
m~..~~
,'.
--
=I t~~~:;d~f~:~::~/.g~~~:l
t4/:,tnl"n, t'M~i~ ~-'/.'?
I/nley ~h7P?/,/-~ .~55; 3?5;
l/nirm-&JW.I117D.J? C'oUJ7CJ/ ~.46bn.~J~ JJA..'i; .373.
l~lt1ps a-t)I"~'L/~/"!fa"-'?~L'~ .;>8:2. ~ 8~ ~.:<.:J,.;e..24/~~1~:z ~Ua)
-.a {/. So/} 7J/:(kA?kI7>>~~?b 1!lftf!'.?:::.~1'f.l ~!,
., ~sj.P~"t;;$tPS ~,(~~ fi"5-~
he-/"', ~ t.23.
=I
=I !/.sd-J/N70 .:l p/, 2 p-t,. ~~?:
IMl"b .~Herips /~.t/. ,t;?~7; -2p.2~ 33 "If E~-5;.y.I5;
~h ~~~~~
//r'-&-olLf; _"7k~/ (, _~h!J:
1M", 392.fll~:- fo/:-:~~{t .{ifJgll/~~
v~~:s;~m::~!~~~/~~sl.y2 8;
. !b~tDri.s SC:JI.v~is_r. S, .
~=~;:Z::;;:.2!r
~.
~~ :_.>~r~:~':7:~:;,',\::",::, .':.,
; ~.'._':.'C ," -,- _". .. _ ';
"'""~t~l:'-~:,-~'-: :;~~_;:'
~.:;~ ;-,"~ "',\~-::
~..",-,. .~;',
,...-/
--
1j,:;;'7;1iif~r;f$jJ34~~1/r/;;;""""I?)/J'?(/L.)-20d~%::f ->!KKZ~
, ~~nw)h5P-#t4'ed5'.ap'~.) ~_ :}
,
~ter ~~5/'nf7, /3,~~.3~/IJ~ /I~ ~~ ~4-7!J5"{" ~Z ~3,
=I ~:2~~~E~~~::~';~~"'~P/"'/1'-
. t(/.;de;-." SPlP.JP-Pf ~s -~~.J$.;:le?, 44..2, -Y63, ~p -~Z
fJ::;=::;t;f:it1~~/, ~;b, ~.R~ ~7'Z o?~a~S7f
11.
=I :;X::~h/P~~~
t#';~~~ #b~rd, .:2~
~~k: ~,:~Z:~;+o?~~ ~/'.
'J'l _ .Jk 19,~#.tltt./"n 1 $/lff,
t{/Po/,.~ ~$/;{ed'/~/ 8'~ ~~.4~.s<?~ ~">;
-.~j~:r~~1fr .
I(/Q?U,h.J' 1l~f<2'?Y?Me~s. 39,5~6,7.:2, 7(~, /IJ/,~~.ft
Uh$1!/'ll'Jop-/.;:md' 1?d?~
W"dJterDJ"IessuY'F!, 5"4 /.R6r/8''td/~
tr/?11i;,pJ'l1l17~ ~~~
~~,.~;nt ~Jw, 7~FI~~~~q~S}
-. tf/~"if't,oSCy 74(l~ /~k /33,/5"~d/)%.9tJ~ 3.23.,'W.<. hlJJ',
___ ~~>>Emf~gf?SU.~7Zg~3.
. ff/,hteJ'l #;-Ga
H/a/~uw,_7b~d.ZJ?t'), 7'5;
1{/.,and'&/7 4f$.<<UA( 51/,
/l1ed-l1llJrimd aOl(e $;;2-~'0; %~ ~~":,1e;:.,-tr-<<J;ff'.?M4l ~ l ~,~.l9I7P'" ~ s-"/6'~~
:~e;::tz~~~~:~~/2;(
-. ~~ ~:~<:/(If';On~17, /~,~
~-H-s ]J~ /-/ ~,a~.2~!}?5;~Q,!i"7L
If/P~d!,;;H//l Sud-c//v. $e/#"!:l'l"" t!fl<9&,p~ ;p/~~ /1"r? /74ff;rze I, /'/_'7//4)
7ft1;#~/f;a;;;;; 15~2J~-2K~ 3/1f-;J.J/.? ':J't 1?f5; ",s-otJ.s,,( !>o.<
=1 ':f/{!!~~f!;/t;~"; tfL~/'j /7f?,O~;"f:l
_ " EJ?Ooh'7f t:'b L~A!'.,/~~..22"i;
V:;::;/:;;;t;t1:/:%~~~ ~.zZ ?4t ~~~-7d~r::1. (;//~;;:Zi
t(IP/s,Fd/'Jrlrao, 2/3,
{ffh6l/RJ1, tJen;jU~, ,2/~~~ ;2~.2,
=I ~:;t:;:~~~;;;~i d21,2%h
. ~t~/);;;~~:~f,;'11 :~;;}jt!?l..?b/,
aM/I/?S/"'f /lve, ,,<:z.~~ !1f/~f)~'~0,
t(4J'er ..s'"'71!11f. eX' F~ht4'fr~-re.$. ~ ~/(/"7~b
tf/del" 71- sewel"o/e ~.fe""/~4 ~#/ t/~7b2 5''T.(
__ Vf/h/1fek// /LLhdMhC/a4~~~
~'/(e:nffj;f~-{;~~14 ~h:Z
~-/er .dor~e ""I"'!?Q/71 .;{f/6: ~r5; ~9'~.y?'Z 5"'00/5:,:J(
tl//j'u-t' <; z-lJr~ Hb..:l" /'I'7t: .:? B'Z
C'oh7.177VH/TY ,~)P.., .:;.;zZ
~
'/7~/r1>>_~, 6/~
U/eszfl4/e? S/~-..4v., t~$; ~ft 6sc<,
,
:.~r:::;.",.
.-
.-
11"'/
-e ~~.6 +NW~ 404
YPu~f:. /o~,~~
ye~r -ti"ek, $~..2,
=I
-.
,., .
-e
=]I
--
-;-'" ~,;:._.:':: ",.~~~
.~., .' :.~-:'" ,~~"'::,,'~~
i~>"~;,.~f;~~2:-,~:.}
iii: