The URL can be used to link to this page

2008-11-24_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jourCity of Saint John Common Council Meeting Monday, November 24, 2008 Regular Meeting 1. Call to Order - Prayer 5:00 p.m. Council Chamber 2. Approval of Minutes 2.1 Minutes of November 10, 2008 Meeting 3. Adoption of Agenda 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 University Avenue - New Sidewalk & Ditch Reconstruction (Recommendation in Report) 5.2 Saint John Adventures Inc Request to Present (Recommendation: Refer to Clerk to Schedule) 5.3 Letter from Eric Teed Accomodations for Transient Employees (Recommendation: Refer to Rockwood Park Advisory Committee) 5.4 Percy Wilbur Requesting to Purchase and Develop City Land (Recommendation: Refer to City Manager) 5.5 Letter from Dennis & Janice Griffin Regarding Payment for Land (Recommendation: Refer to the City Solicitor) 5.6 Council Resolutions Referred and Tabled Items (Recommendation: Receive for Infomation) 5.7 Skate Board Park Highway Usage Permit (Recommendation in Report) 5.8 Selecting a Financial Advisor (Recommendation in Report) 5.9 Management/Professional Pay Scale (Recommendation in Report) 5.10 Sale of City Owned Land Ashburn Rd (Recommendation in Report) 5.11 Proposed Public Hearing Dates 2797 Loch Lomnd Rd, 11 25 Sewell St, 96 124 Station St and 1030 Dever Rd (Recommendation in Report) 5.12 Merchant Agreement-Chase Paymentech Solutions (Recommendation in Report) 6. Members Comments 7. Proclamation 8. Delegations/ Presentations 5:30 p.m. 8.1 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre 6:00 p.m. 8.2 Saint John Waterfront Development 9. Public Hearings 7:00 p.m. 9.1(a) Proposed Rezoning Amendment 99 Simpson Drive 9.1(b) Planning Advisory Committee Recommending Proposed Rezoning 10. Consideration of By-laws 10.1 Zoning By Law Amendment 861-891 Fairville Blvd (PID Numbers 00032813 and 0032821); Imposition of Section 39 Conditions. 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.1 Budget Deliberations/Presentations (Councillor Titus) (Tabled November 17, 2008) 11.2 Building Inspection of Accommodations Recently Vacated by those Eligible for Subsidized Housing (Councillor Killen) 113 Seven Wonders of the World (Councillor Killen) 11.4 Public Information Session on Tannery Ct. Proposal (Councillor Killen) 11.5 Vacant and Derelict Buildings (Councillor McGuire) 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers 12.1 The Fair Market Value of the Lantic Sugar Site 12.2 Westside Wellness Centre 12.3 Community Centres Enhancements 12.4 Update on Westfield Road Reconstruction Plan 12.5 Upper Floors Program 12.6 City of Saint John v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of New Brunswick and Keith Rowe Cause No. 44-08-CA 13. Committee Reports 13.1 Saint John Industrial Parks Committee Update 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda 15. General Correspondence 16. Adjournment City of Saint John Seance du conseil communal Le lundi 24 novembre 2008 Seance ordinaire 1. Ouverture de la seance, suivie de la priere 17 h Salle du conseil 2. Approbation du proces-verbal 2.1 Proces-verbal de la seance tenue le 10 novembre 2008 3. Adoption de l'ordre du jour 4. Divulgations de conflits d'interets 5. Questions soumises a 1'approbation du conseil 5.1 Avenue University - nouveau trottoir et refection du fosse (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.2 Saint John Adventures Inc. - Demande de presentation devant le conseil (recommandation : transmettre au greffier pour qu'une date de presentation soit fixee ) 53 Lettre d'Eric Teed concernant l'hebergement des employes de passage (recommandation : transmettre au Comite consultatif du parc Rockwood) 5.4 Demande presentee par Percy Wibur visant 1'achat et l'amenagement d'un bien-fonds municipal (recommandation : transmettre au directeur general) 5.5 Lettre de Dennis et Janice Griffin concernant le paiement de bien-fonds (recommandation : transmettre a 1'avocat municipal) 5.6 Resolutions du conseil discutees et presentees (recommandation : accepter a titre informatif) 5.7 Planchodrome - Permis d'utilisation de l'autoroute (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.8 Selection d'un conseiller financier (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.9 Echelle de remuneration des cadres et des membres des professions liberales (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.10 Vente d'un terrain appartenant a la Ville, situe sur le chemin Ashburn (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.11 Dates proposees pour les audiences publiques visant le 2797, chemin Loch Lomond, les 11-25, nee Sewell, les 96-124, nee Station et le 1030, chemin Dever (recommandation figurant au rapport) 5.12 Entente avec les commer~ants - Chase Paymentech Solutions (recommandation figurant au rapport) 6. Commentaires presentes par les membres 7. Proclamation 8. Delegations et presentations 17h30 8.1 Hilton Saint John Trade and Convention Centre 18h 8.2 Am6nagement du secteur riverain de Saint John 9. Audiences publiques 19h 9. la) Projet de modification du rezona(-Ie visant le 99, promenade Simpson 9. lb) Comit6 consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le rezonage propose 10. Etude des arretes municipaux 10.1 Modification de 1'arret6 de zonage visant le 861-891, boulevard Fairville (NID 00032813 et 0032821); imposition des conditions de Particle 39 11. Interventions des membres du conseil 11.1 Discussions/presentations relatives au budget (conseiller Titus) (point soulev6 lors de la seance du 10 novembre 2008) 11.2 Inspection des batiments Beres depuis peu par les personnes admissibles aux logements subventionn6s (conseiller Killen) 11.3 Sept merveilles du monde (conseiller Killen) 11.4 Seance d'information publique relative a la proposition concernant l'impasse Tannery (conseiller Killen) 11.5 Batiments vacants et abandonn6s (conseiller McGuire) 12. Affaires municipales evoquees par les fonctionnaires municipaux 12.1 Valeur marchande equitable de 1'emplacement de Sucre Lantic 12.2 Centre de mieux-etre de Westside 12.3 Amelioration des centres communautaires 12.4 Mise a jour relative au plan de refection du chemin Westfield 12.5 Programme de restauration des 6tages sup6rieurs 12.6 Decision judiciaire de la City of Saint John relative a la CSSIAT et coll. 13. Rapports deposes par les comites 13.1 Mise a jour relative au Comit6 des pares industriels de Saint John 14. Etude des sujets ecartes des questions soumises a 1'approbation du conseil 15. Correspondance generale 16. Levee de la seance 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 COMMON COUNCIL MEETING - THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN CITY HALL - NOVEMBER 10, 2008, 5:00 P.M. present Ivan Court, Mayor Deputy Mayor Chase and Councillors Court, Farren, Killen, Higgins, McGuire, Mott, Snook and Sullivan - and - T. Totten, City Manager; J. Nugent, City Solicitor; Cathy Graham, Comptroller; P. Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations; K. Forrest, Commissioner of Planning and Development; A. Poffenroth, Deputy Commissioner of Buildings and Inspection Services; A. Beckett, Deputy City Manager of Programs & Priorities; P. Woods, Deputy City Manager; B. Reid, Deputy Chief of Police; R. Simonds, Fire Chief; E. Gormley, Common Clerk and J. Taylor, Assistant Common Clerk. SEANCE DU CONSEIL COMMUNAL DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN TENUE A L'HOTEL DE VILLE, LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 A 17 H Sont presents : Ivan Court, maire le maire suppleant Chase et les conseillers Court, Farren, Killen, Higgins, McGuire, Mott, Snook et Sullivan et T. Totten, directeur general; J. Nugent, avocat municipal; Cathy Graham, controleuse; P. Groody, commissaire aux operations municipales; K. Forrest, commissaire a I'urbanisme et au developpement; A. Poffenroth, commissaire adjoint aux services d'inspection et des batiments; A. Beckett, directeur general adjoint; P. Woods, directeur general adjoint; B. Reid, chef de police adjoint; R. Simonds, chef du service d'incendie; ainsi que E. Gormley, greffiere communale et J. Taylor, greffier communal adjoint. Call To Order - Prayer Mayor Court called the meeting to order and Councillor Snook offered the opening prayer. Ouverture de la seance, suivie de la priere La seance est ouverte par le maire Court, et le conseiller Snook recite la priere d'ouverture. 2. Approval of Minutes On motion of Councillor Snook Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Common Council, held on October 27, 2008, be approved. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 2. Approbation du proces-verbal Proposition du conseiller Snook Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU que le proces-verbal de la reunion du conseil communal tenue le 27 octobre 2008 soit approuve. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 3. Approval of Agenda On motion of Councillor Killen Seconded by Councillor Snook RESOLVED that the agenda of this meeting be approved with the addition of item 13.2 Standing Committee System. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 3. Adoption de I'ordre du jour Proposition du conseiller Killen Appuyee par le conseiller Snook RESOLU que I'ordre du jour de la presente reunion soit adopte, moyennant I'ajout du point 13.2, Systeme des comites permanents. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest 4. Divulgations de conflits d'interets 5. Consent Agenda 5.1 That the letter from the Hilton Saint John requesting to present the capital funding request for the Trade and Convention Centre renovations be referred to the Clerk to schedule. 5.2 That the letter from Fundy Region Solid Waste Commission regarding debenture refinancing be received for information. 5.3 That the proposed 2009 Common Council Meeting Schedule be approved. 5.4 That the Saint John Police Force 2009 Operating Budget request to present be referred to the Clerk to schedule. 5.5 That the letter from the Saint John Port Authority regarding an appointment to that authority be referred to the Nominating Committee. 5.6 That the letter from the Saint John Waterfront Development requesting to present a progress report with respect to the project development services - Reversing Falls and Lower River Passage be referred to the Clerk to schedule. 5.7 That the letter from the Saint John Waterfront Development requesting an increase in the Leisure Services budget for 2009 in the amount of $170,000, specifically to be directed to the maintenance of Harbour Passage, be referred to budget deliberations. 5.8 That the letter from the Board of Directors and Business Improvement Area (BIA) Membership of Uptown Saint John Inc. requesting to present be referred to the Clerk to schedule. 5.9 That the letter from the Human Development Council requesting to present be referred to the Clerk to schedule. 5.10 Refer to item 14.1 5.11 That Common Council not reconsider the request from Katrina L. Carvell and Karyn E. Thomas for a building permit to construct a detached dwelling on property located on Crane Mountain Road, PID Numbers 00296186 and 55150122, pursuant to Section 40 of the Zoning By-law. 5.12 That as Recommended by the City Manager: 1. The City of Saint John accept the offer from 507392 N.B. Ltd. submitted with M&C 2008-333 and acquire a municipal services easement through lands 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 designated PID Number 55176655 for the sum of $43,133.00 upon the terms and conditions contained in the said offer: and 2. The Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign all necessary documentation. 5.13 That as recommended by the City Manager, Common Council approve the purchase five new pay and display parking machines, complete with credit card readers, from Precise Parklink Inc., at a total cost of $83,465.00, plus applicable taxes. 5.14 That as recommended by the City Manager, the tender in the amount of $29,189.00 plus tax, for the supply and installation of a heat recovery system for domestic hot water at the Stewart Hurley Arena be awarded to the low bidder, Cimco of Moncton, NB. 5.15 That as recommended by the City Manager, the proposal submitted by Atlantic Alarm and Sound for the design, supply, and installation of an electronic card access control system and video monitoring system at fire department facilities, in the amount of $52,666.00 plus tax, be accepted. 5.16 That as recommended by the City Manager Provided the offer from 626922 N. B. Ltd. submitted with M&C 2008-334 is accepted by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the City sell to 626922 N.B. Ltd. the freehold interest in lands designated by PID numbers 00017095, 55045827 and 55097075 for the sale price of $365,000.00 upon the terms and conditions set out in the said offer; and 2. The Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign all necessary documentation. 5.17 That as recommended by the City Manager: Council direct staff to proceed to have a contract agreement developed with Castle Rock Construction Services Inc. to build a winter material storage building at 406 Bay Street as per their proposal submission and at a cost of $580,700.00, plus tax, and; 2. The Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign all necessary contract documents on behalf of the City. 5.18 That as recommended by the City Manager: The City of Saint John accept the offer from McAsphalt Industries Limited submitted with M&C 2008-330 and acquire a municipal services easement through lands designated PID number 55146146 for the sum of $27,247.00 upon the terms and conditions contained in the said offer; and 2. The Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign all necessary documentation. 5.19 That as recommended by the City Manager: The City of Saint John accept the offer from Donald and Eileen Cusack, to purchase the freehold interest in lands designated as parcel 08-5 for the sum of $6,500.00; upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Offer to Purchase, a copy of which was submitted and, 2. The Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute all documents required to complete this sale of land. On motion of Councillor McGuire Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that the recommendation set out for each consent agenda item respectively be adopted, with the exception of item 5.10, which has been identified for debate. 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 Question being taken, the motion was carried. 5. Questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil 5.1 Que la lettre de demande soumise par Hilton, visant a faire une presentation sur la demande de financement des depenses pour les renovations du Trade and Convention Centre, soit transmise a la greffiere pour qu'elle fixe une date de presentation. 5.2 Que la lettre presentee par la Commission de gestion des dechets solides de la region de Fundy concernant le refinancement de ('obligation non garantie soit acceptee a titre informatif. 5.3 Que le calendrier des seances du conseil communal propose pour 2009 soit approuve. 5.4 Que la demande relative au budget de fonctionnement de 2009 du service de police de Saint John, visant a faire une presentation devant le conseil, soit transmise a la greffiere pour qu'elle fixe une date de presentation. 5.5 Que la lettre de I'Administration portuaire de Saint John concernant un rendez- vous soit transmise au Comite des candidatures. 5.6 Que la Iettre de demande soumise par Partenariat d'amenagement du secteur riverain de Saint John, visant a faire une presentation d'un rapport d'etape relativement aux services d'amenagement du projet Chutes reversibles - passage de la riviere inferieure, soit transmise a la greffiere pour qu'elle fixe une date de presentation. 5.7 Que la Iettre soumise par Partenariat d'amenagement du secteur riverain de Saint John demandant une augmentation du budget des Services des Ioisirs pour 2009 au montant de 170 000 precisement destinee a 1'entretien du Passage du port, soit transmise aux fins de deliberations budgetaires. 5.8 Que la Iettre reque du conseil d'administration et des membres de la zone d'amelioration des affaires (BIA) d'Uptown Saint John Inc., visant a faire une presentation devant le conseil, soit transmise a la greffiere pour qu'elle fixe une date de presentation. 5.9 Que la Iettre de demande soumise par le Conseil de perfectionnement social, visant a faire une presentation devant le conseil, soit transmise a la greffiere pour qu'elle fixe une date de presentation. 5.10 Voir le point 14.1. 5.11 Que le conseil communal ne revienne pas sur la demande de Katrina L. Carvell et Karyn E. Thomas relative a un permis de construction pour batir une maison isolee sur une propriete situee sur le chemin Crane Mountain, portant Ies NID 00296186 et 55150122, en vertu de I'article 40 de I'arrete de zonage. 5.12 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general, : 1. The City of Saint John accepte I'offre de la part de 507392 N. B. Ltd. jointe au contrat n° MC 2008-333 et acquiere une servitude de services municipaux par le bien-fonds inscrit sous le NID 55176655 pour la somme de 43 133 conformement a la forme et aux conditions stipulees dans Iadite offre; et 2. le maire et le greffier communal soient autorises a signer la documentation requise. 5.13 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general, le conseil communal autorise I'acquisition de cinq nouveaux systemes de paiement a console d'affichage munis de Iecteurs de cartes de credit de 1'entreprise Precise Parklink Inc., pour la somme de 83 465 taxes en sus. 5.14 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general, le contrat relatif a la fourniture et a l'installation d'un dispositif de recuperation de chaleur pour I'eau chaude 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 residentielle a I'arena Stewart Hurley soit accorde au soumissionnaire le moins- disant, Cimco, de Moncton (N.-B.), au montant de 29 189 taxes en sus. 5.15 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general, la proposition presentee par Atlantic Alarm and Sound relative a la conception, a la fourniture et a ('installation d'un systeme de contr6le d'acces par cartes electroniques et d'un systeme de videosurveillance aux installations du Service d'incendie, au montant de 52 666 soit acceptee. 5.16 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general : a condition que I'offre de la part de 626922 N.B. Ltd. jointe au contrat n° 2008- 334 soit acceptee par la Societe canadienne d'hypotheques et de Iogement, la Ville vende a 626922 N.B. Ltd. I'interet franc sur le bien-fonds designe par Ies numeros de NID 00017095, 55045827 et 55097075, pour la somme de 365 000 conformement a la forme et aux conditions stipulees dans Iadite offre; et 2. Le maire et le greffier communal soient autorises a signer la documentation requise. 5.17 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general : le conseil mandate le personnel pour proceder a I'elaboration d'une entente avec Castle Rock Construction Services Inc. pour construire un batiment destine a 1'entreposage de materiel d'hiver au 406, rue Bay, conformement a sa sou mission de proposition et au cout de 580 700 taxes en sus, et; 2. le maire et le greffier communal soient autorises a signer tous Ies documents contractuels necessaires au nom de la Ville. 5.18 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general : The City of Saint John accepte I'offre de la part de McAsphalt Industries Limited jointe au contrat n° MC 2008-330 et acquiere une servitude de services municipaux par le bien-fonds inscrit sous le NID 55146146 pour la somme de 27 247 conformement a la forme et aux conditions stipulees dans Iadite offre; et 2. le maire et le greffier communal soient autorises a signer la documentation requise. 5.19 Que, comme le recommande le directeur general, : The City of Saint John accepte I'offre presentee par Donald and Eileen Cusack visant I'acquisition de I'interetfranc sur le bien-fonds designe comme la parcelle 08-5 pour la somme de 6 500 conformement a la forme et aux conditions stipulees dans I'offre d'achat, dont une copie est jointe aux presentes. 2. le maire et la greffiere communale soient autorises a signer tous Ies documents necessaires pour conclure cette vente de bien-fonds. Proposition du conseiller McGuire Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU que la recommandation formulee pour chacune des questions sou mises a I'approbation du conseil, a 1'exclusion du point 5.10, qui a ete selectionne aux fins de deliberations, soit adoptee. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 9. Public Hearings 7:00 P.M. 9.1(a) Proposed Section 39 Amendment 430 Prince Street West The Common Clerk advised that the necessary advertising was completed with regard to the proposed Section 39 Amendment amending the Section 39 conditions imposed on the May 13, 1996 rezoning of the property located at 430 Prince Street West, also 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 identified as PID Numbers 55168249 and 55168256 as amended on March 1, 2004, to facilitate the construction of a five-unit townhouse. Consideration was also given to a report from the Planning Advisory Committee submitting a copy of Planning staff's report considered at its November 4, 2008 meeting at which the Committee decided to recommend the amendment of the existing Section 39 conditions. The Mayor called for members of the public to speak against the proposed amendment with no one presenting. The Mayor called for members of the public to speak in favor of the proposed amendment with no one presenting. On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that Common Council amend the Section 39 conditions imposed on the May 13, 1996 rezoning of the property located at 430 Prince Street, also identified as PID Numbers 55168249 and 55168256, to facilitate the construction of a five-unit townhouse. Question being taken, the motion was carried 9. Audiences publiques a 19 h 9.1a) Proposition de modification des conditions imposees par I'article 39 visant le 430, rue Prince Ouest La greffiere communale indique que les avis requis ont ete publies en ce qui a trait a la modification proposee en vertu de I'article 39,modifiant les conditions imposees le 13 mai 1996 relativement au rezonage de la propriete situee au 430, rue Prince Quest et inscrite sous Ies NID 55168249 et 55168256 et modifiee le 1 er mars 2004 pour faciliter la construction d'un batiment comprenant cinq maisons en rangee. On a egalement examine le rapport presente par le Comite consultatif d'urbanisme, accompagne d'un exemplaire du rapport redige par le personnel du Service d'urbanisme, qui ont fait ('objet d'un examen lors de la seance du 4 novembre 2008 au cours de laquelle le Comite a choisi de recommander la modification des conditions en vigueur a I'heure actuelle en vertu de I'article 39. Le maire invite le public a exprimer son opposition quant a la modification proposee, mais personne ne prend la parole. Le maire invite le public a exprimer son appui quant a la modification proposee, mais personne ne prend la parole. Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire QUE le conseil communal modifie Ies conditions prevues a I'article 39, relativement a la propriete situee au 430, rue Prince, dont le rezonage a ete impose le 13 mai 1996, et qui porte Ies NID 55168249 et 55168256, afin de permettre la construction d'un immeuble comprenant cinq maisons en rangee. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 6. Members Comments Council members commented on various community events. 6. Commentaires presentes par les membres Les membres du conseil s'expriment sur diverses activites communautaires. 7. Proclamation 7.1 National Housing Day Mayor Court declared Saturday, November 22, 2008, National Housing Day in the City of Saint John. 7.2 Domestic Violence Awareness Month 10 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 Mayor Court declared the month of November 2008 Domestic Violence Awareness Month. 7. Proclamation 7.1 Journee nationale de I'habitation Le maire proclame le samedi 22 novembre 2008 la Journee nationale de ffiabitation dans The City of Saint John. 7.2 Mois de sensibilisation a la violence familiale Le maire Court declare que le mois de novembre 2008 est le Mois de la sensibilisation a la violence familiale. 8. Delegations/Presentations 8.1 St. Joseph's Community Centre Referring to a submitted presentation, George Quigley updated Council with respect to St. Joseph's Community Centre. Mr. Quigley proposed that The City of Saint John and the St. Joseph's Community Centre (through the Diocese of Saint John) enter into a 10 year lease to begin on January 1, 2010. He indicated that under the lease agreement The City will be invited to provide specific user requirements and recommendations, and to have active input into the final design of the second floor lease space. On motion of Councillor Court Seconded by Councillor Farren RESOLVED that the Council suspend the procedural by-law for this item. Question being taken, the motion was carried. On motion of Councillor Court Seconded by Councillor Mott RESOLVED that the City Manager enter into negotiations with the St. Joseph's Community Centre regarding the lease of space by The City of Saint John on the proposed second floor of their new facility located at 4347 Loch Lomond Road. Question being taken, the motion was carried. 8. Delegations et presentations 8.1 Centre communautaire St. Joseph's Faisant reference a une presentation anterieure, George Quigley informe le conseil au sujet du centre communautaire St. Joseph's. Monsieur Quigley propose que The City of Saint John et le Centre communautaire St. Joseph's (par 1'entremise du diocese de Saint John) signent un bail d'une duree de 10 ans qui entrerait en vigueur a compter du 1 er janvier 2010. 11 indique que la Ville sera invitee a fournir des exigences et des recommandations propres aux clients et a apporter des commentaires actifs pour la conception finale de 1'espace de location du deuxieme etage. Proposition du conseiller Court Appuyee par le conseiller Farren RESOLU que le conseil suspende 1'arrete sur le reglement interieur pour ce point. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Proposition du conseiller Court Appuyee par le conseiller Mott RESOLU que le directeur general entame des negociations avec le Centre communautaire St. Joseph's concernant la location de 1'espace par The City of Saint John au deuxieme etage propose de Ieur nouvelle installation situee au 4347, chemin Loch Lomond. A Tissue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. 11 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 10. Consideration of By-laws 10.1 Third Reading Zoning By-Law Amendment - 951 - 961 Fairville Boulevard (Councillor Higgins withdrew from the meeting.) On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-88 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of the City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land located at 951- 961 Fairville Boulevard, having an area of approximately 3 hectares, also identified as PID Numbers 00396754, 55012371, 00286195, and a portion of PID Number 55107494, from 14" Heavy Industrial Park to "SC-2" Shopping Centre, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-88 A Law to Amend the Zoning By- law of the City of Saint John", was read in its entirety. On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of the parcel of land located at 951-961 Fairville Boulevard, having an area of approximately 3 hectares, also identified as PID Numbers 00396754, 55012371, 00286195, and a portion of PID Number 55107494, be subject to the following conditions: a) The developer must pave all parking areas, loading areas, maneuvering areas and driveways with asphalt and enclose them with cast-in-place concrete curbs to protect the landscaped areas and to facilitate proper drainage; b) The developer must provide adequate site drainage facilities in accordance with a detailed drainage plan, prepared by the developer and subject to approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; c) The developer must provide all utilities underground, including power and telephone from the existing overhead facilities; d) The developer must provide an engineering water and sewer analysis determining the impact of the development on the existing infrastructure, and a detailed engineering servicing plan for the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; e) The developer must landscape all disturbed areas of the site not occupied by buildings, driveways, walkways, parking and loading areas, including a minimum 6 metres (20 feet) inside the front property line abutting Fairville Boulevard, and the required landscaping must extend onto the City street right-of-way to the edge of the City curb/sidewalk. f) Direct street access to the site is limited to a maximum of one driveway on Fairville Boulevard and two on Plaza Avenue, as generally indicated on the submitted proposal, the exact location and design of which are subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate, and which shall include any necessary modifications to the Co-op entrance on the opposite side of Fairville Boulevard; g) The developer must provide a landscaped pedestrian walkway, through the parking lot, from the proposed buildings to the adjacent Sobeys site at 917 Fairville Boulevard. The walkway should include a minimum 1.5 metre concrete sidewalk and a minimum 1.5 metres of landscaping on either side of the walkway, resulting in an overall minimum width of 4.5 metres; h) The site shall not be developed except in accordance with a detailed site plan, landscaping plan and building elevation plans, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, indicating the location of all buildings, parking areas, driveways, loading areas, signs, exterior lighting, exterior building materials and finishes, landscaped areas (including location and types of planting materials) and other site features; 12 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 i) The approved plans mentioned in conditions (b) and (g) above must be attached to the application for building permit for the development, except that such plans are not required for permit applications for the site preparation and/or foundation only; j) All site improvements shown on the approved site plan, landscaping plan and drainage plans, except for landscaping, must be completed prior to the opening of the facility for business; and the landscaping must be completed within one year of building permit approval; and further that upon the rezoning of the area, the land and any building or structure thereon must be developed and used in conformity with the proposal and conditions identified herein. Question being taken, the motion was carried. On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-88 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of the City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land located at 951- 961 Fairville Boulevard, having an area of approximately 3 hectares, also identified as PID Numbers 00396754, 55012371, 00286195, and a portion of PID Number 55107494, from 14" Heavy Industrial Park to "SC-2" Shopping Centre, be read a third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-88 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of the City of Saint John", was read a third time by title. 10. Etude des arretes municipaux 10.1 Troisieme lecture de I'arrete de zonage visant le 951-961, boulevard Fairville (Le conseiller Higgins quitte la reunion.) Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que I'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110- 88 modifiant I'arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » en modifiant a I'annexe A, plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 951-961, boulevard Fairville, d'une superficie d'environ 3 hectares et inscrite sous les NID 00396754, 55012371, 00286195 et en partie sous le NID 55107494, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone de parc d'industrie lourde « 1-4 » a zone de centre commercial « SC-2 fasse I'objet d'une lecture. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule «Arrete no C. P. 110-88 modifiant I'arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU qu'en vertu de I'article 39 de la Loi sur l'urbanisme, I'amenagement propose d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 951-961, boulevard Fairville, d'une superficie approximative de 3 hectares et inscrite sous les NID 00396754, 55012371, 00286195 et en partie sous le NID 55107494, soit assujetti aux conditions suivantes : a) le promoteur doit asphalter toutes les aires de stationnement, les aires de chargement et de manoeuvre et toutes les voies d'acces et prevoir des bordures de beton coulees sur place pour proteger les espaces paysagers et faciliter un drainage correct; b) le promoteur doit assurer des installations de drainage adequates conformement a un plan de drainage detaille prepare par le promoteur et sujet a I'approbation de l'ingenieur municipal en chef ou de son remplagant; 13 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 c) le promoteur doit prevoir toutes les installations d'utilite publique souterraines, y compris les services d'electricite et de telephone, depuis les lignes aeriennes existantes; d) le promoteur doit fournir une analyse technique du reseau d'aqueduc et d'egouts afin de determiner ('incidence de cet amenagement sur ('infrastructure existante, ainsi qu'un plan detaille des services d'ingenierie soumis a I'approbation de l'ingenieur municipal en chef ou de son representant; e) le promoteur doit prevoir I'amenagement paysager des aires perturbees de 1'emplacement ou it n'y a pas de batiments, de voies d'acces, d'allees pietonnieres, d'aires de stationnement ou de chargement, y compris un espace minimum de 6 metres (20 pieds) a l'interieur de la Iimite frontale de chaque terrain attenant au boulevard Fairville, et I'amenagement paysager doit se prolonger sur le droit de passage, a partir de la rue municipale jusqu'a la bordure ou au trottoir; f) l'acces direct depuis 1'emplacement se Iimite a une seule voie d'acces jusqu'au boulevard Fairville et a deux voies d'acces jusqu'a ('avenue Plaza, comme le montre de maniere generale la proposition presentee; 1'endroit et la conception exactes sont sujets a I'approbation de l'ingenieur municipal en chef ou son representant; sont comprises egalement toutes les modifications necessaires devant titre effectuees a 1'entree de la Co-op situee sur le c6te oppose du boulevard Fairville; g) le promoteur dolt fournir une vole pietonniere paysagee, a travers I'aire de stationnement, des batiments proposes jusqu'au site adjacent de 1'epicerie Sobeys au 917, boulevard Fairville. Cette allee pietonniere doit comprendre un trottoir en beton minimal de 15 metre et un amenagement minimal de 1,5 metre de chaque c6te du trottoir, ce qui donne une largeur minimale globale de 4,5 metres; h) 1'emplacement doit titre amenage conformement aux plans de situation, d'amenagement paysager et d'elevation detailles, prepares par le promoteur et sujets a I'approbation de I'agent d'amenagement, indiquant 1'emplacement de tous Ies batiments, Ies aires de stationnement, Ies voies d'acces, Ies aires de chargement, Ies enseignes, 1'eclairage exterieur, Ies materiaux exterieurs des batiments et la finition, Ies espaces paysagers (y compris 1'emplacement et le genre de plantation), et Ies autres caracteristiques de 1'emplacement; i) Ies plans approuves mentionnes aux conditions b) et g) ci-dessus doivent accompagner la demande d'un permis de construction relativement a I'amenagement, a 1'exception des demandes de permis qui ne visent que Ies travaux de preparation du terrain et de la fondation, pour lesquels lesdits plans ne sont pas exiges; i) toutes Ies ameliorations indiquees sur Ies plans de situation, d'amenagement paysager et de drainage, sauf I'amenagement paysager, doivent titre terminees avant l'ouverture de 1'emplacement aux fins commerciales, et I'amenagement paysager doit titre complete dans un delai d'un an a compter de la date d'approbation du permis de construction; de plus, a la suite du rezonage du secteur, Ies terrains ainsi que tout batiment ou construction qui s'y trouvent doivent titre amenages et utilises conformement a la proposition et aux conditions qui y sont stipulees. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C. P. 110- 88 modifiant 1'arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » en modifiant a I'annexe A, plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 951-961, boulevard Fairville, d'une superficie d'environ 3 hectares et inscrite sous Ies NID 00396754, 55012371, 00286195 et en partie sous le NID 55107494, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone de parc d'industrie lourde « 1-4 » a zone de centre commercial « SC-2 fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule «Arrete no C.P. 110-88 modifiant 1'arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John 14 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 10.2 Third Reading Zoning By-Law Amendment - 324 Duke Street West On motion of Councillor Killen Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-87 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of the City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land located at 324 Duke Street West, having an area of approximately 490 square metres, also identified as PID number 00388850, from "RM-1" Three Storey Multiple Residential to "B-1" Local Business, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-87 A Law to Amend the Zoning By- law of the City of Saint John", was read in its entirety. On motion of Councillor McGuire Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of the parcel of land located at 324 Duke Street West, having an area of approximately 490 square metres, also identified as PID number 00388850, be subject to the following conditions: a. The use of the site is limited to a business office within the existing dwelling; and b. A City approved water meter is installed Question being taken, the motion was carried. On motion of Councillor Farren Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-87 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of the City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land located at 324 Duke Street West, having an area of approximately 490 square metres, also identified as PID number 00388850, from "RM-1" Three Storey Multiple Residential to "B-1 " Local, be read a third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-87 A Law to Amend the Zoning By- law of the City of Saint John", was read a third time by title. 10.2 Troisieme lecture de I'arrete de zonage visant le 324, rue Duke Ouest Proposition du conseiller Killen Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110- 87 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » en modifiant a I'annexe A, plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 324, rue Duke Quest, d'une superficie d'environ 490 metres carres et inscrite sous le NID 00388850, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone residentielle d'immeubles a Iogements multiples de trois etages « RM-1 » a zone commerciale locale « B-1 fasse l'objet d'une lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete no C.P. 110-87 modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller McGuire Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU qu'en vertu des dispositions prevues a I'article 39 de la Loi sur l'urbanisme, I'amenagement propose de la parcelle de 15 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 terrain situee au 324, rue Duke Quest, d'une superficie d'environ 490 metres carres et inscrite sous le NID 00388850, soit assujetti aux conditions suivantes : a) ('usage du site se Iimite a un bureau commercial au sein de ('habitation existante; et b) un compteur d'eau approuve par la Ville est installe. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Proposition du conseiller Farren Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete no C. P. 110- 87 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » en modifiant a I'annexe A, plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 324, rue Duke Quest, d'une superficie d'environ 490 metres carres et inscrite sous le NID 00388850, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone residentielle d'immeubles a Iogements multiples de trois etages « RM-1 » a zone commerciale locale « B-1 fasse l'objet d'une troisieme lecture, que (edit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de 1'arrete intitule «Arrete no C.P. 110-87 modifiant 1'arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John 10.3 Third Reading Zoning By-Law Amendment 106 Spar Cove Road On motion of Councillor McGuire Seconded by Councillor Sullivan RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-89 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of the City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land located at 106 Spar Cove Road, having a area of approximately 920 square metres, also identified as PID number 00040998, from "RM-1" Three storey Multiple Residential to "B-2" General Business, be read. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-89 A Law to Amend the Zoning By- law of the City of Saint John", was read in its entirety. On motion of Councillor McGuire Seconded by Councillor Court RESOLVED that pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of the parcel of land located at 106 Spar Cove Road, having an area of approximately 920 square metres, also identified as PID number 00040998, be subject to the following conditions: a. The use of the site be limited to a business office for a structural engineering firm and dwelling unit within the existing building; b. Development of the site be in accordance with a detailed site plan, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the structures, parking areas, vehicle maneuvering areas, driveways, signs, landscaping and other site features; c. Development of the site be in accordance with a detailed drainage plan, including any necessary catch basins, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; d. A City approved water meter be installed for commercial use; e. The proposed driveway entrance shall only be used for business and should not be interconnected with the existing residential driveway; f. The developer must pave all parking areas, vehicle maneuvering areas and driveways with asphalt and enclose them with cast-in-place concrete curbs; 16 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 g. All parking areas must be screened from adjacent residential properties by a board on-board privacy fence with a minimum height of 1.8 metres to the satisfaction of the Development Officer; h. Signage must be in accordance with the requirements of the Zoning By-Law and be subject to the approval of the Development Officer; i. No mobile signs be permitted on site; j. Approved site plans be attached to any building permit application for the development; and k. All areas not occupied by buildings, parking areas and driveways be landscaped and all site improvements indicated on the approved site, landscaping and elevation plans be completed within one (1) year from the issuance of a building permit for the development. Question being taken, the motion was carried. On motion of Councillor Mott Seconded by Councillor Killen RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-89 A Law to Amend the Zoning By-Law of the City of Saint John" amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by rezoning a parcel of land located at 106 Spar Cove Road, having an area of approximately 920 square metres, also identified as PID number 00040998, from "RM-1" Three storey Multiple Residential to "B-2" General Business, be read a third time, enacted, and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto. Question being taken, the motion was carried. The by-law entitled, "By-law Number C.P. 110-89 A Law to Amend the Zoning By- law of the City of Saint John", was read a third time by title. 10.3 Troisieme lecture du projet de modification de I'arrete de zonage visant le 106, chemin Spar Cove Proposition du conseiller McGuire Appuyee par le conseiller Sullivan RESOLU que 1'arrete intitule « Arrete n° C.P. 110- 89 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » en modifiant a I'annexe A, plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 106, chemin Spar Cove, d'une superficie d'environ 920 metres carres et inscrite sous le NID 00040998, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone residentielle d'immeubles a Iogements multiples de trois etages « RM-1 » a zone commerciale generale « B-2 fasse l'objet d'une lecture. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. L'arrete intitule « Arrete n° C.P. 110-89 modifiant 1'arrete sur le zonage de The City of Saint John » est lu integralement. Proposition du conseiller McGuire Appuyee par le conseiller Court RESOLU qu'en vertu des dispositions prevues a I'article 39 de la Loi sur l'urbanisme, I'amenagement propose de la parcelle de terrain situee au 106, rue Spar Cove, d'une superficie d'environ 920 metres carres et inscrite sous le NID 00040998, soit assujetti aux conditions suivantes : a) ('usage du site se limite a un bureau commercial pour une firme d'ingenierie structurale et un logement au sein du batiment existant; b) I'amenagement du site est conforme a un plan de situation detaille, prepare par le promoteur et sujet a I'approbation des constructions, des aires de stationnement, des aires de manoeuvre, des voies d'acces, des enseignes, des espaces paysagers et d'autres caracteristiques du site; c) I'amenagement du site est conforme a un plan de drainage detaille, y compris les 17 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 puisards necessaires, prepare par le promoteur et sujet a I'approbation de I'ingenieur municipal en chef ou son representant; d) un compteur d'eau approuve par la Ville est installe a des fins commerciales; e) la voie d'acces proposee ne doit titre utilisee qu'a des fins commerciales et ne doit pas titre reliee a la voie d'acces residentielle existante; f) le promoteur doit asphalter toutes Ies aires de stationnement, Ies aires de manoeuvre et Ies voies d'acces et prevoir des bordures de beton coulees sur place; g) toutes Ies aires de stationnement doivent titre separees des proprietes residentielles adjacentes par une cl6ture privee planche-sur-planche d'une hauteur minimale de 1,8 metre a la satisfaction de I'agent d'amenagement; h) Ies enseignes doivent titre conformes aux exigences de I'arrete de zonage et titre soumises a I'approbation de I'agent d'amenagement; i) aucun panneau mobile nest permis sur Ies Iieux; j) Ies plans de situation approuves sont joints a toute demande de permis de construction pour I'amenagement; et k) toutes Ies zones non occupees par Ies batiments, Ies aires de stationnement et Ies voies d'acces doivent titre des espaces paysagers, et tous Ies travaux d'amelioration indiques sur Ies plans de situation, d'elevation et d'amenagement paysager approuves doivent titre termines dans un delai d'un (1) an a compter de la date de delivrance du permis de construction pour I'amenagement. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee Proposition du conseiller Mott Appuyee par le conseiller Killen RESOLU que I'arrete intitule « Arrete n° C. P. 110- 89 modifiant I'Arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John » en modifiant a I'annexe A, plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, le zonage d'une parcelle de terrain situee au 106, chemin Spar Cove, d'une superficie d'environ 920 metres carres et inscrite sous le NID 00040998, afin de faire passer la classification s'y rapportant de zone residentielle d'immeubles a logements multiples de trois etages « RM-1 » a zone commerciale generale « B-2 fasse ('objet d'une troisieme lecture, que ledit arrete soit edicte et que le sceau communal y soit appose. A I'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Troisieme lecture par titre de I'arrete intitule «Arrete n° C.P. 110-89 modifiant I'arrete de zonage de The City of Saint John (Councillor Higgins re-entered the meeting) 10.4 Public Presentation - Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment Peel Plaza A Public Presentation was given for a proposed amendment to the Municipal Development Plan which would: Redesignate on Schedule 6A of the Uptown Strategy, from Low Intensity Mix to High Intensity Mix, an area of approximately 51,000 square metres, identified as PID Numbers 00040014, 00039875, 00037747, 55108062, 00037481, 00037739, 00037762, 00037507, 00037499, 00037515, 55088900, 55094908, 55084420, 55178792, 00038455, 00037697, 00039933, 55033773, 00039735, 55190151, 55190177, 55088918, and a portion of 00037689 to permit a comprehensive redevelopment including a justice facility, a police headquarters and a multi-storey parking structure. (Le conseiller Higgins se joint de nouveau a la reunion.) 10.4 Presentation publique relative au projet de modification du plan municipal visant la place Peel 18 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 Une presentation publique est donnee relativement a un projet de modification du plan d'amenagement municipal qui : ferait passer, a I'annexe 6A de la strategie de Uptown Saint John, la classification d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 51 000 metres carres, portant les NID 00040014, 00039875, 00037747, 55108062, 00037481, 00037739, 00037762, 00037507, 00037499, 00037515, 55088900, 55094908, 55084420, 55178792, 00038455, 00037697, 00039933, 55033773, 00039735, 55190151, 55190177, 55088918 et une partie du NID 00037689, de zone de melange a faible densite a zone de melange a forte densite, pour permettre un reamenagement complet incluant un palais de justice, un quartier general de la police ainsi qu'un parc de stationnement a plusieurs etages. 10.5 Public Presentation - Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment 14 McLaughlin Crescent A Public Presentation was given for a proposed amendment to the Municipal Development Plan which would: 1. Redesignate on Schedule 2-A and 2-C of the Plan, from Low Density Residential to Approved Commercial Development, a parcel of land with an area of approximately 1,470 square metres, located at 14 McLaughlin Crescent, also identified as PID Number 00322214. 2. Add the following to the list of Approved Commercial Developments in sub-section 2.4.6.28: "u) a parcel of land with an area of approximately 1,470 square metres, located at 14 McLaughlin Crescent, also identified as PID Number 00322214 to permit a physiotherapy clinic and other professional services within the existing building. 10.5 Presentation publique relative au projet de modification du plan municipal visant le 14, croissant McLaughlin Une presentation publique est donnee relativement a un projet de modification du plan d'amenagement municipal qui : 1. ferait passer, a I'annexe 2-A et 2-C du plan, la classification d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 1 470 metres carres, situee au 14, croissant McLaughlin et inscrite sous le NID 00322214, de zone residentielle de faible densite a zone d'amenagement commercial approuve; 2. ajouterait la parcelle de terrain suivante a la liste de zones d'amenagement commercial approuve a I'alinea 2.4.6.28: « u) une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 1 470 metres carres, situee au 14, croissant McLaughlin et portant le NID 00322214, pour permettre une clinique de physiotherapie et d'autres services professionnels au sein du batiment existant. 11. Submissions by Council Members 11.1 Committee of the Whole Debate in Open Council (Councillor Sullivan) On motion of Councillor Sullivan Seconded by Councillor McGuire RESOLVED that unless otherwise approved, that all open Committee of the Whole meetings take place in the Council chamber. Question being taken, the motion was carried with Mayor Court and Councillor Court voting nay. On motion of Councillor Higgins Seconded by Councillor Mott RESOLVED that Common Council extend the current meeting beyond 10:00 p.m. Question being taken, the motion was defeated with Councillors Snook, Court, Sullivan, McGuire, Farren and Killen voting nay. Items 11.2 - 11.6 will be brought forward to the meeting of November 17, 2008 11. Interventions des membres du conseil 19 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 11.1 Debat du comite plenier devant le conseil (conseiller Sullivan) Proposition du conseiller Sullivan Appuyee par le conseiller McGuire RESOLU qu'a moins qu'autrement approuve, que toutes reunions ouvertes de Comite Plenier interviennent dans la chambre Municipale. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est adoptee. Le maire et conseiller Court votent contre la proposition. Proposition du conseiller Higgins Appuyee par le conseiller Mott RESOLU que la seance actuelle du conseil communal soit prolongee au-dela de 22 h. A ('issue du vote, la proposition est rejetee. Les conseillers Snook, Court, Sullivan, McGuire, Farren et Killen votent contre la proposition. Les points 11.2 a 11.6 seront reportes a la seance du 17 novembre 2008. 11.2 Webcast of Open Council and Committee of the Whole (Councillor Sullivan) 11.2 Webemission des seances publiques du conseil et du comite plenier (conseiller Sullivan) 11.3 Items in Closed Session (Councillor Killen) 11.3 Points presentes devant le conseil en reunion privee (conseiller Killen) 11.4 Budget Deliberations/Presentations (Councillor Titus) 11.4 Discussions/presentations relatives au budget (conseiller Titus) 11.5 Commission, Boards and Committees (Councillor Killen) 11.5 Commissions, conseils et comites (conseiller Killen) 11.6 Information Sessions (Councillor Killen) 11.6 Seances d'information (conseiller Killen) 20 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 12. Business Matters - Municipal Officers Items 12.1 - 12.4 will be brought forward to the meeting of November 17, 2008. 12.1 Les Jeux de L'Acadie - 2010 12. Affaires municipales evoquees par les fonctionnaires municipaux Les points 12.1 a 12.4 seront reportes a la seance du 17 novembre 2008. 12.1 Les Jeux de I'Acadie - 2010 12.2 Princess Street Watermain, Sanitary and Storm Sewer Installation and Street Reconstruction. 12.2 Installation de la conduite d'eau principale et des egouts sanitaires et pluviaux et travaux de refection de la rue Princess 12.3 Vacant and Derelict Buildings 12.3 Batiments vacants et abandonnes 12.4 Designation of Individuals for By-Law Enforcement Purposes 12.4 Nomination de membres pour I'execution des arretes municipaux 13. Committee Reports Items 13.1 and 13.2 will be brought forward to the meeting of November 17, 2008. 13.1 City of Saint John Board of Pension Trustees Response to Council Resolution. 13.2 Standing Committee System 13. Rapports deposes par les comites Les points 13.1 et 13.2 seront reportes a la seance du 17 novembre 2008. 13.1 Reponse presentee au conseil d'administration du regime de retraite de The City of Saint John sur la resolution du conseil 13.2. Systeme des comites permanents 14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda Item 14.1 will be brought forward to the meeting of November 17, 2008. 14.1 Request for Grant in the Amount of Municipal Fees for Residential Hospice Project 14. Etude des sujets ecartes des questions soumises a I'approbation du conseil Le point 14.1 sera reporte a la seance du 17 novembre 2008. 14.1 Demande visant I'obtention d'une subvention au montant des droits municipaux pour le projet residentiel de I'Hospice 15. General Correspondence 15. Correspondance generale 21 94- COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL NOVEMBER 10, 2008/LE 10 NOVEMBRE 2008 16. Adjournment The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. 16. Levee de la seance Le maire declare que la seance est levee a 22 h. Mayor/maire Common Clerk/greffiere communale 22 R W" M & C 2008 - 346 November 19, 2008 C COUNCIL His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: M~ The City ~-,itt Ohm, CONTRACT NO. 2008-31: UNIVERSITY AVENUE - NEW SIDEWALK & DITCH RECONSTRUCTION BACKGROUND The 2008 General Fund Capital Program includes funding for the constriction of a concrete sidewalk on the north side of University Avenue between Royal Parkway and the entrance to the Regional Hospital. The work consists generally of the supply of all necessary labour, materials and equipment for the constriction of approximately 490m of 1.5m wide concrete sidewalk, 90m of 450mm storm sewer, two (2) new 2400mm dia. manholes, one (1) pre-cast concrete headwall for culvert inlet complete with custom fit inlet grate, one (1) rip rap headwall, one (1) 750mm dia. catchbasin, approximately 45m of concrete curb and gutter, approximately -1 of rock excavation, 140m' of clearing and grabbing and 100m of ditch cleaning. Also included in this project are landscaping, rip rap for ditch reconstruction, erosion control strictures, test holes to expose natural gas line, asphalt and restoration, as required. In addition to the work on University Avenue, this project includes the constriction of two concrete islands at the intersection of Tucker Park Road and Sandy Point Road (approximately 40m of concrete curb and 22M2 of 100mm thick concrete). TENDER RESULTS Tenders closed on November 18, 2008 with the following results: 1. Fairville Constriction Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 223,514.00 2. Galbraith Constriction Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 229,160.61 3. Maguire Excavating Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 248,024.27 4. Gulf Operators Ltd., Saint John, NB $ 248,30733 5. L. Halpin Excavating Limited, Saint John, NB $ 263,361.19 The Engineer's estimate for the work was $203,716.40. 23 M & C 2008- 346 November 19, 2008 Page 2 ANALYSIS The tenders were reviewed by staff and all tenders were found to be formal in all respects. Staff is of the opinion that the low tenderer has the necessary resources and expertise to perform the work, and recommend acceptance of their tender. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The Contract includes work that is charged against the 2008 General Fund Capital Program. Assuming award of the Contract to the low tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes the estimated amount of work that will be performed by City forces and Others. The analysis concludes that a total amount of $280,000.00 was provided in the budget for this project and that the projected completion cost of the project is estimated to be $227,464.64, including the City's eligible HST rebate - a $52,53536 positive difference in the General Fund Capital Program. In order to ensure the City received competitive bids for the University Avenue project, the completion date was specified as July 31, 2009. From discussions with the Contractor it is the City's understanding that the work will not start until the Spring of 2009. POLICY - TENDERING OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS The recommendation in this report is made in accordance with the provisions of Council's policy for the tendering of constriction contracts, the City's General Specifications and the specific project specifications. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Contract 2008-31: University Avenue - New Sidewalk & Ditch Reconstruction be awarded to the low tenderer, Fairville Constriction Ltd., at the tendered price of $223,514.00 as calculated based upon estimated quantities, and further, that the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary contract documents. Respectfully submitted, J. M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. Commissioner Municipal Operations & Engineering Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A. City Manager 24 c Saint John Adventures Inc. 18451VManawagonish Road Saint John, NB lE2M 3Y6 506-635-4054 November 20, 2008 City of Saint John Common Clerk's Office 8th Floor 15 Market Square Saint John, NB "Hand Delivered" To the Mayor and Council of the City of Saint John RE: Business Proposal We respectfully request to present in closed session a business proposal at your earliest available date. 1 0LQ C. ,rl Lq. Thank you. Sincerely yours, Terry Stevens - President Saint John Adventures Inc. T.J. Stevens - Vice President 25 Eric L. Teed, O. C., C. D., Q.C. 127 Prince William Street, Saint John, New Brunswick, EM 2B4 Tel: (506) 634-7324 Fax: (506) 634-7423 November 14, 2008 Common Council City of Saint John City Hall, Market Square Your Worship and Councillors, I understand most citizens have agreed that a matter of considerable importance to the City is the development of the Capital Projects which are making Saint John the business and industrial center for the Province. There is a troubling need for proper accommodation for the growing number of transient employees for which there is presently a major shortage of housing. Transient workers do not wish to purchase a home, which is felt to be extremely expensive, on the basis that they may be here less than six months. Further, they cannot rent an apartment as few landlords will rent for only 3 to 6 months. Landlords want steady tenants secondly, the terminating procedure is very difficult for most landlords. The need for winter accommodation is because transient employees find driving in winter conditions in the Saint John area is frustrating and dangerous. The summer conditions don't effect driving as much and an employee will tolerate driving for two hours in summer but not in winter. 26 One Saint John site which could accumulate up to 180 workers in the winter is the Rockwood Parr campground trailer park. Unfortunately, the present policy is the Rockwood Park campground is closed from November 1 to April 30. It is claimed it is too costly to put in water services for winter use. It is suggested that such an expenditure would be justified as it could result in providing the area for winter housing accommodation. Transient workers could rent mobile homes or vans for the winter months at a cost which they are willing to accept. Provision of such winter accommodation would assist in obtaining the necessary workers which the developments are trying to be achieve. It would be a major benefit for the Point Lepreau, Lorneville and Red Head areas where the largest industries are seeking employees. This could clearly indicate that the City Council fully supports the concept of assisting the industries to ensure they can secure the needed workers. It is hoped Council will give this your earliest consideration before the opportunity passes and delay and excuses become the unfortunate reputation of Canada's first city. Respectfully Submitted 27 C; Dear Mayor and Cour cil I am writing to you to request purchasing and developing some land in Milledgeville from the City. This la d consists of approx. 12.5 hectares, has an assessed value of $48,000 and has a PH # of 00446633. I believe that if I wer( to purchase and develop this land, as I am fully prepared to share with you anal, with an (restrictions you find necessary, it could be a remarkable neighbourhood jewel and would solve many issues in this area. The issues that I woul I like to mention are - Many local fa; rilies are afraid to go near this beach/park for fear of some of the illegal and imi Zoral activities that go on here. That is, prostitutes bring their johns here as the dir y condoms everywhere indicate and there is much drug-use there as the syringe: and drug paraphernalia shows. I live in this neighbourhood and can vouch for these concerns amongst my friends. We fear that our children will step on a dirty needle or pick up a condom thinking that it is a balloon or a toy. There are four cen children living on or next to 13rigadoon Terrace under the age of seven alonr The City has,, ' ient well over $ 10,000,000.00 on Lift . Stations, Water and Sewer lines and Seri ces along Kennebecasis Drive and 99% of the street WILL NEVER be dt veloped because one person owns and controls all of it as indicated in the enclose l map. If you sell this land to me, I will sign any document you see fit that I will r of add this land to that individual's holdings (i.e, FLIP IT This develops gent would contain a much needed Playground, a Shelter for folks that might get caught in the rain, and desperately needed Toilets and Parking. All of this would urround the beach area and would be deeded back to the City "prior" to any development, and would consist of approx. 4-5 acres. - With this dev, lopment I will not only pay for all these Park features but the City will enjoy a b ;autiful jewel of a small park and collect hundreds of thousands of dollars annual y in property taxes. As the only builder in this project, I can assure you that all th . homes will be valued over $ 500,000.00. 28 I hope that you will se - fit that this is a great idea for this land, solves many issues and adds value to our City As a developer with several very successful projects such as Brigadoon Terrace I c in assure you this would be a very beautiful project and would reflect highly in our c, mmunity. I am available any tirr to discuss further any of these idea and am open to your input as well. Thank you for your tii ie and please call me anytime at 506 643 1336 cell 506 658 1110 office 506 658 1111 home Regards, Percy Wilbur 14 Nov. 2008 29 r f r•~ J F Fyr~ at ~ R ~ •f ~kYir~r . r1 + T r y h } t J 4 t . ~ j1 !i ~ [ ~.r] S fry -__r r~s t X~ 4✓1 T r a; i - C~ r ~.A ~ y r ' t t t F 4 f~ iI SrY`~• ~ r !i ..i Sri I f r F ~ Z t $ c 7 r ,~n a r~ r r - i~ r I F z. -r Y: 'KIN l ~ ~ S 514. p'~' 3. f' 0 . ~w rs La- I - ^yl I A IN/ 41~1', ''F•F_ f ~ ,fir M ~ I J 4 ~ 1. .t ! L 1' f ~~l ~ k r{ a< I ~ +hk t 74 t '{t ✓r y •A ~ i 1 -1 K~ 1 } ~tl t ~ , F 7 f t IW t~ C '-1 1- ly~~rq ,r: t ! yf t rI `s d o AIJ. 30 S OsFA 4 P' 7 (1 ;i { e f y i r. c ( f~: rr n YY I J 'Y 1 S rf ~1 l ! -'1 i .,C ~r I._i ~ I~ 4 } 4 iS t F l7 " r • Y 7 !'tY ~ k l j v I T, lS { ~5 Y { ra ( r~ 1 t 7 { rr ~ ~ H }f 14 ~%t r I ~`1 ~F* r,i f ,h .mod ' I. i }r a " r i v L F; i i ,r ' } ~ - { I L r r 'f I a 1 a L' zf t , . t 1117 0-e~ Z~A To the Mayor and Council of the city of Saint John I would like to take this time to congratulate each of you in your resent election to council of the city of Saint John. This position of governance is of great responsibility in dealing with the forward advancement of this city and the transference to the Energy Hub so much talked about by the past mayor and council . It is for this reason that we are contacting you this newly elected mayor and council to try to settle a past injustice done to us when we had our lands expropriated for the extension of Bayside Drive to the now known Eider Rock Refinery that Irving Oil Ltd. and BP Petroleum are proposing for the Red Head / Mispec area. In the year of 2005 the city of Saint John and the Irving Oil company representatives meet to plan for the new road to the Irving Oil projects slated for our area and a Design/Build agreement was formulated . In this agreement there was/is a clause in which it was the city responsibility to obtain the land for this new road that would give the Irving Oil company access through our land under the pretence of providing the Red Head residents a second way out of this area if the old Red Head Road was to slide into the Bay of Fundy . Today it is clear that the primary reason was to give Irving Oil Ltd. direct access to highway # I when the new overpass at the One Mile House is built. As a land owner we presented several reason/concerns to representatives Terry Totten, Jim Baird, Brian Irving, Curtis Langle and the city lawyer John Nugent. The past mayor and council were given several letters on this matter and how it effected us These representatives talked of fairness throughout the negotiations for all especially in dollar values for our lands . It was known that the Debly company Sierra Supplies Ltd received some 678,000.00 for 4.5 acres of land in the McAllister Industrial Park which is just north of our lands in the same industrial park! We have asked on several occasion to be compensated at the same values as the Debly company and each time our letters were referred to manager Terry Totten. To this date we have had no response from him and we are still owed some $ 224,469.82 for the 1.5 acres of land that this new Bayside Drive extension that now exist on our lands . We now request that as a new mayor and council this matter be settled. If you require more information we will provide you with such details . If you feel that this matter of payment for lands taken is finalized please state such. Sincerely , Dennis Griffin & E. Janice Griffin 865 Red Head Road Saint John NB E2P IJ3 633 8223 May 30/08 32 xm, xwirxxt xwlavvmixx.i%;y 1caarr " q< .•q'. Price: $3,975,000 MLSO 074424 Status: -Active PID 55150932 Address: MCALLISTER INDUSTRIAL PARK City: SA INT JOHN, E2J 4W2 Side of Road: 4 Lot Size: 1 0.6 ACRES Building Size: District: 4 Water Frontage: Sub-Dist: 410 Out.Dim.: Zoning: - Exposure; Possession: IMMEDIATE Ove ew Site ready-level engineered site (by gemtec) with rai l access of 870 ft. Some under ground electrical installed easy access t0 ~ and proposed 2nd refinery. , - irectlons pe: Vacant Land 8, Lots Heating: None Exterior. S lfease: For Sale Only Fire Pnote4165~[t Driverrray . Gravel Title to 'Freehold---------- Utilities: Sewer, Electrical, Natural Gas Construction: Property Size: 10.0 - 49.99 Acres Rental Equipm,: Internal Features: Access: Year Round Road Documents: Roof: Access Floor: Site Influence: Rail Access, Cleared, Industrial Park, Level Inclusions Exclusions Floors: Sign: Yes UFFI: Garage: Gar.Details: Rental Income: Lockbcx: PCs: Waterfront or View: Water: Building Age: Parking: Park.Dim.: Type Net Rental Area Ren tal Rate N Occupant Lease Expiry Heating: Prop.Taxes: Bus.Tax: Electricity: Water: Insurance: Int.Maint.: ExLMaint.: Struct.Maint.: Gross Revenue: Total Expenses: Net Income: Lease Type; Assessment: $ Taxes: $1197 (2007) Improvements: Mortgage 1 Information Mortgage 2 Information Mortgagee: Mortg.Rate: Mortgagee: Mo' rtg.Rate: Mortg.Amount: $ Due Date: Mortg.Amount: $ Due Date: Payment (P1): $ Payment (PIT): $ Payment (Pl): $ Payment (PIT): $ Subj.to Verif.: Suby.to Verif.: Seller Name: 632604 N.R. LTD. Home Tel.: Bus.Tel,: Listing Office: PRUDENTIAL SUMMIT REAL ESTATE(S122) Compliments of MARCUS POWER: 506-660-9009 E-mail: rnoower0sellsthecitv.com Company Name: RE/MAX PROFESSIONALS SAINT JOHN INC.(S119): 506-634-8200 The information contained on this listing form is from sources believed to be reliable. However, it may be incorrect. This information should not be relied upon by a buyer without personal verification. The brokers and agents and members of the Saint John Real Estate Board assumes no responsibility for its accuracy. 395 (0(9 6. vG 71 _L c-2-e Marcus Power l,04 r 6950-9009 or mpower@sellsthecrty.com 33 R F~j P , 1. . ' J : C' J, M&C #2008 Renort to be received and filed. November 20, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: REFERRED AND TABLED ITEMS Attached as requested by Common Council is a listing of Referred and Tabled Items since this Council took office. The listing is generated by the Clerk's Office, and the City Manager has simply added a comment where appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Enc. 34 Terrence L. Totten, I~CA CITY MANAGER COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS - 2008 (REFERRED AND TABLED ITEMS) June 9 & 10 Symphony New Brunswick requesting renewal of grant and increase to $10,000 June 9 & 10 N.B. Day Parade Committee - Funding request June 9 & 10 Robert Holmes-Lauder - Letter re: Heavy Traffic on City Road June 9 & 10 Marathon By the Sea - Request to present June 9 & 10 Active Transportation - Request to present June 9 & 10 Millidgeville PEAK - Funding request June 9 & 10 Saint John Industrial Parks Limited letter re: Board Vacancies June 9 & 10 Proposal to form Committee to examine role of Auditor General for the City June 9 & 10 Minor Sports Subsidy funding increase June 9 & 10 Invitation to Dr. Robert MacKinnon, UNBSJ to present -future direction of UNBSJ - on June 23, 2008 June 9 & 10 Engagement of financial expert to analyze current grant system and provide options for new tax system June 9 & 10 Discussions with Exhibition Association - New sports facility - Formation of committee - regular reports June 9 & 10 Engagement of financial expert - development of realistic financial plan for property tax rate June 9 & 10 Request for Proposals -Sustainable Municipal Transportation Plan (transit, parking, active transportation, road infrastructure) JUNE 9 & 10, 2008 Budget Deliberations City Manager City Manager Pending To be considered by Council Completed Financial Assistance Provided Common Clerk To schedule Completed Common Clerk To schedule Completed City Manager Completed Council Provided Assistance Nominating To fill vacancies Completed Committee Referred to proposed Process Meeting for Council For 2009 budget deliberations Pending Council will need to consider Completed Overtaken by Provincial initiative to be released in November Nominating To form committee Discussions Have met with EPR and Horseman Committee Initiated Assoc. Consultant Engaged - Report Pending June 9 & 10 Establishment of committee -Water project Committee of To lobby federal and provincial Council governments for funding June 9 & 10 Habitat for Humanities project - 17 St. Andrews Street City Manager For report and recommendation Completed Mayor has met with our MP Completed Council Approved Policy 35 - Grant for municipal services for non-profit agencies June 9 & 10 Anti-Whistling Legislation June 9 & 10 Government Funding (ACOA) - Saint John Port June 9 & 10 Sustainable Neighbourhoods Planning Framework for Lorneville, Westfield Road area June 9 & 10 Affordable Housing Development- Review of relevant municipal plans and policies June 9 & 10 Crescent Valley Summer Reading Program & Union Street Affordable Housing Project June 9 & 10 Dedicated business development resource -West Side June 23 Requested Sale of Lantic Sugar Site June 23 Letter from Lorne Daltrop, Rising Tide Productions June 23 Industrial Expansion/Impact on Municipal Services (Councillor Farren) June 23 Review of Performance Evaluation and Reporting Process - Four staff members reporting to Council June 23 Public Transportation Fuel Tax - Letter from Councillor Titus June 23 Overhead projector in Council Chambers June 23 Annual Value for Money Audit June 23 Year-round Alternate Side Parking - Southern Peninsula June 23 Expanded Recycling Program June 23 KBM Ballpark Page 2 1 City Staff For report and recommendation. Outstanding Mayor To contact Saint John Port Authority Completed City Manager To develop framework and Pending communication strategy City Manager For report and recommendation. Ongoing Mayor To contact provincial government Completed departments to seek positive outcome City Manager To make arrangements with Completed Enterprise Saint John -June zs, zuuu Tabled until August 18, 2008 Completed Mayor To write letter of support Completed Tabled until Councillor Farren is Completed present. Management For report and recommendation. Pending Staff Tabled until Councillor Titus is Completed present. Common Clerk To determine solution - repair or Completed replace City Manager For report and recommendation Pending Saint John For presentation on viability of Parking requested changes - To be Commission completed for the August 18, 2008 meeting. Municipal To report and recommendations on Ongoing Operations alternatives - to be completed by the Staff last meeting in September City Manager Assessment and positive changes to Ongoing &Commissioner park. 36 Inquiries made - Further action required. Must be part of Municipal Plan Preliminary report tabled. Part of a larger planning issue. Report sent to Enterprise SJ and West Side Business Association Council has struck a Committee Budget Allocation being recommended City Manager believes elected officials continue discussions with Parking Commission. Staff are exploring various alternatives Some work done in 2008. Staff are working with the citizens June 23 June 23 June 23 June 23 June 23 July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 July 7 Province of NB Hearings - Tax Options Hospice of Greater Saint John - Request for Annual Grant Saint John Transit Commission City Market Management and rent structure issues Skateboard Park legal documents Leisure Services City Manager & Make presentation to PNB Select Commissioner Committee on Tax Review on July 8, of Finance 2008 City Manager Transit Report to Council on plans to Commission address reported deficit City Manager For a report back in one month City Solicitor For review and report back to Council at next meeting with specific timelines July 7, 2008 Letter from Saint John Art Club regarding sculptures The Saint John Community Arts Board Letter from PRUDE Inc Mayor Letter from EnterpriseSaint John - Request to Present Clerk Letter from Enterprise Saint John - Request to change City Solicitor Letters Patent Letter from Urban Core Support Network- Request to Clerk present Letter from Enterprise Saint John- Recommending Nominating nominations Committee Letter from Patricia Dashwood, Garbage Collection City Manager International Longshoremen's Association - Request Clerk to present Traffic Lights - Rothesay Avenue Municipal Operations Letter from Councillor Farren - Industrial expansion Enterprise Saint impact on municipal services John/Commissi oner of Finance Page 3 1 To write letter of support To schedule For report and recommendation To schedule To fill vacancies To schedule To report on time line and steps to be taken to alleviate issues • To analyze and report within 5 months on the submitted issues within context of Growth Blueprint • Councillor Farren's letter to be Completed Presentation Made Pending Council will decide, awaiting budget deliberations. Completed Completed Completed Completed Ongoing Letter being considered with others 37 July 7 July 7 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Jul 21 Public Transportation Fuel Tax Letter from Councillor Snook- Safer Communities and Saint John Neighbourhoods Legislation Police Commission Letter from Eric Teed, Entrance to Brunswick Square Letter from Eric Teed, Fort LaTour Letter from Linda Steele, Request for More Benches on King Street Letter from New Brunswick Historical Society, re New Brunswick Heritage Letter from Heritage Development Board, re Request to Present Letter from Harold Wright, re North of Union Project Letter from David Cossaboom, re Taxi Scam and Image Rezoning Applications for 105 Cranston Avenue and 1060 Sandy Point Road Letter from Saint John Transit, re Request to Present Land Banking Reports (Councillor Sullivan) Affordable Housing Model - City of Saskatoon Page 4 1 sent to Cities Association of NB To request Provincial government to take necessary action to rebate tax imposed on fuel used by municipal public transportation services. To organize presentation to Council - by the end of September 2008. July 21, 2008 City Manager Heritage Development Board City Manager/ SJ Waterfront Development Heritage Development Board Clerk To schedule Police Justice Steering Committee Taxi Advisory Committee Planning For report and recommendation Advisory Committee Clerk To schedule City Manager For report regarding the City of Sain No report required No report required No report Funding implications required Completed Completed t Completed John establishing a program of land banking. City Manager For examination in accordance with Ongoing However, a new report needs to be generated. It will take some time. Obviously, an integral part of a Municipal 38 (Councillor McGuire) the Commissioner of Planning & Plan. Totten and Forrest have Development's review of the discussed. Municipal Policies as they pertain to Affordable Housing. Jul 21 Economic Development Model (Councillor McGuire) City Manager For report on dedicated economic Pending Budget Consideration development resource given the current level of economic growth taking place within the city. (To be completed within two months). Jul 21 Uptown Development Land Use Plan (Councillor Appropriate City To schedule meeting with Ongoing Part of overall Municipal Plan Snook) Staff community stakeholders to facilitate development of plan. Jul 21 Public Engagement Policy Staff To design series of Ward meetings Completed to be held this fall to gather input on principles to be incorporated into policy. Jul 21 Proposed Skate Board Park Mayor & Clerk To sign submitted consents Completed accepting conditions of CNR and Maritime & Northeast Pipeline. Jul 21 Engagement of Financial Expert Staff To formalize agreement reflecting Contract Kitchen & Slack engaged. Waiting to terms and conditions outlined in Signed receive Guy Finn's Report in November. proposal Mayor & Clerk To sign agreement yugust 5, 200& Aug 5 30 Requests to Present - Sale of Lantic Sugar Site Clerk I To schedule on August 11, 2008 Completed Aug 5 Request for Funding - PULSE City Manager I Completed Council Approved Policy Aug 5 Request for Information - Disability Awareness Group City Manager No Report Staff Responded Required Aug 5 Highland Street - Street Closure - Public Hearing Clerk I To schedule for September 2/08 Completed Aug 5 Public Hearing - ZBA & S39 - 106 Spar Cove Road Clerk & To schedule for September 2/08 Completed PAC To prepare report & recommendation Aug 5 Public Hearing - ZBA 861-891 Fairville Boulevard Clerk & To schedule for September 15, 2008 Completed PAC To prepare report and Page 51 39 recommendation Aug 5 Land Purchase from CPR (PID 361022, 55143275 Mayor & Clerk Execute Documentation Completed Aug 5 Option for Easement Agreement Emera Brunswick Mayor & Clerk Execute Documentation Completed Aug 5 Public Input Sessions - Police Justice Project City Manager To host public input session on the Completed project plans, to be scheduled Aug 26t" and 28t". Aug 5 Municipal Funding (Councillor McGuire) City Manager To report on the establishment of a Pending committee with a mandate to pursue a fair tax share of the tax revenue raised and collected in the City of Saint John. - due in two weeks (August 18-08) Aug 5 Minimum Standards Bylaw Presentation - Proposed Clerk To be brought forward to Aug 18-08 Completed By-law meeting Aug 5 Capital Financing Report Clerk To be brought forward to Aug 18-08 Completed meeting Aug 5 Low Income Housing Grants Clerk To be brought forward to Aug 18-08 Completed meeting. Au gust 18, 2008 Aug 18 Pension Board Lawsuit, Re: Ferguson Clerk To send letter to Pension Board Completed requesting to discontinue lawsuit against former Councillor Ferguson Aug 18 Installation of trash receptacles throughout the City City Manager To investigate feasibility (with a view to budgetary considerations) Aug 18 Early Childhood Development Centre/Program at St. Clerk To send letter of support to BCAPI Completed John the Baptist/King Edward School and to invite them to present at future Council meeting. Aug 18 Request for funding of $200,000 - Heritage City Manager To report back to Council. Completed Development Board - from 2008 Capital Budget Aug 18 Request to Present - St. Joseph's Hospital Foundation Clerk To schedule Completed Aug 18 Request to Present - Key Industries Clerk To schedule Completed Aug 18 Request to Present - Saint John Waterfront Clerk To schedule Completed Development Aug 18 Request to Present - Independence Plus Incorporated Clerk To schedule Page 61 Council waiting to receive Jen Guy Finn's Report (Nov.) Additional Funds Provided 40 Aug 18 Request for Funding - Multicultural Association of City Manager For report and recommendation Pending No specific request. Population Saint John Inc. Secretariat is pursuing as well. Aug 18 ZBA & S39 Applications (1198 Loch Lomond Road Clerk To schedule public Completed and 1 Market Square) hearings/advertise PAC To prepare report and recommendation Aug 18 Sale of Land PID No 00367276 Mayor & Clerk To execute documentation Completed Aug 18 Employee #4172 - Retirement on Order of Council City Solicitor Completed Aug 18 Canada Post Corporation Strategic Review Mayor To send letter opposing deregulation of Canada Post and insisting that the government hold public consultation )EPTEMBER 2, 2008 Sept 2 Option for Easement for Cathodic Protection System Mayor & Clerk To execute agreement and initial Agreement "Lump Sum Payment Option" Sept 2 Public Hearings - Section 39 - 661 Dever Road Clerk To schedule for September 29/08 Completed And 127-129 Bayside Drive; and Rezoning Application - 861-891 Fairville Boulevard PAC For report and recommendation Sept 2 Upgrade of Clover Valley Road Clerk To advise NBDOT that the City is Completed prepared to contribute $114,000 to this project if matched by the Province. Sept 2 Transfer of property (PID 55141857) from Province of Mayor & Clerk To sign all related documents NB to City of SJ Sept 2 Letter from Saint John Firefighters' Association, Re City Manager & Pending Awaiting Arbitrator's Decision Disabled Employees City Solicitor Sept 2 Letter from Vi Matheson, Prince Street West - Lighting Power Commission Sept 2 Tommy Douglas Award - Urban Core Network Mayor To send letter of recognition for the success of the "Dodging Diabetes" project and congratulations for receiving the award. Sept 2 Vacant & Derelict Building Strategy City Solicitor To report on new and innovative Completed Report Presented. Council recently and Buildings & programs that could potentially be asked for a more "proactive report" Inspection Staff implemented to reduce the number Page 7 41 of vacant and derelict properties in Si. Sept 2 Parking in South-Central Peninsula Parking To prepare presentation on a plan to Understand that Councillor Killam is also Commission review the current parking having discussions with the Parking regulations by the end of November. Commission Sept 2 Solid Waste Service Implementation Presentation Clerk To schedule as first item on agenda Completed for meeting of September 15 Sept 2 Proposed development on Crane Mountain Road City Manager For report and recommendation Completed Building Permit Denied ;EPTEMBER 15, 2008 Sept 15 Letter from Eric Teed, Re: City Streets City Manager No report Letter was list of problem areas required Sept 15 Gas Tax Agreement Finance To submit revised plan to Prov of NB Completed for approval Sept 15 NB Environmental Trust Fund Contract Mayor & Clerk To sign contract Sept 15 Consent Form - Prov of NB Mayor & Clerk To sign consentform Sept 15 Public Hearings, ZBAs and S39s, 299 Norris Road, Clerk To schedule Completed 341 Ashburn Road, 461 Millidge Ave, 4207 Loch Lomond Road Planning For report and recommendations Advisory Sept 15 New Brunswick Day Celebrations, Request to Host City Manager Completed City Manager made direct contact. from Saint John West Business Association Sept 15 Repairs at Kennebecasis Drive, Meadowland Municipal Report back to Council on results of Completed A request for compensation from the Subdivision, Bayside Drive/Hazen Creek, Rodney Operations actions Province has been made. Terminal Staff Sept 15 Same Week Same Day, Solid Waste Service City Solicitor To bring forward a revised Solid Pending Waste By-Law to be made effective Jan 1, 2009. Sept 15 Active Transportation Saint John City Manager To report back on five still recommendations outlined in outstanding presentation Sept 15 Land Use Decision: A Process Review City To forward submitted documentation Completed Mike Ircha preparing his report. Manager/Comm for the possible engagement of Dr. issioner of Mike Ircha Planning Page 8 1 42 SEPTEMBER 29, 2008 Sept 29 Letter from Saint John Waterfront Development City Manager Under A matter of price. regarding purchase of property Consideration Sept 29 Saint John Theatre Company - Request to Present Clerk To schedule Completed Sept 29 St. Joseph's Parish - Request to Present Clerk To schedule Completed Sept 29 Saint John Animal Rescue League - Request to Clerk To schedule Present Sept 29 Imperial Theatre - Request for Funding City Manager For budget deliberations To be considered Sept 29 Public Hearings - Section 39 & Zoning Bylaw Clerk To schedule for October 27, 2008 Completed Amendments (26 Kiwanis Court, 106 Spar Cove Road, 324 Duke Street West, 951-961 Fairville Boulevard) P.A.C. For report and recommendation. Sept 29 Retirement Allowance City Manager For report Completed Will be raised as part of Contract Negotiations with every union Sept 29 Areas of Concern for Flooding/Mitigation Strategies Municipal Ops For report Completed Need to schedule time for presentation Staff Sept 29 Assessment of Viability of Current Municipal Plan Commissioner For report Completed Mr. Forrest has laid out a direction of Planning Sept 29 Coordination of Major Road Work and Bridge Work in City Manager To develop plan Ongoing Staff are in constant contact. Simms 2009-2010 with Province of NB and Harbour Bridge Corner work may be deferred Authority Sept 29 Pension Plan Deficit- Dealing with Issue City Manager To revisit previous recommendations Completed Council is issuing an RFP and determine if still relevant; to present course of action; to include financial resources required in 2009 Operating Budget. - and -to provide a table listing and distinguishing plan changes in the purview of Council and NB Government. Sept 29 Sept 29 Tax Rate Reduction City Manager Enhancement of Community Centres (infrastructure Director of and programming) Leisure Page 9 1 To prepare draft budgets with a Still waiting to receive an indication of sustainable tax rate reduction as an revenues. objective. For report and recommendation. Draft report Within one month - budget prepared implications. 43 Sept 29 Infrastructure enhancement for Outlying Neighbourhoods (Lorneville, River Valley Road and Ocean Westway) Sept 29 Amendment to Provincial Shortline Railway Act (Trespassing/Fines) Sept 29 Lorne Middle School & Hazen White St. Francis - Retain schools at present location Sept 29 Environmental Protection Policy, Forest Management Techniques, Forestry Industry Job Protection Sept 29 Special Meeting - Open Committee of the Whole Teach in on Committee System and review request - Build Canada Fund Sept 29 Deed of Gift - Brunswick Pipeline (Endowment Fund to Saint John Horticultural Association) Services City Manager For report - strategic developmental program for infrastructure enhancement (due in one month's time) Mayor To send letter to Minister Landry Completed Mayor To send letter to Province Completed Mayor To send letter to Premier Graham Completed Clerk To schedule for Thursday, Oct 9/08 Completed Nominating Appoint two individuals to serve the Completed Committee City of Saint John's original administrators under the Deed of Gift OCTOBER 14,200b Oct 14 Budget submission for Cherry Brook Zoo City Manager Budget deliberations Oct 14 Letter from GLC Realty regarding Prince William Street City Manager Upgrades Oct 14 Resignation letter from N.A. Britton from the Police Nominating Commission Committee Oct 14 Letter from River Road Community Alliance requesting Common Clerk To schedule to present Oct 14 Section 39 amendment application of Dean Noack / Planning For report and recommendation Rivergate Properties (430 Prince Street) for Monday, Advisory November 10, 2008 at 7:00 pm in Council Chambers Committee Oct 14 Section 39 amendment application of Dean Noack/ Council Schedule hearing Rivergate Properties (430 Prince Street) for Monday, November 10, 2008 at 7:00 pm in Council Chambers Oct 14 Letter from Minister Jack Keir requesting to present Common Clerk To Schedule Page 10 1 Overtaken by discussion on Municipal Plan. Some budget implications as well. Resource and expertise required. Pending Council decision Completed Author's request noted. Completed Completed Completed Completed 44 Oct 14 Speed limit on Heather Way City Manager Completed OCTOBER 27, 2008 Oct 27 Request to Present - Family Plus Life Solutions Clerk To schedule Oct 27 Letter from Ray Bungay, Re: Sidewalks on Hickey City Manager Pending Road Oct 27 Letter from Saint John Board of Police Commissioners Nominating To fill vacant position Committee Oct 27 Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods Legislation Council To request Provincial government to adopt SCAN legislation and urge other NB municipalities to do the same. Oct 27 Pension Benefit - Call for Proposals City Manager To prepare draft Call for Proposals Completed for Council's approval prior to issuance Oct 27 Terms and Conditions of Employment Staff To arrange for teach-in on Terms and Completed Conditions of Employment by professional firms engaged to provide advice on this subject Oct 27 Bill 12 - Workers Compensation Act Council To write to Provincial Minister Doherty indicating Council's displeasure with the process followed. Oct 27 City Pension Plan Disability Statistics Commissioner To prepare report and make Completed of Finance presentation Oct 27 Letter from Karen Kincade -Accessibility in Saint John City Manager For report Pending NOVEMBER 3, 2008 Nov 3 NB Crimestoppers - Request for financial support of City Manager For budget deliberations Pending $2,500 Nov 3 Senior's Resource Centre - Request for financial City Manager For budget deliberations support of $3,000 Nov 3 Progress Reports - Council Motions City Manager To present on regular basis Nov 3 Implementation of 311 Municipal Phone Service or City Manager For report other improved methods of customer service Page 111 Pending Council approved report/staff monitoring Capital Budget consideration The City Manager will now have to consider consultant's recommendations. Draft Policy being circulated Ongoing This is first Pending Has budget implications 45 Nov 3 Open Committee of the Whole Meetings - Nov 17-Dec Mayor To schedule presentations 5, 2008 - Financial needs and issues facing the Administration, Commissions, Boards and other agencies Nov 3 Future use of Jewish Synagogue - Carleton Street City Manager To arrange community input session Pending no later than January 31, 2009 NOVEMBER 10, 2008 Nov 10 Saint John Trade & Convention Centre, Request for Clerk To schedule presentation capital funding Nov 10 Saint John Police Force - Operating Budget Clerk To schedule Nov 10 Saint John Port Authority - Recommendation to Nominating To fill vacancy Appoint Stephen Campbell as Saint John Port Committee Authority Representative to Saint John Development Corporation Board Nov 10 Saint John Waterfront Development - Request to Clerk To schedule present- Reversing Falls and Lower River Passage Nov 10 Saint John Waterfront Development - Maintenance of For budget deliberations Harbour Passage Nov 10 Human Development Council - Request to present Clerk To schedule Nov 10 Uptown Saint John Inc. Board of Directors and BIA Clerk To schedule Membership - Request to present Nov 10 St. Joseph's Community Centre City Manager To enter into negotiations for lease of Pending space at 4347 Loch Lomond Road Page 12 1 Exchange of a-mails have occurred. Face to Face 46 M & C -2008-353 November 21, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Skate Board Park: Highwav Usage Permit BACKGROUND: At its meeting on July 7, 2008 Common Council "authorized the Mayor and Common Clerk to sign all necessary documents to obtain the various permissions required to build a skateboard park under the Main Street Overpass...." One of the documents was Highway Usage Permit No. 2008100M43000101 (HUP) with the Department of Transportation (DOT). The HUP was signed by the City with the `revised design' as Schedule "B". Prior to DOT signing the HUP, City staff realized that the Schedule "B" attached to the HUP was not the `final design'. The purpose of this report is to recommend that the `final design' be substituted for the `revised design' that was attached to the HUP approved on July 7ti', the skateboard park having been constricted in accordance with the `final design'. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that: The Schedule `B' titled `revised design for DOT submission' be deleted from Highway Usage Permit No. 20081 IOM431000 10 1 approved July 7, 2008 and the Schedule `B' titled `final design for DOT submission' attached to M&C 2008-353 be inserted in its place. Respectfully submitted, hen Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning and Development Terrence Totten, F.C.A. City Manager Attachments 47 16 SCHEDULE "Bil Nmd n3lNON YY 1. 1 N z ~ 4 j r~Q t~/~ rd/ Q ~U) W LL 48 '8'N'wpl' Mi1~4 cram Wmla nVIs uqwr wins rte. = ' ~V O r I r ' ~1 , ~ 1 •r ~ ti y l 0 terra % Yy •yY,vr..~.Yr ..45ay - Kx=.j $ r. Y lyg r ' ~ % I ' J X14-{ \ X 'r '~r~. s• ~ ~ I rrn ~aa~, ~I w+or~ra,+ / I A,:M WrwIM,~ra~:Jny 94W~ Q6`J3l H=VH+ lF~ YMf ay u W / r P, 10[Y M w.:f.r Yuv rr~ DrM PIrM MI ~Mr Yrr,ppYlw(f11Q]ItIOYrrlrabdrr' r:.w „1:,pryr rlMwue:,rrr~a,wr~~1 MY >V'+6,M'N N GFR'~1 ~1Tr• WOibGwwrryMa W+,Tb'f 1ROb AIF,rldf'ti M~~,r.ie,Y~.Y~+^q~V M'r w,:NM T,w:m~ww~Y. wMwsti Yrsgr:,A{Y4~r~lrcrnl W9'! ~YVM,ipIrMYt .trrf,4r~ r,9P r'bX~01 .TA/}~M w a~n: WOhIM~f,1,V'1 C) d' f ~g SC~g~ LLBI, ~ Nurra lus 1~1i ; a sit l N ~ +~~t 1 y ~ Y _ f ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~q~ ~t Vii' •?7 bt 4 ` ~ f r i< t~Y itak F ~ k r 3 t r .(red r~ <i t~{ 1 •L f C ~ r s ~s," Y,1 ~ 1 tr F 1 ~ 1 31 i ~ • 1 7 ~rn 444 i ~ s 3~1 1 XNI n ~ ~ tr r4 cit'~•y h ''`jy:~ i~ - ~1i tit L~ \ 1 i ,j I I sJ 50 19 SCHEDULE "B"L^v~~~~ LROAM NODUaNROJ _ II II LO II tr-~~. I ij kill Ill ~o~ ,fl ~ ~ i,.~ I1 g $ p i I ~ o'II (o: t 1 a 51 20 SCHEDULE "B" NVId SNOISNIWIO NNV IROAM IU ao-tw:as 11 -~s i7~ { _tlllffl~ ~1~ o t5 '$b ii i1! o o 1 ,1 o `ti a o Il ! o ~ - ~ o i ' i 52 £5 I ~ I 0 c 'I'o c Y o Ci O O ' k r 1 8 T TfrT 1--SK-6 11 Inl ORDINATE LAYOUT PLAN IZ ' b5 T /s tt~.~ytf , r 'rte - rl IE ~ ,F<6 G ~ ~ k Yg^'p6Na +N g~ Z gs eb tL a i t 3 G r 5a ~ Ny ~ dEii E ! ~ S xy 1~I~ ~ I E~'=ii ~ " ~ ~ E~]i#:G jR#~PE i➢'.t yiil u~~t~ igqij igga GEi Ejt99~g~ ~ ~ EPPi ~E fE ~ ~ t kI 44 If~ cpc {c c;vaciclcE ~i. ~ ~ ( •i IIi30Ei___ ~ ~ :E9 CE! li I~ sK-7 II II II GRADING AND DRAINAGE FLAN r ,g,, =(13[JIDS zz Ul Yd.. 'REFER TO OETYLR M cawrw f rua RAl URERFKY6 ~ .+Mi..b.MR~bR.'Iwbbpilbe.b..1YYYW RYRM. brm.Yb~M.bY.gY bMm'INp.mb. 94F:..r. R,J br.o,eR.., ur w SST-n: q,....I...Rdi+.. W'.d RSF; .Lb..RIR wp WYbReMYl1.i0AFTY-.11pW m; moo RY..00:-WMN.AS*. FS& 2,4UTQe 2,,F IYYIR mWp 7M•ti ilYQ Sw f.iv .d G1R: SNC~Y YIM u.w.e.Yw.ee.y.awm.. bib. rr.k,..Y. M mYn.o..w r p,rY m MYV A b.WgMb Yb W,0 w0 P.M Pa b YlYMI a'.pMb~ J HATCH LEGEND 9~ Rrl cabYwerYYrY. bM.Wi ~~w~rn j' ~f ba..wwn.b,.wwn _ tf.Ywmoub. ware Sited Tube Placement a Coping PWcemeM v O Y 0 .n w Q wri .~ul.P .u, nd n , ~ ws.w ` Gwe..Y¢.___. ' n e A 9 Flat Sled Bar PlaeemeM f ~ 0 0 0 0 0 s N ,V N c Sabl! Jahn skaa Pun Raa a a SRML JOIm, Ns. 24 SCHEDULE "B" *441sow NVId 1N101 ~jfI M aA f! i~i s i ~ ~ ~I~I€ ~ I 0~ sf j e k~fi if $E ~t~ f s tif It Ela ~i3~ if fill if. ii i i w dl II y# lUl ---ll!#f!t . L!d4_ f i ~ 17x1.1 77 ~I+I oo-coon!s Ilan-~s ~I V \ N7" 56 L9 r Ain Fg f t a 03 t ~ ~ ~ etF ~E { w l I 'It ~ j1111( {itt [l=EF ;t _ _t _ }4 _ F f4 f 1 t f ~ m ~ GAS PIPE LIVE ~b f `~Y0 ~R ~~4 t~ SK200T-0i r~~ n AMA 111 1 1 ic~~~ 7 li 1Q~s 8v/B~ ~ SZ 26 SCBEDULE "B" MEMO 11V13V ~cu-ill hap ~oj V JC } . ` poi o x > o •o a ~ o 0 ~ o 7 -0 W„ l7 P I 1 1•~~ t [ i R! + M + i ~3 } r 1 Y} 58 27 SCHEDULE "B" 4:;jw y d I slroilu lUl eo-coon}s~ll~''~'~a.~.,~1 ! t il} : ; uAI e x~ E r I I -11 - Xy . i lW is 59 2$ SCHEDULE «B A ~F O ~O O O 0 0 O on 4 O 1 .G• 6 h ~1 i AL Y tl i a O RN 5K ~'}M -a- I "s i lit '-iy 4 flouts Z 60 ,-1o, m wawlhdc.Yw.w.Y,wl..aawiwla+.a~e.~a..Yae.wM «a v,war.caw.nerm:a rwn.nw..: . n NR O1a01,1Wb.N. Ntl OqO nwlRUl Y aKW POr~.P.~.d •A?b1• N mnoM a.m.•Y Nr . Y/; l)R~,vA,y.urfo ayYkJ b•Y,r IrF10b6.. 26% WD 51 itndw200m ~ a T,cr■.r""a Aw or ppOw ..nwr Nas" Yd at... tr.Y+i aw aanoehs d aM nwMIY 1) RAW" ~d'Ip OOmin RIO KfAYtiYbn u•C~A•nM ~d W..lr.hMbwMnbAaba k,.. GYra. c~ Cl) ill, i lak as TYPIGrLRL .a •euo,Rao••+r il.b)1nY6ElS 0 ~ . f o . o c ~f '~I~uu~ - xxx'o L~-I f 1 I' -I I,.f I I,11_;III Klu r 9DS' 2) a+r 3) isa., x IsalRl roY.c aooaRl oc 4) s.e. ,«....a...d+w~r.lwe.~a+.d.nr,n.,~R:Ywwa. 5) Fly Raae bM 6) -ioim,alUYnllwDS'Sxbr.lSMImOC.RpMtlwMl.MYnawb.u.' 7) rxrXW,= a aulm -vaasoose aqs' .a.n be. rrl.w ee 8y ,~,oa~,,..ptl150wlOCbYOb uY 9) r.tl na eAsd d.b(b O^w..Plagab pe..e.rd.ew.T" 10) -,m laa .n .t. & br..a..d @ hod . x M en.. ra .b.• 11) EmRro-, Y.x.,ra aNa wsa wawb .«+mlaRnRw.' aawwwwbrol.wlq.W. CD wn• ND z v 00 w cz W cm 0 r i M= Mm Saint John ti Skate Plaza Q swm Jobo, MAL r D n N Gd 30 SCHEDULE "B" Woms I DBMS AMIODUSNOO nave eily ira ::]I i' 4fi a} l~l II I it i3 i!i iIi i 11 ~1 L - -71 . ...,..a\4/ L{ n {"i° ~ q ~ ? ~ ~4 I t 'XI a~ e: 5 ai_1 1 ~ I, d- A =i e`i~ ti .,j~ F 62 C9 S -I 0 1.51 fil I' kl -l~I t BCD) I F- ~-0 ®R E ' if P P s s y s b e 5 ~ p i 7 g ~ 0 YY I~ . Aa 1 3 g i~..l Iny~~ f ~ 333(( ■ r t t I P •r: ~t~ ~Ll. 0 t, .C fi a F4 5 tell i1 3 ! ! R r d ~,ili~0 ` ell _ _ lfif~l s[-0-e i 5°°~-08 1(-l TRANSITION PANEL CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE «g„ a-naaHDs I~D M&C #2008 November 20, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: SELECTING A FINANCIAL. ADVISOR-THE PROCESS As directed at the last meeting, the City's Purchasing Agent is assembling all of the background information needed to support Council's Call for Proposal for Advisory Services related to the Pension Plan. Every effort is being made to release a complete package by the end of November. Council has chosen to take on the task of receiving, reading, evaluating and interviewing firms and or individuals who might choose to respond to this Call for Proposal. Reflecting on this undertaking, I have concluded that without the benefit of staff input, Council may find it beneficial. to seek some expertise in assisting Council with this process. Coincidentally, I received the attached letter from Luedey Consultants Inc. this past week. The City has utilized this firm in the past to assist staff in evaluating responses to various Calls for Proposals related to Benefit Plans. My experience would indicate that for a very small investment Council would be well served by engaging this firm, or some other similar firm, to assist Council with evaluating the responses to the Proposal Call. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council authorize His Worship to explore with Luedey Consultants, or any other similar firm any suggestion the firms may have to assist Common Council in working through the process of selecting a financial advisor related to the Pension Plan. itted, Terrence L. Totten, FCA CITY MANAGER 64 "Y CON SULTAN TSIN C w f fl, EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN CONSULTANTS HALIFAX OFFtCF 5991 Spring Garden Road November 17, 20018 Suite 800 Halifax Nova Scotia Mr. Terry Totten B31-1 IY6 City Manager 'iL1 902 4.50-l z r a City of Saint Joan iAX t)02 450-1274 15 Market Square, P. D. Box 1971 www.LuedeyConsultants.ca Saint John, NB E21_. 41-1 Dear Terry SYDNEY BRANCH Re: Pension Plan - Actuarial Services 64 Brookland Street, 2nd Floor Sydney Nova Scotia BlP5B2 I have followed some of the recent press and media articles on the concerns raised by City Council regarding the City Pension Plan. I understand a decision IEL 902 67-0997 has been made to retain the services of a pension expert to conduct a full review of the City Pension Plan. Retaining a Pension Actuarial firm with the proper credentials will be critical. I would assume that the current Pension Actuary would not be eligible for this project. If you require our services to conduct the RFP (Tender) for the Pension Consultant, I would be pleased to discuss this matter with you. Terry, I will be in Saint John on Thursday November 27th and could be available to meet with you if you wish to discuss this service. CONSLIf.TtNG SERVICES Just a thought for now, but let me know if you have any interest in this service. Group Insurance Regards, Worksite Wellness r//JJy Employee Assistance Programs W f 7 W.J.` (Bill) Luedey ` President Ph: (902) 482-3640 ! wjl cr luedeyconsuitants. ca 65 M&C #2008 November 20, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: MANAGEMENT/PROFESSIONAL PAY SCALE mum W N' C jry L 10 d!w ..D The City of Saint John Under Council's policy, the City Manager is to provide a recommendation to Common Council with respect to any proposed changes to the Management/ Professional Pay Scale by November of each year and Council is to consider this matter prior to year end. In the past, the City Manager has strictly adhered to this direction and Council has inevitably had lengthy discussions on this particular topic. Council is also well aware that the media is prone to providing significant and repeated coverage to this issue. Inevitably, the coverage alludes to the topic of potential conflicts. From the City Manager's perspective, a conflict has never existed given that there are eleven elected officials, with various viewpoints, who have the responsibility to debate, discuss and ultimately decide the merits of any staff recommendation. Having said this, staff is sensitive to such perceptions. With this in mind, the City Manager had been considering recommending to Council that Council engage an independent body to undertake a comprehensive compensation survey. Undoubtedly, such a review would require an investment of terns of thousands of dollars. An opportunity has recently presented itself to allow the Council and the City Manager to receive the benefits ofjust such a compensation survey. This survey is being conducted on behalf of another New Brunswick city which is facing very similar challenges to those being experienced. here in Saint John. In any event, unless instructed otherwise by Council, the City Manager intends to deviate slightly from the current policy with. respect to timing of his recommendation so as to allow participation by the City in this survey. This particular survey, along with a number of others available to the City Manager, should provide an opportunity for Common Council and the public to more fully understand the issues surrounding compensation. A recommendation should be forthcoming by the end of the first quarter of 2009. RECOiv1MENDATION: filed. FCA CITY MANAGER 66 ~r CONSULTING INVITATION Subject. Participation in the 2008-2009 City of Moncton Compensation Survey The objective of this invitation is to offer you the opportunity to participate in our 2005-2009 City of Moncton Compensation Surrey. The survey is being carried out by Aon; an international HR consulting firm with vast experience in compensation practice. What is the 2008.2009 00), of"Moncton Comp. ensation Survey? With the pressures of globalization, a looming labour shortage and the demands of new categories of workforce participants (veterans, generation Y, immigrants), there is a growing demand for precise information on compensation practices in the labour market. Due to these circumstances, we are carrying out a compensation survey for our client, the City of Moncton, in order to gather accurate, timely and useful information about salaries and benefits for technical jobs in the private and public sectors. We have identified you as an employer for one or several of the jobs being surveyed and would like to invite you to participate in our survey. The value of this survey is directly proportional to the level of participation and the quality of information that will be gathered. Benefits ofparticipation This survey will provide you with sound data that can help you to evaluate the competitiveness of your compensation package and assist you in making changes that can make your organization a coveted workplace. There is no cost to participate in the survey. All submissions are completely confidential and no data will be shared outside ofAon's team.?Data collection is done through our secure on-line server The report will be in aggregate forma and will include base salary and comprehensive benefits details. How do I get started? At this point we are conducting a feasibility study. We would like to know if you would be interested in participating in this survey through an on-site data collection meeting that will occur the 1St or 2" week of December or early in 2009. If you are interested, we will contact you shortly to schedule the data collection meeting or send you the data collection manual. Submitting the information will likely take you 1.5 hours. When will l receive my results? After the data has been collected and results tabulated, Aon will share a company specific report with the participating organizations. The report will include a summary of results for the jobs you submitted data. You can expect to receive your complementary participant report by the end of the 1St quarter of 2009. Thank you again for your interest, and we hope we can count on your participation in this comprehensive survey, Sincerely, Uri.cl MacGillivary Senior Consultant 67 M & C - 2008-352 November 20, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Sale of City Owned Land-Ashburn Road BACKGROUND: In spring of 2008 Common Council resolved: That The Citt, of Saiia.Iohli sell PIT) 53025, 672-675 Ashbul°1i Road to Clecir f reir Mobile Honzes Ltd wider the terms grid com itioiis coiWihied hi the attached Agreenlew of Purchase cmtl Sale; grid that C lecir f ieir Mobile Honzes Ltd be alithoYi°ed to seek cm cimemlinel?t to the 1111,11?icipal Plall al?d apph' f OY a re°ol?ing of the subject pcircel hoirei,er Co1r moll Colllicil c1re 11ot explicitly o1° ingVicitly obligated to appl•ore dull, cinleridnlew to the 1llimiei1al Plcm or arlr rezoi ing, acid fiii•ther that the 111aror grid C'onanloii Clerk be authoi•i, ed to execute cuo, docunlerit 1"eqZill"ed to effect this tYalrvf r. The Agreement of Purchase and Sale referenced in the above noted resolution called for a closing date of September 30, 2008. The closing did not occur on or before the prescribed date as the compensatory flood risk land to be transferred to the City is subject to several restrictive covenants which must be evaluated prior to acceptance of the parcel. Legal Counsel for the prospective purchaser had asked that the City not allow the Agreement to expire. They asked that the City extend the closing until November 30, 2008 so they may negotiate with the former owner the release of covenants. The following recommendation was adopted, 68 Report to Common Council Page 2 November 20, 2008 "That The City of Saint John grant an extension of the closing date for the potential sale of PID 53025, 672-675 Ashburn Road to Clear View Mobile Homes Ltd. to November 30, 2008, and that Clear View Mobile Homes Ltd. be authorized to seek an amendment to the Municipal Plan and apply for a rezoning of the subject parcel however Common Council is not explicitly or implicitly obligated to approve any amendment to the Municipal Plan or any rezoning." Clear View Mobile Homes Ltd. has had some difficulty securing CN's approval to remove the aforementioned covenants. It has requested a further extension of the closing to allow for further discussions. RECOMMENDATION: That The City of Saint John grant an extension of the closing date for the potential sale of PID 53025, 672-675 Ashburn Road to Clear View Mobile Homes Ltd. to February 26, 2009, and that Clear View Mobile Homes Ltd. be authorized to seek an amendment to the Municipal Plan and apply for a rezoning of the subject parcel however Common Council is not explicitly or implicitly obligated to approve any amendment to the Municipal Plan or any rezoning." Respectfully submitted, Ken Forrest, MCIP Commissioner Planning and Development Attachment Terrence Totten, F.C.A. City Manager 69 M & C - 2008-348 November 19, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Proposed Public Hearing Dates 2797 Loch Lomond Road, 11-25 Sewell Street and 96-124 Station Street, and 1030 Dever Road BACKGROUND: As provided in Common Council's resolution of August 3, 2004, this report indicates the rezoning and Section 39 amendment applications received and recommends an appropriate public hearing date. The frill applications are available in the Common Cleric's office and will form part of the documentation presented at the public hearing. The following applications have been received Name of Applicant AJ Mallette Sons Ltd Location 2797 Loch Lomond Road Existing Proposed Zone Zone "RS-111 ..IM1 Ocean Capital 11-25 Sev °ell Street "RM-1" Investments Moncton and 96-124 Station and " I-1" Limited Street Doug Simpson 1030 Dever Road "R-lA" -13-211 -R-211 Reason To permit a rural residential subdivision with 2(_) lots. To permit future commercial development. To permit a tN-,°o-family dwelling. 70 Report to Common Council RECOMMENDATION: Page 2. That Common Council schedule the public hearings for the rezoning applications of AJ Mallette & Sons Ltd. (2797 Loch Lomond Road), Ocean Capital Investments Moncton Limited (11-25 Sewell Street and 96-124 Station Street) and Doug Simpson (1030 Dever Road) for Monday, December 22, 2008 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber, and refer the application to the Planning Advisory Committee for report and recommendation. Respectfully submitted, hen Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development Terrence Totten, F.C.A. City Manager hF/skh 71 REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL r. All M & C - 2008 - 350 Th City fint john November 19, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Merchant Agreement Chase Paymentech Solutions BACKGROUND Chase Paymentech Solutions, on behalf of the Bank of Nova Scotia, currently processes payment card (Debit, Visa, Master Card and American Express) transactions for the City of Saint John. The existing Merchant Account currently includes transactions from the Finance Department, Building Inspection, Parking Commission and Municipal Operations. In order to continue with these services the City must enter into a Merchant Agreement with Chase Paymentech. Details of the Merchant Account can be found in the attached Application and Agreement, Schedule A and Merchant Operating Guideline. ANALYSIS This Merchant Application and Agreement was reviewed by the Legal Department and they have indicated that there are no major concerns arising from their review of the attached documents. The IT Department has also reviewed the Agreement with regards to the technical implementations and processes. IT has stated that the agreement adheres to the standards as documented by the City's Auditors, Ernst Young. 72 Report to Common Council Page 2 November 19, 2008 FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS Fees for the Merchant Agreement include a yearly rental agreement of $2,516.40. All other Merchant Agreement fees can be found in Schedule A. These funds are provided for in the Operating Budgets. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that 1. The City of Saint John enter into a "Merchant Agreement" with Chase Paymentech Solutions for the processing of payment card transactions based upon the terms and conditions attached to this report. 2. The Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary documents. Respectfully s fitted, Gr 16 rmans, CCA, C mFinance Terrence L. Totten, CA City Manager Attachments 73 H SELECT MERCHANT APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT PARTIES AND SERVICES I MCC SALES REPRESENTATIVE PHONE ESTIMATED DATE OF FIRST' PAYMENT INSTRUMENT ACCEPTANCE: SALES ID REFERRAL NUMBER PAYMENT INSTRUMENT ACCEPTANCE REQUESTED: ❑MASTERCARD ❑ VISA ❑INTERAC ❑AMERICAN EXPRESS ❑INTERAC ONLINE ❑CHASE PAYMENTECH GIFT CARD Now OR ❑ Advantage OR ❑ Custom) BUSINESS LEGAL NAME y IS YOUR BUSINESS SEASONAL? .x A ' cNw, [I YES NE 9 N MAILINGIBILLING ADDRESS CITY PROVINCE POSTAL CODE TA') . a-i of tV ~ z L 4L i TELEPHONE NUMBER , } DBA FAX # .'N) p - IC~1 Cj" i Cj Q GST # TOTAL * OF L°OCCA^TIDNS _1l - 't , - LEGAL FAX # 16 9 -y 1 / MERCHANT' O NG BUSINESS AS" NAME - . BUSINESS START DATE (MONTHPYEAR) HOW LONG AT THIS LOCATION? (7 n LOCATION DRESS (No P O ox) CITY y ` PRO~VpI~G POSTAL CODE TEHONE NUMBER fg P MA Y MERCHANT CONTACT E-MAIL ADDRESS nci TYPE OF OWNERSHIP: © SOLE OWNERSHIP El PARTNER IP ❑ fNT NTURE ❑ LLC ❑ PUBLIC COR ❑ PRI E C RP OVT. CORP ON-PROFIT ❑ OTHER 16 L~L'tj TYPE OF BUSINESS: ❑ RETAIL ❑ WHOLESALE ❑ RESTAURANT ❑ LODGING ❑ MAIL ORDER El TELEPHONE ORDER ❑ CONVENIENCE, STORE ❑ CONVENIENCE STORE WITH GAS ❑ INTERNET ❑ BUSINESS TO BUSINESS ❑ HOME-BASED Ud.O I HER LIST ALL WEBSITE ADDRESSES. LAJ W ! Ch i E) hn . C _ DESC E THE MERCHANOIS SOLD OR SERVI E PROVIDED + G, `"kr. ctrl' f CHECK METHOD OF ADVERTISING AND INCLUDE ANY MATERIALS. ❑ YELLOW PAGES AD ❑ CATALOG El DIRECT MAIL - LETTERIBROCHURE ❑ TVIRADIO C] TELEPHONE/TELEMARKETING El NEWSPAPER/MAGAZINE ADVERTISEMENT [I REFERRAL L 147ERN'ETIE-MAIL MAILJFAX CHARGEBACKIRETRIEVALS TO: ❑OUTLET Dt'bRPORATE DELIVER STATEMENTS TO. ❑ OUTLET [;J<ORPORATE DELIVER BY: ❑ MAIL ❑ E-MAIL AMERICAN EXPRESS MERCHANT # EQUIPMENT TYPE. VENT ❑ PURCHASE ❑ LEASE ❑ REPROGRAM ❑ RESOURCE ONLINE ❑ OUTLET ❑CHAIN % ANNUAL CREDIT CARD SALES GENERATED BY; IMAILI PHONE [INTERNET [CARD SWiPECrI.1 / ] [HAND-KEYED ITEMS FACE-TO-FACE %I TOTAL =100% PERCENTAGE OF CUSTOMER ORDERS DELIVERED IN: 10 DAYS [1.7 DAYS %1 [8-14 DAYS 115-30 DAYS [MORE THAN 30 DAYS %1 TOTAL = 100% NUMBER OF DAYS TO PREPARE SHIPMENTS FOR DELIVERY' TO CUSTOMER FROM DATE OF ORDER: ARE CUSTOMERS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A DEPOSIT? ❑ YES ❑ NO d by J! jg IF A DEPOSIT IS REQUIRED, WHAT PERCENT OF THE TOTAL SALE IS REQUIRED? i IF A DEPOSIT IS REQUIRED, WHAT PERCENT OF YOUR CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS REQUIRE A DEPOSIT? % MCIVISA SALES ARE DEPOSITED (CHECK ONE1` El AT DATE OF ORDER El AT DATE OF DELIVERY C3 OTHER IU III DO YOU HAVE A REFUND POLICY FOR YOUR MASTERCARDIVISAIINTERAC SALES? ❑ YES ❑ NO v Q CHECK THE APPLICABLE REFUND POLICY.. ❑ CASH ❑ EXCHANGE El STORE CREDIT El MCPVISA CREDIT ' Lj OTHER 1. NAME: TITLE RESIDENCE ADDRESS CITY HOME TELEPHONE SOCIAL INSURANCE # (OPTIONAL) DATE OF BIRTH 2. NAME TITLE RESIDENCE ADDRESS CITY HOME TELEPHONE SOCIAL INSURANCE # (OPTIONAL) DATE OF BIRTH PERCENT OF OWNERSHIP PROVINCE POSTAL CODE DRIVER'S LICENSE # (OPTIONAL IN QUEBEC) PROVINCE PERCENT OF OWNERSHIP °Je PROVINCE POSTAL CODE DRIVER'S LICENSE # (OPTIONAL IN QUEBEC) I PROVINCE MASTERCARD: VISA„ INTERNAL USE ONLY I REFERRAL SOURCE/ASSOCIATION NAME select appiicatdon 7107 74 'Personal information is collected, used and disclosed as described herein and in accordance with our applicable Pnvacy^ Policy (available at ~a a .ti .cliJSCnu aurcuee°i ,.p g or upon reques[) or othem4sc as permitted by law. nt Trademark of Paymentech, I..P.. Chase Paymentech Solutions authorized user. NAME OF FULFILLMEN } DELIVERY TIME FRAME IF USING A FULFILLMENT HOUSE, WHO OWNS THE MAJORITY OF THE INVENTORY? X ❑ MERCHANT El FULFILLMENT HOUSE FULFILLMENT HOUSE ESS r ;W CITY PROVINCE POSTAL CODE girs! W M a N! BANK NAME TRANSIT ROU I ING # o f /0 4 ACCOUNT, N MBER ~ " CONTACT PHONE NUMBER ADDRESS -39 k t e~ _ _s Id✓ CITY -S w` 4 1 To PROVINCE T K.>' 19 POSTAL L.1- E4 1-4o BANK, IF BANK OR PROCESSOR NAME' CITY PROVINCE IPOSTAL CODE ICONTACT PHONE i w I r I HAVE ANY OF THE PRINCIPALS EVER FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY? (OPTIONAL) FIRST PRINCIPAL I] YES 92"NO IF YES,DATE FILED DATE DISCHARGED SECOND PRINCIPAL ❑ YES i IF YES, DATE FILED: DATE DISCHARGED. HAVE ANY OF THE PRINCIPALS EVER MANAGED OR OWNED ANOTHER BUSINESS THAT ACCEPTED CREDIT CARDS? (OPTIONAL) FIRST PRINCIPAL ® YES M460 IF YES, BUSINESS NAME: CITYIPROVINCE SECOND PRINCIPAL 0 YES L`_Y O IF YES, BUSINESS NAME: CITYPPROVINCE FOR MERCHANT - As the person signing below on behalf of the business designated on the above Application ("Merchant"), I certify that I am an owner, partner or officer of the Merchant and have been duly authorized to sign this Merchant Application and Agreement on behalf of the Merchant. Merchant signing below hereby acknowledges that at the time of application, they have received and read this Merchant Application and Agreement. Facsimile versions of executed copies of this Agreement shall be binding and enforceable against the parties and have the same force and effect as if they were original signatures. Merchant represents and warrants that all information on this Application, and the related information submitted in conjunction with the Application, is true, complete and not misleading. The Application now belongs to Chase Paymentech Solutions ("Paymentech'°). ANY UNILATERAL ALTERATION, STRIKEOVER OR MODIFICATION TO THE PREPRINTED TEXT OR LINE ENTRIES OF THIS MERCHANT APPLICATION AND AGREEMENT SHALL BE OF NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER, AND AT PAYMENTECH'S SOLE DISCRETION, MAY RENDER THIS MERCHANT APPLICATION INVALID. Merchant and each Owner consent to Paymentech or its designees investigating and verifying the credit and financial information of, and obtaining credit reports from credit reporting agencies or credit bureaus on each of the Merchant and Owners (and this is prior written notice for so doing). If the Application is approved, subsequent credit reports may be required or used in connection with the maintenance or renewal of the Agreement, The Merchant and Owners agree that all business references, including banks, may release any and all credit and financial information to Paymentech. Merchant and each Owner expressly consent to Paymentech°s collection and use of Personal Information in accordance with our Privacy Policy and specifically as part of our credit investigation, and acknowledge that your social insurance number, date of birth and driver's license number will be used for credit matching and identity verification. Paymentech may exchange your Personal Information with financial institutions (including those party to this Agreement) and Associations for the purpose of providing you with the requested products and services and for security measures in relation to your account. MERCHANT: BUSINESS LEGAL NAME By: Individual Signature (#I from application) Title: Date. Pont Individual Name: By: Individual Signature (#2 from application) Tilde„ Dale. Print Individual Name: APPROVED. CHASE PAYMENTECH SOLUTIONS for itself and on behalf of The Bank of Nova Scotia and First Data Loan Company, Canada. By Title: Date, 75 select application 7107 SELECT MERCHANT PAYMENT CARD PROCESSING AGREEMENT THIS SELECT MERCHANT PAYMENT CARD PROCESSING AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is dated as of the Effective Date. WHEREAS CHASE PAYENTEC SOLUTIONS, , having its principal office at One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy Road, Suite 200, Toronto, Ontario, MIT 3V3 ("Paymentech," "we", "our" or "us"), for itself, and on behalf of Scotiabank and First Data Loan Company, Canada ("FDLCC") is authorized to process the payment card transactions listed on Schedule A; and WHEREAS Scotiabank is a party to this Agreement for the purposes of Visa acceptance and FDLCC is a party to this Agreement for the purposes of MasterCard acceptance; and WHEREAS ("Merchant," "you" or "your"), wishes to accept payment cards from its customers for the sale or lease of goods or services offered by Merchant; ACCORDINGLY, in consideration of the mutual promises made and the mutual benefits to be derived from this Agreement, Paymentech, Member (defined below), and Merchant agree to the following terms and conditions intending to be legally bound: 1. Merchant's Acceptance of Cards. 1.1 Exclusivity. You will tender to us Transaction Data generated from all your Transactions via electronic data transmission according to our formats and procedures. You will not use the services of any bank, corporation, entity, or person other than Paymentech for authorization or processing of Transaction Data throughout the term of this Agreement, except for your divisions, products, or business lines specified in your account application or for which we otherwise agree in writing not to process. 1.2 Certain Payment Acceptance Policies. You will honour without discrimination valid Payment Instruments properly tendered for use. Each Payment Transaction and Conveyed Transaction must be evidenced by a singleTransaction Data record completed with (i) the transaction date; (ii) a brief description of the goods or services sold, returned, or cancelled; (iii) the price of the goods or services, including applicable taxes, or amount of any credit or adjustment; (iv) the Customer name; (v) your name in a manner recognizable to Customers; (vi) your address; (vii) a customer service telephone number; (viii) any applicable terms and conditions of the Transaction; (ix) the exact date any free trials end; and (x) any other information which the applicable Payment Brand may require. You shall not impose any surcharge or finance charge on a Payment Transaction or Conveyed Transaction or otherwise require the Customer to pay the fees payable by you under this Agreement if prohibited by the applicable Payment Brand. You shall not set a dollar amount above or below which you refuse to honour otherwise valid Payment Instruments in violation of Payment Brand Rules. With respect to any Payment Transaction or Conveyed Transaction for which a Payment Instrument being used is not physically presented, such as in any on-line, mail, telephone, or pre-authorized transaction, you must (i) have notified us on your application or otherwise in writing of your intention to conduct such Payment Transactions and Conveyed Transactions and secured our agreement to accept them, and (ii) have reasonable procedures in place to ensure that each Payment Transaction and Conveyed Transaction is made to a purchaser who actually is the Customer or the authorized user of the Payment Instrument. Notwithstanding the foregoing, you acknowledge that under certain Payment Brand Rules, you cannot rebut a Chargeback where the Customer disputes making the purchase without an electronic record (for example, "swiping", or "electronically reading" a Payment Instrument) or physical imprint of the Payment Instrument. 1.3 Operating Guide; Payment Brand Rules. You agree to comply with the operating guide attached to this Agreement, as amended from time to time ("Operating Guide"), and all Payment Brand Rules as may be applicable to you and in effect from time to time as published (on a website or otherwise) by any Payment Brand or of which you have been otherwise informed, and with such other procedures as we may from time to time prescribe for the creation or transmission of Transaction Data. We may modify and supplement the Operating Guide in order to comply with requirements imposed by the Payment Brand Rules, applicable law, and our operating procedures. You acknowledge that you have received a copy of the Operating Guide at or prior to your execution of this Agreement, and that you can also view the Operating Guide on-line at the Chase Paymentech Solutions Internet website ( //www.chasepavment(' ch&4). 1.4 Requirements for Transactions. As to all Payment Transactions and Conveyed Transactions you tender to us for processing, you represent and warrant that, to the best of your knowledge: (1) The Transaction represents payment or refund of payment, for the bona fide sale or lease of the goods, services, or both, which you have provided in the ordinary course of your business, and the Transaction is not submitted on behalf of a third party. (2) The Transaction represents an obligation of the Customer for the amount of the Transaction. (3) The Transaction does not involve any element of credit for payment of a previously-dishonoured Payment Instrument or for any other purpose, except payment for a current transaction and, except in the case of approved installment or pre-payment plans, the goods have been shipped or services actually rendered to the Customer. (4) The Transaction is free from any material alteration not authorized by the Customer. (5) The amount charged to the Customer that is represented in the Transaction is not subject to any dispute, setoff, or counterclaim. (6) Neither you nor your employee has advanced any cash to the Customer (except as authorized by the Payment Brand Rules) or to yourself or to any of your representatives, agents, or employees in connection with the Transaction, nor have you accepted payment for effecting credits to a Customer. This sub-section (6) does not apply to Interac Payment Transactions. (7) The goods or services related to each Transaction are your sole property and you are free to sell them. (8) You have made no representations or agreements for the issuance of refunds except as it states in your return/cancellation policy, which has been previously submitted to us in writing as provided in Section 3. SA 7107 76 (9) Any credit transaction submitted to us represents a refund or adjustment to a Transaction previously submitted. (10) You have no knowledge or notice of information that would lead you to believe that the enforceability or collectibility of the subject Transaction is in any manner impaired. The Transaction is in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. You have originated the Transaction in compliance with this Agreement and the applicable Payment Brand Rules. (11) For a Transaction where the Customer pays in installments or on a deferred payment plan, a Transaction Data record has been prepared separately for each installment transaction or deferred payment on the date(s) the Customer agreed to be charged. All installments and deferred payments, whether or not they have been submitted to us for processing, shall be deemed to be a part of the original Transaction. 2. Authorizations. 2.1 Obtaining Authorizations. You are required to obtain authorization/approval codes through Paymentech in accordance with this Agreement, for all Payment Transactions and Conveyed Transactions. You acknowledge that authorization/approval code of a Payment Transaction or Conveyed Transaction indicates only that credit is available for such Transaction at the time the authorization is given, and it does not constitute a representation from us, or from a Payment Brand that a particular Payment Transaction or Conveyed Transaction is in fact a valid or undisputed transaction entered into by the actual Customer or an authorized user of the Payment Instrument. 2.2 Lack of Authorization. We reserve the right to refuse to process any Transaction Data presented by you (i) if you do not record a proper authorization/approval code, (ii) if we reasonably determine that the amount represented by the Transaction Data is or will become uncollectible from the Customer to which the Transaction would otherwise be charged, or (iii) if we determine that the Transaction Data was prepared in violation of any provision of this Agreement. 3. Refunds and Adiustments. 3.1 Disclosure of Refund Policy. You are required to maintain a fair policy with regard to the return/cancellation of merchandise or services and adjustment of Transactions. You are required to disclose your retum/cancellation policy to us on your application. Your return/cancellation policy must be disclosed to your customers. 3.2 Changes to Policy. Any change in your return/cancellation policy must be submitted in writing to us not less than 14 days prior to the effective date of such change. We reserve the right to refuse to process any Transaction Data made subject to a revised return/cancellation policy of which we have not been notified in advance. 3.3 Procedure for Refunds/Adjustments. If you allow a price adjustment, return of merchandise or cancellation of services in connection with a Payment Transaction, you will prepare and deliver to us Transaction Data reflecting such refund/adjustment within 3 days of receiving the Customer's request for such refund/adjustment. The amount of the refund/adjustment cannot exceed the amount shown as the total on the original Transaction Data except by the exact amount required to reimburse the Customer for postage that the Customer paid to return merchandise. You are not allowed to accept cash or any other payment or consideration from a Customer in return for preparing a refund to be deposited to the Customer's account nor may you give cash refunds to a Customer in connection with a Payment Transaction, unless required by law. 4. Settlement. 4.1 Submission of Transaction Data. You must transmit your Payment Transactions to us no later than the next business day immediately following the day that such Transaction Data is originated. Unless otherwise indicated on Schedule A, you will be solely responsible for all communication expenses required to accept the transmission of Transaction Data. 4.2 Merchant's Settlement Account. In order to receive funds from Paymentech, you must maintain a Settlement Account at an institution(s) that is a member of the Canadian Payments Association, the details of which are indicated in Schedule A and the Pre- Authorized Debit Agreement. You are solely liable for all fees, costs and expenses associated with your Settlement Account and for all overdrafts. You authorize Paymentech to initiate electronic credit and debit entries and adjustments to your Settlement Account for all obligations arising under this Agreement or resulting from your transaction of business with us, at any time without regard to the source of any monies in the Settlement Account(s), in accordance with the PAD Agreement. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY IN THE PAD AGREEMENT, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT THIS AGREEMENT MAY BE TERMINATED IMMEDIATELY BY PAYMENTECH WITHOUT NOTICE IF YOU REVOKE YOUR CONSENT TO DEBIT YOUR SETTLEMENT ACCOUNT UNDER THE PAD AGREEMENT. We will not be liable for any of your losses or expenses whatsoever resulting from delays in receipt of funds or errors in Settlement Account entries caused by third parties, including without limitation, delays or errors by either the Payment Brands or your bank. 4.3 Conveyed Transactions. You cannot submit any Conveyed Transaction for processing by Paymentech unless you have a valid agreement in effect with the applicable Payment Brand. Upon your transmission of such Conveyed Transaction to us, we will forward the Conveyed Transaction to the appropriate Payment Brand. Payment of the proceeds due you will be governed by whatever agreement you have with that Payment Brand, and we do not bear any responsibility for their performance. If your agreement with a Payment Brand requires such Payment Brand's consent for us to perform the services contemplated by this Agreement, you are responsible for obtaining that consent. 4.4 Transfer of Settlement Funds. For all Payment Transactions, immediately upon our receipt of your Transaction Data, we will process your Transaction Data to facilitate the funds transfer between the various Payment Brands and you for Payment Transactions. Promptly after we receive credit for such Transaction Data, we will provide provisional credit to the Settlement Account for the proceeds. The proceeds payable to you shall be equal to the amounts received by us in respect of your Transaction Data minus the sum of the following: all fees, charges and discounts set forth in Schedule A, all adjustments and Chargebacks, all equipment charges (if any), all Customer refunds, returns, and adjustments, all Reserve Account amounts, and any fees, charges, fines, assessments, SA 7107 77 penalties, or other liabilities that may be imposed on us or the Member from time to time by the Payment Brands, and all related costs and expenses incurred by us. You agree that all such fees, charges, discounts, adjustments, and all other amounts are due and payable by you at the time the related services are rendered to you; that all Reserve Account amounts are due and payable by you upon our request; and that the related Chargebacks, Customer refunds and adjustments, fees, charges, fines, assessments, penalties, and all other liabilities are due and payable by you when we receive notice thereof from the Payment Brands or otherwise pursuant to Section 4. In the event we do not deduct such amounts from the proceeds payable to you, you agree to pay all such amounts to us. Alternatively, at our option, we may debit the Settlement Account(s) (in accordance with the terms hereof and the PAD Agreement) for such amounts. 4.5 Negative Amounts. To the extent the proceeds from Payment Transactions do not represent sufficient credits or the Settlement Account does not have a sufficient balance to pay amounts due or reasonably anticipated to become due under this Agreement, we may pursue one or more of the following options: (i) demand and receive immediate payment for such amounts; (ii) debit the Settlement Account for the amount of the negative balance; (iii) withhold your settlement payments until all amounts are paid; (iv) delay presentation of your refunds until you make a payment to us of a sufficient amount to cover the negative balance; and (v) pursue any remedies we may have at law or in equity. Furthermore, if the amount represented by your Transaction Data on any day is negative due to refunds/credits being submitted by you in excess of your proceeds from Transaction Data, you are required to provide us with sufficient funds prior to the submission of the Transaction Data so as to prevent the occurrence of a negative balance. 4.6 Delinquency/Merchant Fraud. If (j,) there is a material, adverse change in your financial condition or your payment record with creditors, (ii) you are in material default of this Agreement, (iii) you change your billing practice in relation to shipment of merchandise or fulfillment of service or change refund procedures currently in place, and you fail to notify us in advance, or (iv) you are receiving excessive Chargebacks (as defined in Section 7.2 below), (v) you significantly alter the nature of your business or product lines, (vi) we have reasonable grounds to believe that we may be or become liable to third parties for the provisional credit extended to you, or that you may be liable to your Customers, or the Payment Brands, or (vii) we have reasonable grounds to believe that we may be subject to any additional liabilities, including, without limitation, any fines, fees, or penalties assessed against us by any of the Payment Brands, arising out of or relating to your Payment Transactions, your Chargebacks, or your failure to comply with this Agreement, any of the Payment Brand Rules or the Security Guidelines (as defined in Section 12), we may temporarily suspend payments to you during our investigation of the issue and/or designate an amount of funds that we must maintain in order to protect us against the risk of existing or anticipated Chargebacks, and to satisfy your other obligations under this Agreement (such funds being hereinafter referred to as the "Reserve Account"), which may be funded in the same manner as provided for negative balances in subsection 4.5. The Reserve Account will contain sufficient funds to cover any unbilled processing costs plus our estimated exposure based on reasonable criteria for Chargebacks, returns, unshipped merchandise and/or unfulfilled services, and additional liabilities anticipated under this Agreement. We may (but are not required to) apply funds in the Reserve Account toward, and set off any funds that would otherwise be payable to the Merchant against, the satisfaction of any amounts which are or become due from you pursuant to this Agreement. The Reserve Account will not bear interest, and you will have no right or interest in the fiords in the Reserve Account; provided that upon satisfaction of all of your obligations under this Agreement, we will pay to you any funds then remaining in the Reserve Account. Any funds in the Reserve Account may be commingled with other funds, and need not be maintained in a separate account. Effective upon our establishment of a Reserve Account, you irrevocably grant to us a security interest in any interest you may have or acquire in any and all funds, together with the proceeds thereof, that may at any time be in our possession and would otherwise be payable to you pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. You agree to execute and deliver to us such instruments and documents (including, without limitation, security agreements and releases) that we may reasonably request (i) to perfect and confirm the security interest and right of setoff set forth in this Agreement, and (ii) in connection with any return of Reserve Account funds. 5. Accounting. We will supply a detailed statement reflecting the activity for your merchant account(s) by on-line access (or otherwise if we agree). We will not be responsible for any error that you do not bring to our attention within ninety (90) days from the date-of such statement. 6. Retrieval Requests. 6.1 Records. You agree to store original documentation of each Transaction for at least twelve (12) months from the date of such Transaction, and to retain copies of all Transaction Data for at least 18 months from the date of such Transaction. You may not charge a fee to your Customers for the creation or storage of such copies. We may, at our discretion, require you to deliver copies of Transaction Data to us rather than storing it. 6.2 Response to Retrieval Requests. We will send you any Retrieval Request that we cannot satisfy with the information we have on file concerning any Transaction. In response, you must provide us in writing by registered or overnight mail or by confirmed fax (or by other means as agreed by Paymentech) the resolution of your investigation of such Retrieval Request and include legible copies of any documentation required by the Retrieval Request within seven (7) business days after we send it to you (or such shorter time as the Payment Brand Rules may require). Once we receive your response, we will take the appropriate steps in a timely manner to reduce the probability of the Customer's bank sending an unjustified Chargeback. You acknowledge that your failure to fulfill a Retrieval Request in accordance with Payment Brand Rules may result in an irreversible Chargeback. 7. Chargebacks. 7.1 Chargeback Reasons. You may receive a Chargeback from a Customer or a Payment Brand for a number of reasons under the Payment Brand Rules. The following are some of the most common reasons for Chargebacks: (1) Your failure to issue a refund to a Customer upon the return or non-delivery of goods or services. (2) An authorization/approval code was required and not obtained. (3) The Transaction Data is prepared incorrectly or fraudulently. SA 7107 78 (4) We did not receive your response to a Retrieval Request within seven (7) business days or any shorter time period required by the Payment Brand Rules. (5) The Customer disputes the Transaction or the signature on the Transaction Data, or claims that the Transaction is subject to a set-off, defence or counterclaim. (6) The Customer refuses to make payment for a Transaction because in the Customer's good faith opinion, a claim or complaint has not been resolved, or has been resolved by you but in an unsatisfactory manner. (7) The credit or debit card comprising the Payment Instrument was not actually presented at the time of the Payment Transaction or you failed to obtain an electronic record or a physical imprint of such Payment Instrument, and the Customer denies making the purchase. The Merchant acknowledges that, under these circumstances, the fact that an authorization/approval code was obtained does not mean that a particular Transaction is in fact a valid or undisputed transaction entered into by the actual Customer or an authorized user of the Payment Instrument. (8) As of the date specified by any Payment Brand, your failure to use Equipment which electronically reads Payment Instruments comprising debit or credit cards with an embedded microcomputer EMV chip ("Chip Payment Instrument"), and a Chip Payment Instrument used for a Payment Transaction is a lost, stolen, counterfeit or otherwise fraudulent Payment Instrument. 7.2 Excessive Chargebacks. If we determine that you are receiving an excessive amount of Chargebacks, in addition to our other remedies under this Agreement we may take the following actions: (1) review your internal procedures relating to acceptance of Payment Instruments and notify you of new procedures you should adopt (at your sole discretion) in order to avoid future Chargebacks; (2) notify you of a new rate we will charge you to process your Chargebacks, (3) collect from you (pursuant to subsection 4.6) an amount reasonably determined by us to be sufficient to cover anticipated Chargebacks and related fees and fines; or (4) terminate the Agreement with written notice of termination. For purposes of this Agreement, an excessive number of Chargebacks means one Chargeback per 100 Transaction Data records or the total dollar amount of Chargebacks is greater than or equal to three (3) percent of the total dollar amount of Transaction Data for any 30-day period. The foregoing percentages are subject to change in accordance with the Payment Brand Rules. You also agree to pay any and all Payment Brand fees and fines assessed against you or against Paymentech or Member relating to your violation of the Agreement, the Operating Guide, or the Payment Brand Rules with respect to your Transaction Data or, with respect to excessive Chargebacks under this Section. 7.3 Claims of Customers. You have full liability if any Transaction Data for which we have given the Settlement Account provisional credit is the subject of a Chargeback. Subsequently, you are allowed to resubmit applicable Transaction Data for a second presentation, but only in accordance with Payment Brand Rules. To the extent that we have paid or may be called upon to pay a Chargeback, refund or adjustment for or on the account of a Customer and you do not reimburse us as provided in this Agreement, then for the purpose of our obtaining reimbursement of such sums paid or anticipated to be paid, we have all of the rights and remedies of such Customer under applicable federal, provincial or local law and you authorize us to assert any and all such claims in our own name for and on behalf of any such Customer individually or all such Customers as a class. 8. Advertising. Wherever you accept Payment Instruments, you will inform the public of the Payment Instruments that you honour. However, you may not indicate that any of the Payment Brands endorses your goods or services. 79 assessments and fines) that Paymentech would have received during the months remaining in the term of the Agreement based upon your representations contained in Schedule A, or (b) if we have at such time been processing all of your Transaction Data for at least six (6) consecutive months, an amount calculated by multiplying the average monthly fees (net of Payment Brand fees, interchange, assessments and fines) from the immediately preceding six (6) months by the number of months remaining in the term of the Agreement. Such amount will be funded, to the extent possible, according to the same methods for collecting amounts due under subsection 4.5 of this Agreement. We may terminate this Agreement at any time upon written notice to you as a result of any of the following events: (i) any non-compliance with this Agreement, the Payment Brand Rules or the Operating Guide, which is not cured within thirty (30) days of our notice to you, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement and except that no cure period is allowed for termination based on Merchant fraud or failure to fund a Reserve Account; (ii) any voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving you; (iii) Paymentech deems you to be financially insecure; (iv) you or any person owning or controlling your business is or becomes listed in the MATCH file (Member Alert to Control High-Risk Merchants) or similar database maintained by the Payment Brands or any Payment Brand notifies us that it is no longer willing to accept your Transaction Data, (v) you revoke your consent to debit your account(s) under the PAD Agreement (as set out in subsection 4.2), or (vi) for a period of more than 60 consecutive days, you do not transmit Transaction Data to us. 10.3 Account Activity After Termination. Termination does not affect either party's respective rights and obligations under this Agreement as to Transaction Data submitted on or before the date of termination, If this Agreement is terminated, our right of direct access to the Settlement Account will survive termination until such time as all credits and debits permitted by this Agreement and the PAD agreement and related to Transactions prior to the effective date of termination have been made. If you submit Transaction Data to us after the date of termination for which you have given us notice, we may, at our discretion, process such Transaction Data. In the event that we do so, it shall be done in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. Upon notice of any termination of this Agreement, we may estimate the aggregate dollar amount of Chargebacks and other obligations and liabilities that we reasonably anticipate subsequent to termination, and you agree to immediately deposit such amount, or we may withhold such amount from your credits, in order to establish a Reserve Account pursuant to and governed by the terms and conditions of subsection 4.6. 11. Indemnification. 11.1 Paymentech. We agree to indemnify you and your affiliates, officers, directors, employees, and agents from any losses, liabilities, and damages of any and every kind (including, without limitation, your costs, expenses, and reasonable legal fees) arising out of any Customer complaint or Chargeback related to (i) any failure by us to properly safeguard the Customer's account information, (ii) our failure to deliver funds processed by us in accordance with subsection 4.4 which relate to payments due from us for Transaction Data, or (iii) any voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding by or against us. This indemnification does not apply to any claim or complaint relating to your failure to resolve a payment dispute concerning merchandise or services sold by you or your negligence or wilful misconduct. 11.2 Merchant. You agree to indemnify Paymentech, Member, the Payment Brands, and each of their respective affiliates, officers, directors, employees, and agents from any losses, liabilities, and damages of any and every kind (including, without limitation, our costs, expenses, and reasonable legal fees) arising out of any claim, complaint, or Chargeback (i) made or claimed by a Customer with respect to any Transaction Data submitted by you, (ii) caused by your non-compliance with this Agreement, the Operating Guide, or the Payment Brand Rules, including any breach of a representation or warranty made by you, or (iii) resulting from any voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding by or against you. The indemnification provided for in this Section does not apply to any claim or complaint to the extent it is caused by Paymentech's own negligence or wilful misconduct. 12. No Disclosure of Customer Information. You will exercise reasonable care to prevent disclosure of any Customer Information, other than (1) to your agents and contractors for the purpose of assisting you in completing a Payment Transaction, (ii) to the applicable Payment Brand, or (iii) as specifically required by law. You agree not to use any Customer Information other than for the sole purpose of completing the Payment Transaction authorized by the Customer for which the information was provided to you, or as specifically allowed by the Payment Rules or required by law. You are prohibited from storing CVV2 or CVC2, magnetic stripe track data, and AVS and PIN data. You will store all media containing allowed Customer Information, currently limited to cardholder name, cardholder number and expiration date, in an unreadable format wherever it is stored and in an area limited to selected personnel on a "need to know" basis only and, prior to discarding any material containing Customer Information, you will destroy it in a manner rendering the account numbers unreadable. If at any time you determine that Customer Information has been compromised, you will notify Paymentech immediately and assist in providing notification to the proper parties as we deem necessary. Merchant information may be shared by us with our affiliates subject to the provisions of this Agreement and Payment Brand Rules. You agree to comply with all security standards and guidelines that may be published from time to time by any Payment Brand, including, without limitation, the MasterCard Site Data Protection Program ("SDP"), and the Visa Canada Account Information Security Program ("AIS"), (described in more detail in the Operating Guide) (collectively, the "Security Guidelines"). All Service Providers you use must be recognized by Visa as AIS compliant service providers and payment applications you use must be recognized by Visa as compliant with the Payment Application Best Practices ("PABP"). You understand that failure to comply with the SDP, AIS,or Payment Brand requirements, or other Security Guidelines, or the compromise of any Customer account information may result in assessments, fines, and/or penalties by the Payment Brands, and you agree to indemnify and reimburse us immediately for any assessment, fine or penalty imposed on us or the Member due to any such event or your breach of this Section, and any related loss, cost or expense incurred by us. You further agree to (i) exercise reasonable due diligence to ensure that all of your Service Providers, agents, business partners, contractors and subcontractors maintain compliance with the Security Guidelines established by SDP and AIS, and (ii) provide us upon our request with the assessment of your compliance with Security Guidelines as required by the Payment Brands. If any Payment Brand requires an audit of you or any of your Service Providers, agents, business partners, contractors, or SA 7107 80 subcontractors due to a data security compromise event or suspected event, you agree to cooperate with such audit and agree to pay for the costs and expenses related to such audit, and our reasonable costs relating to such audit, including legal fees. 13. Information About Merchant's Business. 13.lAdditional Financial Information. To the extent not available from public sources, you agree to fumish us within five (5) days of our request (i) your most recently prepared financial statements and credit information and (ii) if applicable, your three most recent filings with the Ontario Securities Commission or other applicable Canadian securities regulator. 13.20ther Information. With prior notice and during your normal business hours, our duly authorized representatives may visit your business premises and may examine only that part of your books and records that pertain to your Transaction Data. You agree to provide us at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice of your intent to change your product line or services, or your trade name, or the manner in which you accept Payment Instruments. If we determine such a change is material to our relationship with you, we may refuse to process Transaction Data made subsequent to the change. You agree to provide us with prompt written notice if you are the subject of any voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy or insolvency petition or proceeding. You will also provide us with prompt written notice of (i) any adverse change in your financial condition, (ii) any planned or anticipated liquidation or substantial change to the basic nature of your business, (iii) any transfer or sale of any substantial part (25% or more in value) of your total assets, or, (iv) if you or your parent is not a corporation whose shares are listed on a national securities exchange or on the over-the-counter market, any change in the control or ownership of you or your parent. You will also notify us of any judgement, writ, attachment, distraint, execution or levy against any substantial part (25% or more in value) of your total assets not later than three (3) days after you obtain knowledge of any such judgement, writ, attachment, distraint, execution or levy. 14. Disclaimer; Limitation of Damages. Subject to Section 5, we will, at our own expense, correct any data to the extent that errors have been caused by us, or by malfunctions of our Intellectual Property or machines. Under no circumstances will Paymentech's financial responsibility for Paymentech's failure of performance under this Agreement exceed the total fees paid to Paymentech under this Agreement (net of Payment Brand fees, interchange, assessments, and fines) for the six (6) months prior to the time the liability arose. EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEMENT IN NO EVENT WILL ANY PARTY, ITS RESPECTIVE OFFICERS, DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, OR AFFILIATES OR SPONSORING BANKS, BE LIABLE FOR SPECIAL,INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES OR ANY LOSS, THEFT, DISAPPEARANCE, OR DAMAGE TO DATA TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT. PAYMENTECH AND MEMBER HEREBY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL OTHER REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICES, PRODUCTS AND EQUIPMENT PROVIDED HEREUNDER, WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY WARRANTY OR CONDITION REGARDING QUALITY, SUITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR USE FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR OTHERWISE (REGARDLESS OF ANY COURSE OF DEALING, CUSTOM OR USAGE OF TRADE). 15. Stored Value Transactions. 15.1 Cards & Packaging. If indicated on Schedule A, you are required to purchase cards from us for your Stored Value Transaction program ("SV Program"). If you are obligated to purchase cards from us or if you elect to do so anyway, we will arrange for the card production and may, at our option, invoice you therefore, in lieu of electronically debiting your account. Any such invoice will be payable upon receipt. Cards, packaging and point-of-purchase marketing materials are available and priced on a per bundle basis, based on current rates. All production and delivery timeframes and costs provided by us are estimates only and we do not guarantee any specific date of delivery or price for cards produced by third parties. You are responsible for all production costs and delivery charges for cards. The form and content of all cards will be subject to our approval. 15.2 Compliance and Warranties. You are solely responsible for complying with all applicable laws relating to your Payment Instruments for Stored Value Transactions ("SV Payment Instruments") and you agree to indemnify and hold us, the Payment Brands, and their respective affiliates, officers, directors, employees and agents harmless from any loss, damage or claim relating to or arising out of any failure to comply with applicable laws in connection with your SV Program. NEITHER THIS AGREEMENT NOR ANY DOCUMENTATION FURNISHED UNDER IT IS INTENDED TO EXPRESS OR IMPLY ANY WARRANTY BY US THAT THE SERVICES WILL FUNCTION WITHOUT INTERRUPTION OR ERRORS. ANY SECURITY MECHANISMS INCORPORATED IN THE SERVICES HAVE INHERENT LIMITATIONS, AND YOU MUST INDEPENDENTLY DETERMINE THAT THE SUCH MECHANISMS ADEQUATELY MEET YOUR SECURITY AND RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS. BY USING THE SERVICES, YOU REPRESENT THAT YOU HAVE SO DETERMINED. 15.3 Indemnity. In the event of any loss, theft, disappearance of or damage to data that is transmitted electronically in connection with the SV Program, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless Paymentech, the Payment Brands, and their respective affiliates, officers, directors, employees and agents, with respect to such. You are solely responsible for monitoring the legal developments applicable to the operation of your SV Program and ensuring that your SV Program complies fully with such requirements as in effect from time to time. Merchant acknowledges that Paymentech cannot reasonably be expected to monitor and interpret the laws applicable to its diverse customer base, and has no responsibility to monitor or interpret laws applicable to Merchant's business. 15.4 Fraud. You hereby agree (i) that you are responsible for ensuring that all SV Payment Instruments require activation at the point of sale; (ii) to provide notification in writing to Paymentech of any fraud losses by type by fifteen days following the end of each calendar quarter; (iii) that you will be solely responsible for any and all value adding and fraud losses and expenses relating to or arising from your SV Program; (iv) to discourage transportation of groups of sequentially numbered SV Payment Instruments; and (v) to deactivate or otherwise remove all value from SV Payment Instruments that have been compromised. You shall be responsible for SA 7107 81 any fraudulent transactions involving your SV Payment Instruments, including, without limitation, the unauthorized activation of SV Payment Instruments, reloading of existing SV Payment Instruments (whether pursuant to a manual telephone order or otherwise) with additional value, or the unauthorized replication of SV Payment Instruments or SV Payment Instrument data for fraudulent transactions. 16. Intellectual PropeLV. We retain all ownership and copyright interest in and to any and all Intellectual Property, computer programs, related documentation, technology, know how and processes developed by us, and provided in connection with this Agreement (collectively, the "Intellectual Property"), and we grant you a non-exclusive license to use the Intellectual Property for the limited purpose of performing under this Agreement. Unless otherwise provided in a separate agreement between you and us, any equipment, terminals or machinery provided by us but not developed by Paymentech, is being licensed or purchased by you directly from the manufacturer or developer of such machinery or Intellectual Property. You acknowledge that the license granted herein is limited to your own use exclusively and that you do not have the right to sub-license any of the Intellectual Property in either their original or modified form. You agree that you will not reverse-engineer, disassemble or decompile the Intellectual Property. Merchant shall not give any third party, except Merchant's employees, access to the Intellectual Property without our prior written consent. 17. Equipment. 17.1 Merchant-Provided/Owned Equipment. If you use Equipment that is not provided by us, you must ensure that it complies with Payment Brand requirements, including security and chip functionality requirements, at all times. You will supply us with any certification of compliance as requested from time to time by the Payment Brands. 17.2 Paymentech Provided/Owned Equipment. If you use Equipment provided by us or by a designated service provider, we will arrange for your Equipment to be delivered. The Equipment, including terminals we provide, are our property and will not become a fixture under any circumstances. You agree to reimburse us for any loss, damage or expense resulting from another person obtaining a right or an interest in any of our terminals. You do not have the right to sub-lease the Equipment. If your Equipment is lost or stolen you agree to notify us immediately. You are responsible for any loss, theft or damage to any Equipment we have provided to you, except for normal wear and tear. You agree to allow us to inspect your Equipment periodically and, at our option, repair it. If we ask you, you will tell us where each terminal is at any time and who is in possession of it. We have the right to replace our Equipment with any other type of Equipment if we believe it is necessary. 17.3 Installation of Equipment. You agree to install and activate such Equipment in accordance with our procedures. If you need to move any Equipment to another location after it has been installed, or if multiple pieces of Equipment are being moved or exchanged, you will notify us in advance and pay any expenses to have it moved. Prior to installing the Equipment in your place of business, you will ensure compliance of all electrical, communication, and other physical facilities with all applicable laws and regulations that relate to the installation of the Equipment. Unless we tell you that we are ordering telecommunications facilities or you have made some other arrangement with us for them, you will order the telecommunications facilities needed to link the Equipment with our network. You will pay all costs associated with this. 17.4 Using the Equipment. You will use all Equipment according to our procedures and applicable laws. You acknowledge that Equipment can be used for transactions and services that are not covered under this Agreement or in any other agreements you have with us (such as communicating with issuers of other types of Payment Instruments). You agree that we are not responsible for suchTransaction Data or for any failure ofa terminal to communicate with other persons, including other Payment Brands. You may upgrade your Equipment to another type during the term of the Agreement, so long as the Equipment is certified to communicate with our networks. You may have to pay an upgrade fee and/or pay a higher fee. 17.5 Canceling Your Equipment Rental. You can cancel the rental of Equipment from us at any time by returning the Equipment (or any portion or piece) we sent to you. If you return the Equipment less than 12 months after the date we shipped it to you, you agree to pay a terminal service charge, unless you have negotiated seasonal pricing. The amount of this service charge is equal to 18 months rent on your Equipment (or attributable to that portion or piece of the Equipment that you are canceling), including applicable taxes, minus the rent for that portion or piece of Equipment that you have already paid to us. You will owe us fees until you return our Equipment to us and we receive it. 18 Miscellaneous. 18.1 Taxes. Unless you are otherwise exempt, you agree to pay any taxes imposed on the services, Equipment and Intellectual Property, supplies, and other goods purchased or tangible property provided under this Agreement, and you authorize us to increase the amount we collect from you to reflect any and all assessments or increases in the sales, use, excise, goods and services, value added, occupational, property, lease, or other taxes imposed on such sale or lease of services, tangible property, Intellectual Property, Equipment, supplies, and other goods purchased. 18.2 Application and Credit Check. You represent and warrant that all statements made on your Application for this Agreement are true as of the date of your execution of this Agreement. Your signature on this Agreement authorizes us to perform any credit check deemed necessary with respect to Merchant and its directors, officers, affiliates, principals and guarantors. 18.3 Section Headings. The section headings of this Agreement are for convenience only and do not define, limit, or describe the scope or intent of this Agreement. 18.4 Assignment. We cannot assign this Agreement without your prior written consent, except that we may assign this Agreement to an entity qualified under Payment Brand Rules to perform our obligations under this Agreement. You cannot assign or transfer your rights or delegate your responsibilities under this Agreement without our prior written consent: $A 7107 82 18.5 Parties. This Agreement binds you and us and our respective heirs, representatives, successors (including those by merger and acquisition), and permitted assigns. You represent and warrant that your execution of and performance under this Agreement (i) in no way breaches, contravenes, violates or in any manner conflicts with any of your other legal obligations, including, without limitation, your corporate charter or similar document or any agreement between you and any third party or affiliated entity; and (ii) has been duly authorized by all necessary action and does not require any consent or other action by or in respect of any third party; and that the person(s) signing this Agreement on your behalf is duly authorized to do so. In providing services to you, we will not be acting in the capacity of your agent, partner, or joint venturer, and we are acting as an independent contractor. Each party agrees that any other party may publicly disclose, through press releases or otherwise, the existence of the business relationship that is the subject of this Agreement. Any such permitted disclosure may identify the parties by name but shall not, without the prior written consent of the non-disclosing party, include any of the terms of this Agreement. 18.6 Severability. Should any provision of this Agreement be determined to be invalid or unenforceable under any law, rule, or regulation, including any Payment Brand Rule, such determination will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of this Agreement. 18.7 Waivers. No term or condition of this Agreement may be waived except pursuant to a written waiver executed by the party against whom such waiver is sought to be enforced. 18.8 Entire Agreement. The Payment Brand Rules, Operating Guide, Application, and all schedules and attachments to this Agreement are made a part of this Agreement for all purposes. This Agreement represents the entire understanding between Merchant and Paymentech with respect to the matters contained herein. This Agreement shall prevail over the terms of any agreement governing the Settlement Account. 18.9 Notices. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, all notices must be given in writing and either hand delivered, faxed, or mailed first class, postage prepaid (and wili be deemed to be given when so delivered or mailed) to the addresses set forth below or to such other address as any party may from time to time specify to the other parties in writing. 18.10 Governing Law; Waiver of Jury Trial. This Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario without reference to conflict of laws provisions. Any action, proceeding, litigation, or mediation relating to or arising from this Agreement must be brought, held, or otherwise occur exclusively in Toronto, Canada, and the parties hereby attorn to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of Ontario. The non-prevailing party in any such proceeding will reimburse the prevailing party the reasonable legal fees, and court costs incurred by the prevailing party in connection with such proceeding. You agree to indemnify and hold harmless Paymentech, its affiliates, officers, directors, employees and agents for all costs, expenses and reasonable legal fees arising in connection with the enforcement by Paymentech of your obligations under this Agreement. THE PARTIES HEREBY KNOWINGLY, VOLUNTARILY, AND INTENTIONALLY WAIVE ANY RIGHTS EITHER OF THEM MAY HAVE TO A TRIAL BY JURY IN RESPECT OF ANY LITIGATION BASED ON, ARISING OUT OF, OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT. 18.11 Compliance with Laws, Regulations and Privacy Policy. Each party shall comply with all laws and regulations and Payment Brand Rules applicable to the operation of its business, including without limitation any applicable privacy laws. A copy of Paymentech's privacy policy is available on its intemet website. 18.12 Force Majeure. No party will be liable for delays in processing or other non-performance caused by such events as fires, telecommunications, utility or power failures, equipment failures, labour strife, riots, war, terrorist attack, non-performance of our vendors or suppliers, acts of God, or other causes over which the respective party has no reasonable control, except that nothing in this Section 18.12 will affect or excuse your liabilities and obligations for Chargebacks, refunds, or unfulfilled products and services. 18.13 French Language. THE PARTIES HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE REQUIRED THIS AGREEMENT AND ALL RELATED DOCUMENTS TO BE DRAWN UP IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. LES PARTIES RECONNAISSENT AVOIR DEMANDS QUE LE PRESENT CONTRAT AINSI QUE LES DOCUMENTS QUI S'Y RATTACHENT SOIENT REDIGES EN LANGUE ANGLAISE. 18.14 Survival. The provisions of Sections 1.3, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 6, 7, 9, 10.3, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18.11, 19 and any other section that by its nature should survive termination, shall survive termination of this Agreement. 19. Definitions. "Application" is your statement of the characteristics of your business or organization and related information that you have submitted to us to induce us to enter into this Agreement with you, and that has induced us to process your Transactions under the terms and conditions of this Agreement. "Chargeback" is a reversal of a Transaction you previously presented to Paymentech pursuant to Payment Brand Rules. "Chase Paymentech Gift Card' means a stored value and/or loyalty card or account, the transactions of which are processed exclusively by Paymentech, that is issued by Merchant (or a group of merchants, of which Merchant is a member) to a Customer for use only to make purchases from Merchant or other members of such group. A Chase Paymentech Gift Card account consists of an account funded by a Customer either through a payment to the Merchant or another member of such group; by the return of goods initially purchased with such account; or by the Merchant or another member of such group in the case of a promotion or the rewarding of the Customer via a loyalty program. "Conveyed Transaction" is any Transaction conveyed to a Payment Brand for settlement by such Payment Brand directly to Merchant. "Customer" is the person or entity to whom a Payment Instrument is issued or who is otherwise entitled to use a Payment Instrument. "Customer Information" is information related to a Customer that is obtained by a Merchant as part of a Transaction. Such information shall include a Customer's name, address, phone number, date of birth, and personal account numbers. "Effective Date" means the date on which this Agreement takes effect pursuant to Section 10.1 SA 7107 83 "Equipment" is point-of-sale terminals or other software, hardware or other Payment Instrument processing equipment used by you to obtain Payment Instrument information and transmit Transaction Data to us. "Members" is the entity providing sponsorship to Paymentech as required by any applicable Payment Brand. "Payment Brand' is any payment method provider whose payment method is accepted by Paymentech for processing, including, but not limited to, MasterCard International Inc., Visa International, Inc., Visa Canada, Interac, Acxsys Corporation, other credit and debit card providers, debit network providers, Chase Paymentech Gift Card and other stored value and loyalty program providers. "Payment Brand Rules" are the bylaws, rules, and regulations, as they exist from time to time, of the Payment Brands. "Payment Instrument" is an account, or evidence of an account authorized and established between a Customer and a Payment Brand, that you accept from Customers. Payment Instruments include, but are not limited to, credit cards, debit cards, stored value cards, loyalty cards, electronic gift cards, authorized account or access numbers, paper certificates, credit accounts and the like. "Payment Transaction" is a Transaction other than a Stored Value Transaction or a Conveyed Transaction. "Personal Information" is information which relates to an individual and allows that individual to be identified. "Retrieval Request" is a request for information by a Customer or Payment Brand relating to a claim or complaint concerning a Transaction. "Service Provider'' is any party that processes, stores or transmits Customer information on your behalf. "Settlement Account' means an account at a financial institution designated by Merchant as the account to be debited and credited by Paymentech for Transactions, fees, Chargebacks, and other amounts due hereunder or in connection herewith (including without limitation, assessments, fines, and penalties). "Stored Value Transaction" is a Transaction utilizing a Payment Instrument issued by or on behalf ofa Merchant in respect of which a Customer receives value from the Merchant in exchange for consideration from the Customer. "Transaction" is a transaction conducted between a Customer and Merchant utilizing a Payment Instrument in respect of which consideration is exchanged between the Customer and Merchant. "Transaction Data" is the written or electronic evidence of a Transaction. Agreed and Accepted by: Agreed and Accepted by: ]MERCHANT LEGAL NAME] CHASE PAYENTECH SOLUTIONS, for itself and on behalf of The Bank of Nova Scotia and First Data Loan Company, Canada by (authorizea signature) by Print Name and Title Name Date t one Address bate Address: One Corporate Plaza, 2075 Kennedy Road, Suite 200, City, Province, Postal Code Toronto, Ontario, MIT 3V3 by (authorized signature) Print Name and Title Date Address City, Province, Postal Code SA 7107 84 Chase Paymentech Solutions Pre-Authorized Debit Agreement S✓{ 7107 85 13. You consent to the disclosure of any personal information that may be contained in this Authorization to the Financial Institution at which Paymentech maintains its account to be credited with the PADS as far as any such disclosure of personal information is directly related to and necessary for the proper application of the Rules of the Canadian Payments Association. SA 7107 86 CHASE " Pr wu 'FlTius -71 Assur++ptions MCIVisa sales volume Average transaction sate Chargeback % Number of locations Amex & Discover trans Corporate Card %a Foreign Card e/ Return % Fees 1. 'Initiation & service fees Annual fee Application fee Rush fee Pin pad encryption fee Pin Pad swap fee Monthly helpdesk fee Monthly admin fee Supply fee billing 2 Transaction fees 3.Authonzation fees Terminal reprogram fee Frame Relay/Leaselme: Monthly Fee Auth Fee Internet Product: Setup Fee Monthly Fee Transaction Fee careless Product: Activation Fee Monthly Fee r.ti ti~7^~~ i r~lr Customer Buys Own Supplies Settled VISA per item fee Settled MC per item fee Return transaction per item fee - VISA return Return transaction per item fee - MC return Discover Per Item American Express Per Item EBT Per Item Interac Debit - Per Item Interac Online- Per Item Wireless Transaction Fee Small Ticket Transaction Fee (May vary depending on average ticket size) Voice Authorizations Terminal Authorizations: MasterCard Electronic Authorization Visa Electronic Authorization American Express Electronic Authorization Discover Electronic Authorization Private Label Electronic Authorization {a) Sequence Codes for Voice Auth (include all). $3,021,645 $270.05 0.040% 6 0 0,00% 0.07% 3.00% NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA $0,00 $0.00 NIA N/A N/A N/A NIA NIA N/A NIA NIA $0.08 $0.08 N/A $0.150 NIA NIA N/A $0.50 NIA N/A NIA N/A NIA MC Visa Amex Discover 4. Stored Value fees Initials: Date,- (Month /'bay / Year) Paymentech Confidential Sched A Page 1 Gift Card Program None Plan Fee (per month) NIA Authorization Fee* $ Block Activation fee (per card) $ Setup Fee (per location) NIA Cards, Faekapg 4 point-of-purchase muke6ng mefenatsara avahbie aid priced m a per run bass, based on current rates, The u, rates are shown on the Gift card Mate nots Order Form. You are required to pvrahase pour stored wean earJS from us, You must process Ali your stored value rand Irantusbons unit. us for at least 3 gears from the adaclive date of this Agreement (lhe'To m'), If you lernnnate this Agneamantpror to the expvalon of the Term, you agree to pay as liquidated damages an amount equal to the. Gdt Card fees you pad u: the previous momlh. times his months rein-ng in the Term. Such amunt a+ll be lundad, to Iha erten4;possible. acowding to the same methods loo collecting amounts due under Soot on 43 of this Agreement 87 CHASE .W.: 4~i -A 1114,4 JIM Settlement Bank Account Number: Paymentech Confidential Sched A Page 2 88 CHASE(--5, a 1~u tLU1. ~IL:I~Lr1 L.lr,. rN~Y b~ ~,~~.SL~w' ~L4 ~ ._L? ' Reporting Options SE Workstation Reporting Monthly Fee N/A Resource Online Monthly Fee N/A My Merchant View Monthly Fee N/A 5. Discount Information. MasterCard / Visa discount rate on Gross sales 7. Processing fees 8, Other lees MC Rate: 1.830%1 Visa Rate: 1.920%1 Non Qualification Transaction Processing Fee NA] Pass-Through of Payment Brand fees (including, without limitation, interchange, assessments and any other Payment Brand fees) No Interac Debit discount rate on Gross sales NIAI Interac Online discount rate on Gross sales I N/AI Discount frequency: Monthly Non-Qualified Interchange' Yes Target Qualification Level Domestic Consumer Electronic Rate Discounl Rate Pricing is based on the assumpbern th of all transacrons will quality at the Target Ouatirrcabon Leval setout above.. For example, Iranevabcrosmil meet ceclum quatdication cdEOnaaslaWishod by Visa and MasterCard for your Target Qualificalion Level in orderto. receive the Merchant Duuxunt Rate. Far each transaction nolquallfymg at the Target Quaificafino Level, we 04 charge you both the Merelowt Discount Raja and addhonal feels] calculated as described below under the headmg'Additioned informi About Your Fees" Minimum monthly discount fee per account $10.00 Chargeback processing fee $10,00 EFT return fee N/A Statement fee Statement only N/A. Deconversion fee N/A Entitlement fee N/A One time fee NIA Other monthly fee NIA Terminal Set-up Fee $25.00 Virtual Transaction Manager N/A Interac Online I Acxsys Testing and Technical Support N/A ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR FEES Interchange A sicnAcanl. amounlof the fees that we cl you for procee,ng your credit eaed lransacticns represent charges Lhalwe most pay to the card issuing banks tar List are othe-. charged to us by MaslerCard and Visa} under MasterCard and Visa (tio'Payment Brani rules. These charges are often redmrad le as"Interchange fees' or simply "Interchange . Interchange lees are set by the Payment Brands based upon a serves of IMerohange levels that they eslab,sh and middy from Irma to pane. Thus, the Interchange flee charged fora given transaction depends an the Interchange level applicable to that transaction, and that Horseshoe level depends on a number of factors established by the Payment Brands, such as lee typo of cwd masemted, speeifio information cenlainedto the Iranseresn, how and when the bansa;tinn is processed. your industry and otherfaciors. For a transaction to quatily at any specific Inlerehange loved, the applicable qualification entBnamest be meL Note that the Payment Brandemay, add new Interchange levels and change Mho Interchange rates and qualificaticn orrtena for eri5bng Interchange lovefs. Merchant Discount Rate and Target Oualificaien Level Every oroc5lcwd VansacGnn wtl bo charged the M~erohant Dtsecunl Ratle. Paymentech has set your Merchant Discount Rafe based an Me assumption that your transactions wl satisfy the cntena established by the Payment. Brand rules in meet the Target Qaalifiwllon Lave) setforith above The Target Qualihcahan Level she Interchange gavel thatwa aspectrte apply le yotw bwwsao5orns- Nis defennned based on the type of transactions you submit and how they will most likely be prosessed, Howovar, it is. possible thal some of your bansacdans will be processed at ahPoer interchange level, resulting in higher Interchange fees far your business. This may oaur because. INOae'"Nan-Quafjfied Traasactons do not med the cntoria quality at your Target Oualdicatiam Level Suchtan.sactions are subjecj to leas it addition la the Merchant Discount Rate boo'Non Owildied Transaciwns' beluwi Non-QuadaFoad Transactions Non£tuallfled Transactions will be downgraded by Chi Paymenlerand, resultingn higher Interchange fees. For prosessmg such Nan-0ua6foed. Transaction, wevell charge you (a)the Merchant Discount Rata; (bl as addidanal fee (the "Yoe NearOualilymg Amount} 110 the diNerence between the Interchange lea associated walN your Targot0ualificabon Levan and Cho Interchange lee Iw die Inlerchanga lovotalt which the Non-0ualifsad TrarrsacLan was actual]y procassod; mtl to Na ozlent epplicabVe, depending on the nature of your pmmng with.e m yrun program aliglbildy (c)a Neri- 9uafdred Transactwn Presessing Fee lwhwh iscalcrdated as a percentage of the amount of the Noor-O lih I aasacttoni. The combined faraf el fha Nan-Qualifying Ani and the Non-Qusliiied Transaction Processing Fee will) appear on your statement. Initials: Settlement Bank Account Number; Date: (Month / Day / Year) Paymentech Confidential Sched A Page 3 89 IY CHASE ` E Equipment Type Qty I I Rate I Total Purchase TYI I Terminal eN-Touch 3000 I 1 0 I $45.001 I $0.001N/A Terminal (Omni 3750 w/ SC5000 Pinpad 01 $30.001 $0.001N'IA Terminal 10mni 3750 (Terminal only) 0 $23.001 $0.001N/A Terminal ISC5000 (Pinpad only) 0: $17.001 $0.001N/A Terminal IVx570 wl SC5000 Pinpad 61 $34.951 $2,516.401 Rental Agreement Terminal IVx570 (Terminal only) I OI $27.951 $0.001 N/A Terminal 1Vx510 w/ SC5000 Pinpad 1 01 $27.001 $0.001N/A Terminal IVx510 (Terminal only) 1 01 $20.001 $0.001N/A Terminal 1lngemco 5310 wl i3070 pinpad 1 01 $34.951 $0.00 NIA Terminal Iingenico 5310 (Terminal only) 1 01 $27.951 $0.00 N/A Terminal Iingenico 13070 (Pinpad only) 1 01 $17,001 $0.00: N/A Terminal Iingenico 7780 Versatile base I 01 $47.951 $0.00'N/A Terminal 11ngenico 7780 Charging base 01 $34.951 $0.00IIN/A Terminal 1NBS 5600 1 01 $72.95 $0.001N/A Terminal 1ingenico i3500 (Pinpad only) 1 01 $17.00 $0.001N/A Terminal IVR 1 01 $5.95 $0.001N/A Imprinter Imprinter 1 01 $1.00 $0.001N/A Terminal (Maxwell Fee (pass-thru) 1 61 $0.00 $0.001N/A Replacement (swap) IN/A I 01 $30.00 $0.001N/A Late Fee For all eq returned late, or not ret"d 1 01 $500.00 $0.001N/A "It terminal/equipment is "Rented", "Monthly Rate" is displayed. If terminal is "Purchased", per unit price is displayed Merchant Signature: Cate: Paymentech Confidential Sch A-Equip (Month I Clay I Year) Page 1 90 MERCHANT OPERATING GUIDE GENERAL RULES APPLICABLE TO ALL TRANSACTIONS 1. AuTH0RjzATtoWAPrRovALCooEs 1.1 All Payment Transactions and Conveyed Transactions require an authorizatiordapproval code. You must request an outhorto6onlapprovel code for the total amount of such Transaction. 1.2 An authorization/approval code indicates the availability of credit for the Payment Transaction or Conveyed Transaction at the time of inquiry, it Is not a promise or a guarantee that you will receive payment for the related Payment Transaction or Conveyed Transaction, it does not warrant that the person presenting the Payment Instrument is the rightful Customer. 2. REFUHDSfCREDrrs 2.1 You shall complete a credit for the total amount of the refund and Identify the merchandise being rstumed and any shipping and handling charges being returned. You shall imprint or record the credit voucher with the same Payment Instrument used to make the original purchase. For retail Payment Transactions, the credit voucher must be dated and signed by the Customer and the appropriate copy provided to the Customer. Cash refunds should never be issued for Payment Transactions. If you fall to follow these procedures, you may be unable to rebut a Chargeback from the Customer for failure to issue a refund (even If you actually gave the refund by cash or cheque). 2.2 Paperwork is not necessary for an even exchange. For an uneven exchange, complete a credit for the total amount of the merchandise being returned and complete row Transaction Data for any new merchandise purchased- 2,3 You shall not process a credit wllhoul having completed a previous purchase Payment Transaction with the same Customer. • Payment Instrument was not imprinted or magnetic strip was not electronically recorded (for example, "swiping" or "electronically reading' a card) through a lerminat. Even If an electronic terminal is used, an Imprint of the Payment Inatrument must be taken If the Payment Instrument was not authorized through the terminal or was manually keyed Into the terminal. • AuthorFzation/approvai code Is invalid. • Transaction Data was not signed by the Customer unless It was a Mal order, telephone order or pre-authorized order In compliance wfth the Agreement and authorized by the Customer and Indicated as ouch on the order. • Customer asserts any disputes, claim, counterclaim, defense or offset against you. • Transaction Data or any material information thereon is Illegible, incomplete, Inaccurate or unsigned, or is not delivered to us within the required time limits. • Transaction Data is fraudulent or does not represent a bona fide transaction In the ordinary course of your business, or Is subject to any claim of illegality, negligence, dishonesty or offset • You have failed to provide copies of Transaction Data requested by us (Retrieval Request) within the prescribed time period • Suspicious Transaction or fraudulent Transaction A non fully authenticated 3-13 Secure (Verified by Visa/Securecode) Transaction (for Internet Transactions) • As of the date specified by any Payment Brand, your facture to use Equipment which electronically reads Payment Instruments comprising debit or credit cards with an embedded microcomputer EMV chip ('Chip Payment Instrument"), and a Chip Payment Instrument used for a Payment Transaction Is a lost, stolen, counterfeit or otherwise fraudulent Payment instrument. 3. PROCE39NG OF PAYMENT TRIINSACtMNa 3.1 You must submit Transaction Data (including credit vouchers) to us on or before the next business day after the date of the Payment Transaction. Late submission of Transaction Data may result In higher Payment Brand fees and/or a Chargebackto you. 3.2 You must not submit Transaction Data for payment until the goods are delivered, shipped, or the services are performed (except as otherwise provided in the Agreement, and only If you have notified us that you are doing so on your application or otherwise In advance). If the Customer disputes being charged for merchandise or services before receiving them, the result will be a Chargeback to you. We may from time to time contact Customers to verify that they have received goods or services for which Transaction Data has been submitted. 13 You snail not present for processing any Payment Transaction that was not originated as a result of an act directly between the Customer and you. You shall not present for processing any Transaction you know or should have known to be (1) fraudulent or (It) not authorized by the Customer. You shall be responsible for the actions of your employees while acting in your employ. 3.4 The collection and payment of all federal, provincial, and local taxes Is your responsibility. Taxes collected shall be Included In the total Transaction amount and not collected separately as cash. 3.5 if you process recurring Payment Transactions, you shall obtain Customer written permission to periodically charge for recurring services and retain a copy of this permission for the duration of the recurring services. You shall include the words 'Recurring Transaction on the Transaction Data. You will not complete any recurring Payment Transaction after receiving: (i) a cancellation notice from the Customer (ii) notice from Paymentech or a Payment Brand; or (14) an authorttatiordapproval code that the Payment Instrument Is not to be honoured. 4 CHARGEBACxa The term'Chargebaek' refers to the debiting of the Settlement Account or withholding of settlement funds for all or part of the amount of a particular Transaction, as provided In the Agreement. There may be a Chargeback under any of the following circumstances, or as the Payment Brand Rules and operational requirements dictate from time to time. Consequently, additions and/or deletions to this list may occur. • Customer account number is Incorrect or otherwise Invalid. • Authorization/approval code was not received or other required authortmilon was not obtained. • Autharizatiordapproval code received but not for exact amount or wrong transaction date. Customer never received marchandise/service requested. • Customer's mfund/credit was processed as a sale. - Transaction Data for an i.w,,, -t amount. • Customer was charged Incorrectly. • Customer was never credited for returned merchandise or a canceled order. Payment Instrument was expired, counterfeit, shared, or Invalid at time of Transaction. • Customer's Transaction Data was deposhed more than once. • Customer did not authorize or consent to the Transaction. • Signature an the Transaction Data does not reasonably match the signature on the Payment instrument. 5 DI5PUTNG CHARGEBACKs If you have reason m dispute or respond to a Chargeback, then you must do so by the darts provided by us on our report to you. We are not required to investigate, reverse or make any adjustment to any Chargeback when thirty (30) calendar days have elapsed from the dale of the Chargeback. All responses to Chargsbacks must be In writing, and must contain the following information: • Date of debiifcredii advice • Company case number • Total amount of Chargeback • Date and dollar amount In which the sale%redit was originally submitted H known, the date and author6ationfapproval code • merchant number • N a 3-D Secure transaction (Verified by Visa/SecureCode), specific transaction values Any supporting documentation to substantiate claim. You should include a dated cover letter detailing reasons for requesting a review of the Chargeback You should retain a copy of the correspondence and all documentation for files. You should retain proof that we received your response. B DATASEcuRffYAND PRIVACY 6.1 You agree to post and maintain on all Merchant Web sites both your consumer data privacy policy (which must comply with all Payment Brand regulations, rules and guidelines) and your method of Transaction security. 6.2 You may not retain or store CVV21CVC2 data subsequent to the authorization. 6.3. You must comply with the Visa Canada Account Information Security Program ('AIS') and MasterCard's Security Date Program (SDP). Pursuant to these programs, you must, among other things: • restrict access to data by business "need-to-know" • assign a unique ID to each person with computer access to data • not use vendor-supplied defaults for system passwords and other security parameters • track access to data by unique ID; • reguiady test security systems and processes • install and maintain a working network firewall to protect data accessible via the Internet • keep security patches up-to-date • encrypt stored data and data sent over open networks • use and update anti-virus software maintain a polity that addresses Information security for employees and contractors; and • restrict physical access to Customer Information. • When outsourcing administration of Information assets, networks, or data you must retain legal control of proprietary Information and use limited `need-to- know" access to such assets, networks or data. Referents the protection of Customer Information and compliance with the Visa AIS and IMsterCard SDP Rules In contracts with other Service Providers. 5.4 You must notify Paymenlach of any third party vendor with Customer information, You are responsible for the AIS and SDP compliance ofthat party AIS and SDP may require that you engage an approved third party vendor to conduct quarterly perimeter scans and/or an on-sfte security review of your systems in order to be compliant. The detailed AIS and SDP requirements can Rev7107 91 be accessed through the Visa and MasterCard websites at www.Vij@.ggm 7. DYNAMIC CURRENCY CONVERSION SERVICES If you offer and provide dynamic currency conversion or any other currency conversion services to VISA Customers, you must: Rev7tm7 92 SPECIAUZED RULES FOR RETAIL TRANSACTIONS 1 PRESENTATION OF PAYMENT INSTRUMENTS 1.1 You or your employee must examine each Payment instrument presented to determine that the Payment Instrument presented is valid and has not expired by the terms on its face. You must exercise reasonable diligence to determine that the authorized signature an any Payment Instrument presented corresponds to the Customer's Signature on the Transaction Data. You must not honour expired, invalid, altered, counterfeit, or revoked Payment Instruments not any Payment instrument presented by any person other than the proper Customer as evidenced by the authorized signature on the Payment Instrument. WE IN OUR SOLE DISCRETION MAY DECLINE AT ANY TIME OR FROM TIME TO TIME TO PROCESS ANY TRANSACTION DATA THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE ACTUAL SIGNATURE OF A CUSTOMER, EVEN IF THE CUSTOMER'S CONSENT OR INSTRUCTIONS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED BY TELEPHONE OR BY MAIL. 1.2 A Customer may authorize another person to use his or her Payment Instrument for purchases, provided the user's signature appears on the back of the Payment Instrument. The signature on the back must match the one on the Transaction Data. If the Payment Instrument is not signed, in addition to requesting an authorization, you may review positive identification as allowed by local and provincial law, such as a passport or drivers license, to confirm that the user is the Customer, record the Information and require the Customer to sign the signature panel of the Payment Instrument prior to completing the Payment Transaction. 1.3 In order to protect yourself, you must never complete a Payment Transaction If the Customer does not present his or her Payment tnalrumerrt or If you cannot obtain an electronic record or physical Imprint of the Payment Instrument (this includes mad, telephone and Internet orders). if you elect to do so, you will be deemed to warrant the Identity of the purchaser as the authorized holder of the Payment Instrument, and If the Customer later denies making time purchase, you will not be able to rebut the Chargeback. 2 COMPLETION OF PAYMENT TRANSACTION 2.1 You must use a suitable Imprinter to legibly Imprint Payment Instruments on Transaction Data or, capture the infomtation from the Payment Instrument by electronic data capture. A Photocopy of the Payment Instrument is not an acceptable substitute for an imprint. If the account number is manually keyed Into the terminal, you must imprint the Payment Instrument and Include the Information set out below in this Section on the Transaction Data record. Your name, location, city and province must match the Merchant plate on the Imprinter. You must notify, us of any changes to the Information on the Merchant plate. You must use one Transaction Data record for all goods and services sold In the same Payment Transaction. In addition to having the Customer sign the Transaction Data record, the sales date and dollar amounts and other Information must be clearly written or printed on theTnaneaction Date record or captured by an electronic device. A brief description of the goods sold or service rendered must be provided on the Transaction Data record. 2.2 Authorizationlapprovel code numbers shall be clearly recorded In the appropriate place on the Transaction Data record. Never circle or underline any Information on the Transaction Dale record. 2.3 With respect to Payment Transactions, all Transaction Data must be Imprinted (or printed from electronic draft capture equipment) with the Customers amount number and Merchant name. For mail, telephone, and pre-authorized orders, al[ Information that would normally be imprinted from a Payment Instrument must be dearly written in the appropriate areas on the order or Transaction Data record. 'Mail Order' or'Phone Order' should be written on the signature line of the Transaction Data record. 2.4 You will require the Customer to sign the Transaction Data record In your presence. You will give the Customer a true and completed copy or the Transaction Data record or appropriate fecsirr le. if The Customers copy of the Transaction Data record Is printed from electronic draft capture equlpmentflerm[nal. It must contain no more than the last four digits of Cutomer's account number. 2,5 You shall not require Customers to provide any personal information as a condition for honoring Payment Instruments unless otherwise required by the Payment Brand Rules. Personal Information Includes but Is not limited to a home or business telephone number, a home or business address, a social Insurance number, or a photocopy of a drivers license. 2.8 You shall not retain or store magnetic-stripe data alter the authorization of a Transaction, except as required to complete the Irensmisslon of such Transaction Data to us. 2.7 In the event your electronic service Is unavailable for any reason or If the information encoded on a Payment Instrument cannot be read by an electronic card reader, you shall manually process the Transaction in accordance with these procedures and all Payment Brand Rules (Including, without limllation, Imprinting a manual Transaction Data record and obtaining the Customers signature and all information set out with respect to manual Transaction Data records In section 2.1). Once your electronic service Is avallable, you shall electronically process the Transaction and attach your manually generated Transaction Data record to the electronically generated Transaction Data record and retain copies of these materials. 3 AUTHORVATIOWAPPROVAL CODES 3.1 If so directed by a Payment Brand or other entity from whom authorization is requested, you shall attempt to retain the Payment instrument by reasonable and peaceful means, notify us of the recovery or the Payment Instrument, and ask for further Instructions. 3.2 If you are suspicious of the Transaction for any reason at all, you should contact the Voice Authorization Center, state to the authorization clerk 'This Is Code Ten' and await Instructions. 4 FORGERESICOUNTERFErr PAYMENT INSTRUMENTS You should examine all notbas received from us or from Visa or MasterCard or other Payment Brands to help you determine whether a Payment Instrument presented is counterfelL You should attempt to retain the Payment instrument while making an authorization request and then match the signature on the Payment Instrument with the one on the Transaction Data. You should compare the embossed eccourd number on the Payment Instrument to the account number printed on the receipt or displayed on the terminal. You should examine each Payment instrument to sea if it looks genuine. You should use reasonable, peaceful efforts to recover any Payment instrument if (Q the printed four digits above the embossed account number do not match the amount number, If applicable, (g) you are advised by us or authorization centre to retain it. or (fil) you have reasonable grounds to believe such Payment Instrument Is counterfeit, fraudulent or stolen. You shall be solely responsible for your actions In recoveringfretaining Payment Instruments. 5 LMRtNG CUsTomER REFUNDS AND ExCHANGES (CREDITS) -RETAL ONLY You may limit your acceptance of retumed merchandise or establish a policy to make price adjustments for any Transactions provided that proper disclosure is made and purchased goods or services are delivered to the Customer at the time the Transaction takes place, Proper disclosure by you shall be determined to have been given at the time of the Transaction If the following words or similar wording reflecting your policy Is legibly printed on all copies of the Transaction Data, in letters approximately .25 inch high and In dose proximity to the space provided for the Customer's signature: "NO REFUND," or "EXCHANGE ONLY' or'IN-STORE CREDIT ONLY." 8 TRAVEL AND ENTERTAINMENT SeRMES Al your option and as specified In the applicable sections of this Operating Guide, Travel & Entertainment Merchants may participate In one or more of the following Travel & Entertainment Services: • Reservation Service Advance Lodging Service • Priority Check-Out Service Any Merchant participating in any of the above services must do so In accordance with the following requirements. 6.1 Reservations Service. Merchants operating lodging establishments and enrolled In the Reservations Service shall lnsdhde and complywith the procedures as theyare listed here and as they are amended from time to time by Visa and MasterCard: 8.1.1 Reservation Procedures On receipt of a lodging accommodation reservation request from a Customer, you will inform the Customer of the availability of the Reservation Service. If the Customer specifies that the lodging accommodation reservation request 19 to be made under [his Reservation Service, and that request is so accepted by you, you will at that Ume: (a) specify to the Customer that the lodging accommodation reservation request made and accepted under the Guaranteed Reservation Service (To Reservation") wi11 be a guaranteed reservation as contemplated below and quota the confirmed dollar amount rate for the Reservation to the Customer, (b) record the Customer's name, address and account number (and expiry date), the confirmed dollar amount rate for the Reservation quoted by you to the Customer, the scheduled dale(s) of the Reservation and the dale on which the Reservation was made; (c) Issue a Reservation confirmation number to the Customer, advise the Customer to retain such number and to provide it to you in the case of cancellation ofthe Reservation; and (d) advise the Customer that the Reservation may be cancelled, without charge, at any time prior to 6:00 p.m, local time al the accommodation facility where the Reservation has been booked ('Prescribed Time") on the scheduled commencement date for such Reservation, recorded as required above, and that any failure by that Customer to cancel that Reservation before the Prescribed Time will result In that Customer being charged, through a Transaction Data record, for the confirmed price of the Initial night's accommodation under the Reservation. If the Customer requests a written confirmation of a Reservation, the Merchant wig, within a reasonable time (not more than 14 days), provide It to that Customer. 6.1.2 Cancellation Procedures if a Customer cancels a Reservation before the Prescribed Time, you will provide a cancegagon number to the Customer and record the cancellation number In the written record referred to above. This written record (Including the cancellation number) must be retained by you for a period not less than nine (9) months following the time of cancellation or the use, Rev7l07 93 as the case may be, of the Reservation by the Customer. If a Customer requests a written confrmaton of cancellation of a Reservation, you will, within a reasonable time (not more than 14 days), provide It to the Customer. 6.1.3 Failure to Cancel If accomodations reserved under the Reservation Services have not been claimed or cancelled prior to the Prescribed Time, you shall pre-register the Customer and assign specific room(s) in accordance with the Reservation. If e. Customer fags to cancel a Reservation before the Prescribed Time, you will prepare a Transaction Data record for the Transaction, that record to contain the information sat out above, the Merchant's identification number, assigned room number, and the phrase 'RESERVATION -'NO SHOW' in the signature area of the Transaction Data record, to be delivered to us In the usual manner and w]Wn the time required by your Merchant Agreement or the Payment Brand Rules. 6.1.4 Honouring Reservations Except [hose cases set out under Cancellation Procedures or Failure to Cancel, you agree to honour each Reservation made by a Customer under the Reservation Service (until checkout time the next day). If, for any reason, you are unable to honour a Reservation, you will: jM find an alternate lodging accommodation of similar or better quality to the Reservation accommodation for the Customer; and 01 Immediately reimburse to the Customer the costs and expenses directly Incurred by the Customer resulting from lodging accommodations being provided at a location other than that ofthe Reservation, those costs and expenses to include the amount of the lodging accommodation rate for one night's stay quoted to the Customer by the protider of the alternate lodging accommodation, transportation to the alternate lodging accommodation and one three-minule telephone call (long-distance, if necessary) to advise of a change of address. 6,1.5 Publicity You may advertise your Reservation Service. That advertising must contain dear and conspicuous notice to the effect that each Reservation Is accepted under the conditions set out in this section. 6.1.6 Chargebacks We agree that we will not refuse to credit to your Settlement Account or Chargeback to your Settlement Accourd the total amount of a Transaction Data record described in the section `Fallura to Cancel' above by reason onlythat H has not been signed by the Customer. However, we have the right to refuse to credit the Settlement Account or to Chargeback the Settlement Account if any other event gives Nee to the right to Chargeback as set out In the Operating Guide, the Merchant Agreement or the Payment Brand Rules, or If any or the Wowing events has occurred: (a) the Customer provides us with the cancellation number or other satisfactory written evidence that the Reservation was cancelled before the Prescribed Time; (b) the Customer provides us with satisfactory written evidence supporting the Customer's claim that the Reservation was paid for by a means other than a Payment Instrument; (c) alternate lodging accommodation was provided by you to the Customer as set out above; or (d) you have otherwise failed to comply with the Reservation Service provisions of this Operating Guide. 6.2 Advance Lodging Service Merchants operating lodging establishments and offering the Advance Lodging Service shall institute and comply with following procedures respecting Payment Transactions as they are listed here and as they are amended from time to time by Visa and MasterCard. 6.2.1 Reservation Procedures. You shall accept all Payment Instruments for advance deposit when the Advance Lodging Deposit Service Is agreed to by the Customer. The amount of the Advance Lodging Deposit Transaction must not exceed the cost of fourteen nights of accommodations or the Intended length of the stay, whichever Is the least of the two. You shall inform the Customer of the Advance Deposit Requirements and the cancellation policy requirements. You shall inform the Customer Mud the accommodations will be held for the number of nights used to determine the amount of the Advance Lodging Deposit. You shall obtain the Customer's account number, Payment Instrument expiration date, the name embossed on the Payment Instrument, telephone number, mailing address, scheduled data of Brrlval and the intended length of stay. Any changes in the reservatlon made by the Customer must be provided to the Customer In writing at the Customer's request. You shall provide the Customer with a confirmation number and advise the Customer that the number must be retained. You shall Inform the Customer that if the Customer has not checked In by check-art time following the last night of accommodations used to determine the amount of the Advance Lodging Deposit or If the reservation was not canceled by the specified time and date, the Customer will forfeit the Advance Lodging Deposit. You shalt complete a Transaction Dala for the amount of the Advance Deposit. The Transaction Data shall Include the words Advance Deposit" on the signature line, the Customer account number, expiration date and the name embossed on the Payment Instrument, the Customer's telephone number and malting address, the confirmation number scheduled check-in date, and the date and time the cancellation privileges expire without forfeiture of the Deposit If the accommodations are not used. You shall authorize the Advance Deposit In the same manner as other lodging transactions. Mail the Customer copy of the Transaction Data to the Customer within three business days from the Transaction Date and deposit the Transaction Data as other Lodging Transactions. 6.2.2 Cancellation Procedures. You shall accept all cancellation requests from Customers provided the cancellation request is made prior to the specified cancellation data and time. You shall provide a cancellation number and advise Customer to retain number for future reference. You shall process a credit for the entire amount of the Advance Deposit, which shall lnciude the words 'Advance Deposit' on the Transaction Data, the Customer account number, the Payment Instrument Expiration date, the name embossed on the Payment Instrument, the Customers mailing address and the cancellation code. You shall mail the Customer copy to the Customer within three business days from the Transaction date. 6.2.3 priefnste Accommodations, If accommodations that were guaranteed under the Advance Lodging Service are unavailable when the Customer arrives, you shall complete and deliver Transaction Data for a credit for the entire amount of the Advance Lodging Deposit In addIdan, you shall provide the Customer with at least comparable accommodations at a comparable establishment for the number of nights used to determine the Advance Lodging amount, not to exceed fourteen nights or until the reserved accommodations are made available at the original establishment, whichever comes first In addition, you shall provide the Customer traruportalion to the aiternele establishment and, If requested, transportation to and from the alternate establishment must be provided on a daily basis. You shall forward all communications to Customer to the eltemate hotel and provide two three-minute telephone calls to the Customer, all at no charge. 6.3 Priority Check-Out Service Merchants operaling lodging establishments and enrolled In the Priority Check- Out Service shall institute and comply with following procedures respecting Payment Transactions as they are listed here and as they are amended from time to time by Visa and MasterCard. You shall accept all Payment Instruments when a Customer requests the Priority Check-Out Service. You shall provide Customer with a Priority Check-Out Agreement which must contain, but Is not limited to, the Customer account number, your name, location and telephone number, departure date of the Customer, Guest name and room number, a statement authorizing you to charge the designated Customer for the amount of the big and to deposit the Transaction Data wHhoni the Customer signature and a legend identifying the Customers request for specific billing receipts, including the name and address to whom the receipts are to be malled. You shall Inform the Customer that the Priority Check-Out Agreement must be complete and signed; the mailing address must be completed to receive a copy of the hotel bill supporting the Final Payment Transaction amount. You shall ensure the account number on the completed Priority Check-Out Agreement matches the Customer account number imprinted on the Transaction Data. You shall complete the Transaction Data and write time words 'Priority Check-OuP on the signature line. You shall follow normal lodging authorization procedures. You shall mail a completed Transaction Data, Itemized hotel bill, and signed Priority Check-Out agreement to the Customer within three business days of the Customses departure. You shall maintain the Itemized hotel bill end ell supporting documentation for a minimum of six months from the Transaction date. 7. INTERAC -DIRECT PAYMENT card 7.1 You may accept valid and unexpired debit payment cards Issued by any Inalitutlon participating in the Interact Direct Payment program. You shell never request, or obtain, the Customer's personal identification number ('PIN") from the Customer. You shall situate the PIN keypad In a way that minimizes the risk of disclosure when the PW is entered into the point-of--sale device. You shall not permanently fix or attach a PIN keypad to a counter or other objecL 7.2 H a card Is left at your premises, you agree to promptly rotum it to the Customer, subject to satisfactory identification of the Customer, or, if you are unable to return it or If the card is not claimed within 24 hours, you shall deliver it to us at your first available opportunity. 7.3 The use ore direct payment card creates an online direct debit to the Customers account at hlslther card Issuing Inatitution and a return or void creates a credit to the Customs{s account with that card Issuing Institution. 7.4 You shall not manually key direct payment card Information Into a point- of-sale terminal In order to complete a transaction. You shall give the Customer a transaction recelpt regardless of whether a Payment Transaction [a approved, declined or rat completed. 7.5 If your printer is not operational and your point-of-sale device has processed the Payment Transaction, you shall (1) provide an aftemete Transaction Data (such as a completed and dated sales slip or manually created facsimile showing the account number on the card to indicate that payment was made with that card or (It) reverse the Payment Transaction on the day of the request or the next business day N the Customer requests that you do so. 7.8 You shall otherwise comply with all requirements of the Interac Payment Brand ("Interac") applicable to the Direct Payment services as are specified in the Interac Rules. You acknowledge that the Interac Rules are confidential information of lyderac and you shall maintain such confidential Information in confidence and shall not disclose such confidential information to any person without the prior written consent of Interac. You will take care to protect such confidential information using a degree of care at least equal to that used to protect your own confidential information and will not use the confidential information for your own benefit or the benefit of any third person without the consent of lnlerac. You acknoweegs that Interac requirements are detailed In the Operating Guide or are available on-line at the Chase Paymentech Solutions Internetwabslle fhttn:pwww.chaseoavmeniech-cal. 7.7 You shall maintain accurate togs of employee shifts rind provide these logs to us, within 24 hours of our request, in order that any debit payment card fraud skimming Incident can be investigated. Rev7l07 94 SPECIALIZED RULES FOR MAIL ORDER, TELEPHONE ORDER, AND INTERNET TRANSACTIONS 1 COMPLUKA OF PAYMENT TRANSACTION 1.1 You must submit one Transaction Data record for all goods and services sold in the same Payment Transaction. The collection and payment of all federal, provincial and local taxes is your responsibility. Taxes collected shall be included In the total Transaction amount and not collected separately by another form of payment, 1.2 If you are authorized by us to accept Payment instruments for mail, telephone and pre-authorized orders, all available information about the Payment Transaction, including handling and shipping charges, must be accurately recorded. You are responsible for determining that the purchaser Is the person whose name appears as the Customer and the account number Is correct. If not, or If an account number is transposed Into an Invalid or Inappropriate account number, the Payment Transaction may result In a Chargebaek. 1.3 You will provide to the Customer a true and completed record of the Payment Transaction. 1.4 All available information about the Payment Transaction, including handling and shipping charges, must be accurately recorded. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any Transaction Data record shall Include the following information: • the date that you obtained the Transaction Data regarding the Transaction; • your merchant number applicable to the Payment Transaction; • your business trade name and web site address; • the Payment Instrument type used; • the amount and type (purchase or credit) of the Payment Transaction; • the currency in which the Payment Transaction was processed; • the authorization number, • the unique transaction order number assigned to you; • a detailed description of the goods and services purchased; • the contact name, mailing address, electronic mail address', telephone and fax number of the person responsible for handling customer disputes; • any applicable taxation or export information; • the name of the purchaser; and • your ratumlrefund policy. Except for the last four digits, the account number should be suppressed from the Transaction Data record. 2 REFUNDS AND EXCHANGES (CREWS) - CAkD-NOT-PAESFM TRANaAcTIONs ONLY You may lirrd your acceptance of returned merchandise or establish a policy to matte price adjustments for any Transactions. If your refund policy prohibits realms under certain circumstances, you may 9611 receive a Chargeback relating to such Payment Transactions pursuant to the Payment Brand Rules. 3 RECURRING PAYMENT TRANSACTIONS. For recurring transactions, you must obtain a written request from the Customer for the goods and services to be charged to the Customer's account, specifying the frequency of the recurring charge and the duration of lime during which such charges may be made. You must include In your Transaction Data the electrons Indicator that the transaction is a securing transaction. 4. GENERAL RESPONSIBILfrIES 4.1 You shall not use, or allow a third party to use, the products, services or software provided to you under this Agreement to sell, receive, display or link to: (1) any activity associated with a game of chance or mixed chance or skill or any other form of gambling (including virtual casinos, funding an account, as well as the purchase of value for proprietary payment mechanisms (including electronic gaming chips); (ii) any communications or material which depicts or describes any obscene materials, pornography or other sexual communication; (iii) any software or other material that contains viruses, corrupted files or is intended to damage the operation of any software application or personal compuler, (iv) any unsolicited or unauthorized advertising, promotional materials, "junk mail", "seam", 'chain letters', 'pyramid schemes' or any other forth of solicitation; (v) any direct or indirect criminal or quaskdminal activities or any violation of any applicable laws or government regulations; (vi) any malarial in any form whatsoever that violates any applicable intellectual property rights; or (vii) any collection of personal information about third parties without the consent of such third parties. 4.2 You agree that the services provided by us pursuant to this Agreement may contain third party services and online kinks for which you acknowledge that we have no responsibility nor liability whatsoever and you shall not seek any remedy or relief from us. Any use by you of any third party product, service or web site is subject to your agreement with the third party's policies and agreements. 4.3 In addition to your obligations set out In the Agreement or the Operating Guide, you agree to complywith all applicable codes, guidelines, principles or laws related to consumer protection for electronic commerce activities which may be Issued by any authority. 4.4 You will display, at a minimum, all of the following Information on your web site In connection with any and all of your Internet Transactions: • your business trade name and its corresponding webslte; • proof of your web slte(s) registration, ownership or lease; • a complete description of the goods or services available through your web site(s); • your retumlrefund policies; • all customer service contact information; Including mailing address, electronic mail address and telephone numbers; • your Internet transaction currency, whether Canadian or US Dollars, or otherwise; • all taxes, tariffs and restrictions applicable to your Internet Transactions; • your delivery policy; for example, if restricted to Canada or another country or any division or area within a country, etc.; • the country In which you are officially registered and located; • en appropriate Payment Brand mark unless pmhlbfted by your trade association; • your consumer data privacy policy; • your security capabilities and policy for transmission of Payment Instrument details; • export restrictions (if known). 5. INTERAC ONLINE 51 Merchant Responsibilities. You will comply with all applicable federal and provincial laws relating to all ectly les you carry out pertaining to Inlerac Online. You are responsible for ensuring that all Merchant information relating to your registration with the Acxsys Payment Brand ('Acssys') Is correct, complete and current 5.2 Compliance; Fraud. You agree that (1) we may share with Acxsys, and Acxsys may use, any Information, Including Personal Information we have collected from you, and (fi) we have the right to share with otter participants In the Interac ONins system and Acxsys, information pertaining to any termination, suspension or other action taken against you for reasons of non-compliance with the Acxsys bylaws, rules, and regulations ("Acxsys Rules') or applicable law. You agree that you will, upon and in accordance with our request, assist us, our business partners and Acxsys with the investigation of a fraud. 5.3 Authorisation. You are required to display the Issuer confirmation number generated bythe Issuer on the confirmation screen to the Customer ("Issuer Confirmation Number. You acknowledge that the Issuer Confirmation Number does not conalituts a representation from us, the Issuer or Ammys that a particular payment Transaetlon is In fact a valid or undisputed transaction, and that all Payment Transactions are subject to ft Acxsys Rules. 5.4 Merchant Web slte. You are required to include the following on your Web site: • Timeoul Message: Where you allow less than 30 minutes for a Customer to complete a Payment Transaction through the issuer's Web site, you shall disclose to the Customer the amount of time allotted to complete the Payment Transaction. • Trade-mark: You shall display the Interec Online trade-mark to indicate acceptance of Interac Online in accordance with the Acxsys Rules. You acknowledge that you can view the Acxsys Rules pertaining to display of the trade-mark at the Paymentech Internet Web alts (W JAuww.ghaseDaymantech.cat. • Currency: You shall disclose to ft Customer cite amount that will be debited from the Customer's account In Canadian funds, • Acxsys "Consumer Education Page: You shall prominently display a direct link to the Aaxays 'Consumer Education Page" at an URL to be supplied by Acxsys from time to time. A Customer must not be able to IntUate a payment using tnterac Online without having been given the opportunity to follow this link and view this page. • In addition, you are required to comply with the Canadian Code of Practice for Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce, published by industry Canada on January 16, 2004, or such other ecommerce cads of practice prescribed by Acxsys from lime to time. 5.5 Payment Instrument Acceptance. You will honour a Customer's request to pay by Intarae Online. You are not allowed to require a Customer to pay a surcharge for the use of into= Online where tits result would be brat the Customer would pay more using Interac Online than If a Customer used other online payment options. 5.5 Confidentiality; Privacy, Security. (i) You acknowledge that the Intense Online Payment Brand Rules are confidential Information of Acxsys and you shall maintain such confidential Information in confidence and shall not disclose such confidential information to any person, other than to your agents and contractors for the purpose of assisting you In completing a Payment Transaction, or Acxsys, without the prior written consent of Acxsys. You shalt use such confidential information only for the purpose of fulfilling your rights and obligations In connection with interac Online and under the Payment Brand Rules. You will, and will cause your agents and contractors to, lake care to protect such confidential Information using a degree of care at least equal to that used to protect your own confidential information, and will not, except as may be required by law, use the confidential Information for your own benefit or for the benefit of any third party without the prior written consent of Acxsys. Rev7107 95 S. Chip Payment Instruments 8.1 As of the dale specified by any Payment Brand, you are required to use Equipment which electronically reads Chip Payment Instruments, and Is compliant with all Payment Brand Rules. If you do not implement such Equipment, your Payment Transactions will be subject to Chargebacks as set forth in the Agreement and this Operating Guide. 8.2 If a Chlp Payment Instrument is presented by a Customer, you will process the Customer's Payment Transaction as a chip initiated Payment Transaction, as the only method of initialing and processing the Payment Transaction. 8.3 You shall direct the Customer to insert the Chip Payment Instrument Into the chtp-reading terminal Instead of being swiped by the Merchant, and to leave the Chip Payment Instrument In the terminal throughout the transaction. The Customer will enter his/her PIN on a keypad In or connected to the terminal. 8.4 Certain Chip Payment instruments will be set up to require a signature. The terminal will determine whether the Chip Payment Instrument requires PIN or signature and you are required to follow the prompts displayed on the terminal. 8.5 If a chip initiated Payment Transaction is declined, the Payment Transaction should not be processed by any other means. The Merchant should advise the Customer to utilize an alternative Payment Instrument for the Payment Transactlon. 8.6 For a recovered Chlp Payment Instrument, the Merchant must cut away the comer of the Chip Payment Instrument at the opposite end of the chip. A comer must be cut at a 45 degree angle and extend approximately 25 mm from the comer of the Chip Payment Instrument. You shall immediately deliver such recovered Chlp Payment Instrument to us, 9. Car Rental Agency Services Merchanls renting or leasing a motor vehicle to a Customer shall institute and comply with the procedures as they are listed here and as required by the Payment Brand Rules, as they are amended from Ums to time by the Payment Brands. 9.1 You shall oblaln the necessary authorization for the total estimated amount of the Payment Transaction, based on the Customers intended car rental period at the time the Customer arrives to pick up the motor vehicle ("Check-In"), the applicable rental rate, taxes and/or mileage rates, and any additional charges. The estimated transaclion amount must not lrtdude charges that cover potential vehicle damages or the Insurance deductible amount. 9.2 If the estimated Payment Transaction amount is equal to or below the floor limit, you shall check the most current Issue of the Card Recovery Bulletin for the Payment Instrument number or obtain an authorizatlon for 1 currency unit (for example, 1 dollar) at Check-In. 9.3 If the estimated Payment Transaction amount Is above the floor limit, you shall obtain an authortzatlon for this amount at check-In, and record the authorization code on the Sales Data with the estimated Payment Transaction amount and the authorization date. 9.4 You may obtain and must record sulhorizations for additional amounts above any amount already authorized alter Check In and priorto the lime the Customer returns the motor vehicle to you ('Check-put'). You must oblaln a final or an additional authorization and include the dale, amount, and authorization code on the Sales Data if the actual Payment Tran8aCUOn amount exceeds either the floor limit or 15% more than the sum of the authorized amounts. 9.5 N you wish to process delayed or amended charges for the motor vehicle rental after Check-Out, you can only do so IF. (1) you have already obtained the Customer's written consent to be liable for such charges; and (it) you charge only for ancillary or corrected charges which can include fuel, taxes, Insurance, and rental fees, damage to motor vehicles, parking tickets, and other traffic violations. You may not charge for loss, [haft, or deposits to cover potential damage to the motor vehicle. 9.6 To process charges that occur after Check-Out, you are required lo: (1) provide documentation from the appropriate civil authority to support charges for parking tickets and other traffic violations. Such documentation must Include the time and location of the violation, the license number of the rental motor vehicle, the statute violated, and the amount of the penalty in local currency. In the case of damage to a motor vehicle, you must support charges for damages with a copy of the rental agreement, an estimate of The eoslto repair such damages from an organlza0on that can legally provide these services, a police accident report (if applicable), other documentation showing the Customers consent to pay for damages with his or her Payment Instrument, and any other documentation which maybe used to demonstrate Customer liablUly. If 1he damage charges are for an insurance deductible, you musk support such charges with a copy of your Insurance policy, (it) complete Sales Data for the permitted delayed or amended charges. In the signature area of the Sales Data, write "Delayed or amended charges - Signature on ille.'; (111) deposit this Sales Data In accordance with normal deposit procedures. In all cases, you must make deposits for delayed or amended charges within 90 days of transaction data of the related transaction; and (Iv) mail the Customer copy of the Sales Date to the Customer, with a written explanation of the delayed or amended charge, within 3 business days of the Transaction date. Rev71®7 96 Specialized Rules for STORED VALUE AND LOYALTY TRANSACTIONS 1. Services. The Merchant's Customers are given a magnetic stripe card by the Merchant In exchange for money received, merchandise returned or other consideration. The SV Payment Instrument represents a dollar value that the Merchant'e Customer can either use or give to another Individual. There Is no security essociated with the SV Payment Instrument itself. The actual record of the balance an the SV Payment Instrument is maintained on Paymentech's Stored Value card database. The SV Payment Instrument, the design and use of which Is proprietary to the Merchant, is designed la be swiped through a POS terminal during each Stored Value Transaction at Merchant's location. When the Customer gives the magnetic stripe SV Payment Instrument to the cashier, the cashier will press the appropriate keys dependent upon the Stored Value Transaction type, swipe the SV Payment Instrument Into the terminal, and key In the amount to be applied against the SV Payment Instrument's balance. This information will be immediately transmitted to Paymentech, and the appropriate approval response will be routed to the Merchant. Associated with the program Is a standard monthly reporting package detailing the Merchant's Stored Value Transactions and the outstanding balances on the Individual SV Payment lnstmenerrts. The Merchant will have access to help desk support through Paymentech for their Stored Value Transactions. Customers will have access to an interactive voice response system ("IVR"), via a loll free number, through which they may receive some basic account information. Merchant's SV Program will be configured In the manner specified by Merchant to Paymentech during enrollment, which will represent binding program rules relating lc Merchant's SV Program. Changes to such SV Program requested by Merchant subsequent to setup will be made at Paymentech's sole discretion and In the time and manner which Paymenlech shall determine. We will supply a detailed statement reflecting your SV Program activity. We will not be responsible for any error that you do not bring to our aterdlon within ninety days from date of such statement. 2. Paymentech provides a number of tools and options to help Merchant reduce Merchant'e risk of exposure for fraudulent transactions. We urge you to make use of any and all of such tools as we may offer In order to help reduce the risk of such transactions. In particular, we recommend that you utiltze only those vendors that have been certified by Paymentech as having appropriate security measures In place to reduce the risk of counterfoil SV Payment Instruments and the iosa of sensitive SV Payment Instrument Information that might result In unauthorized transactions and, you promptly and frequently reconcile the. transaction reports we provide to you against your own internal transaction records, and to report any unauthorized transactions to your account representative at Paymentech. Because manual Stored Value Transactions (Le, those Involving the activation or reloading of SV Payment Instruments over the telephone In cases where your terminals may be unavailable) pose a higher risk of potential fraud, we urge you to pay special attention to these Stored Value Transactions and reconcile them on an even more frequent basis. In the event that you do not reconcile your Irensaction reports and promptly report any suspicious activity to us, Paymentech may not be able to assist you In canceling fraudulently activated or reloaded SV Payment Instruments, or in otherwise identifying the source of any fraud. RaV7/07 97 (Ii) You are required to have appropriate processes and procedures In place to protect all Information relating to a Customer, Including the Customers name, address, email address. telephone number, login ID, password or any other personal or demographic information relating to such Customer and such Customer's use of Interac Online ("Cardholder information"), In accordance with all applicable federal and provincial privacy leglaWon, You are responsible for obtaining the appropriate consent, sufficient to meet all obligations under all applicable lama, from Customers to share Cardholder Information through ft network for the purpose of Interac Online.You shall otherwise comply with the requirements in the Operating Guide respecting Internal transactions. (iii) You agree to comply with all Security Guidelines that may be published from time to time byAc ys, including, without Ilmliation, the PCI Data Security Standard, Version 1.0, December 15, 2004 or other best practice security framework as determined byAcys from time to time, and you acknowledge that you may be held liable For any failure to meet the Security Guidelines. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, your webalte must use not less than a 128-hit SSL (Secure Socket tayar) encryption to collect personal inF,.. -.on from a Customer. You are required to obtain and use a valid SSL c cats from a recognized, reputable source. You acknowledge that the Security Guidelines prohibit you from collecting online banking login information. fdeV?'107 98 i II II III I ~ u i I I N I I I I 1 ~ 1~"'~I U II u n I!IIII'illl Hill u... mill III r4" ~ q4 M II,III;~ [t~ flu. •x Ipu„~~~ IIIIIIIII ~ r I ~i , p II II ~~a .k.~ J 1 ~ ,~IIIIIII;II III 7p , II I. ~ ~ I I N l.~ II N Mill . II Ihuuuuuuuuuuuuiuuu I i~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ I I i Illllllluuuuudmm I H ..~IIIIIIIIIII~~~~~~~~~~~~IIIIIIIIIIII i I ~ II IIIII IIIII qqq u iiil rl I III I I I ~ IIII u I u I I i I, I~ IJ VA NI I~ I~ I I sl ~ II I II I III II I I Mill I Ii m. w 6' Um Illlllllllllllllo.~u ~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~I IVulllllll,llllll~l imuuuullllllll U II u IUu I~ Jim jilo I 1111111 mum ~f l I' Pil I I~ i III II O h ~ ~IIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIII' ,,0 - E _ D fig. a -@~ - _ - ~ ~a L~ u pu°I IIIIIII hill I L, I'I'I'Illliill~ III III I,~uumuull VIII. ~Ilor" aaaaaaa IDr„ .III I r a ~v m~ illlllllllllllllll l ~ JJJJIIIIIII~l 1 f I m~~~ `nlw.l y a 'a 'U IIIIII. !!I ~I k."f" I ~ l ~ tlYl l I I~I ~f I d~' 1 VIII ! ~ ; wl I 1 Y IIIs MI~ N I dl o q ' musumummuou ' I NII III III IIIIII II III ~ ~,I II VIII„IIII~I~~ ICI 111111 r. Ill~uuulllllul III IIIIIIIIIIIIII°" I Ilmmu Illil uumil p~ mnn nr^ w Ohl u @ I I 1 , ply I al I Ig l I I i i~ I p f~ II ,I a N I I~~~ ~ 1111 li~l IIII V ql~ IIII I ~ ~ I I co III' MV I I II I __~~~IIIII C III IIIIIIIII UIIU ~M I~ I III~ IIIIII ~uYu m 9!!!~~~I "UHIII~~~~~~~IIIIIIlIII, ~uuuNxsam ~ IIIIIIIIIII 4 PIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIli ~ III' I IIVouI . ^911111 " . i I ! f.. .III I III I lllllllllllllllu I~IIIIIII~ 111111 err UUUNNNNHUUUUf I I' WUUNNNNHU " II i ml .-war i ~ j I IlPiil 4 ~R I I I I I I Ip I I ,111111%~I~I~I~;~ 9 I' ~ ~ ml i IIIIIIIIIII ~l pA~ ,I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~ f i . ~ ~ I Uol~~ 4i ~ u t ~ .n~~{~III um~ ~ t I ~illllp ~ ~~IIII I O IIIIIUI ~~IIIIII III IIIIIIIIIII uVlllllllllll II ~,,,Ill~d liiuuulll . Illlluul~~ !!!Illllliiiiiiiiiil ~ ~ f I~ II I.' IL.. to ~ I I~. pp I ~ I"~ ~ ~IV .I II %M II ~-,1Y N til h I tl I ,y I r I u i " P I III I m~ L I u l p , ~ ' ' 11111111111 ~ III9IIl IIIIII;:: ~ w iiutlllll IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I I VIII y mV ' III' u. IIIIIIIIII ~ ~ I 1 ~ !!!11111 { li ~liii~+ll~~ ~ j ill 11 ~ I 4 ~ ~I III ~ 1 } u ull III ' III I, .I , IIIIIIIIIIIII~IIII ° . III„ ~ I , 1 I~~ II II II~ lllpuuuuuum II ui m~dllll O IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII y., ........rrrvPXn' / / IIII ' ~ yl ~klh'I'I'I'lyl;iii;;;;'Ilgp;iiiiulllllll J y4' r.~r 1111111 a F n{ I!II~II ~ Ili • 1 t IIII I~ w111~iliil it 111 i4 III,; I "r I ~d I s 9 .,.E I, I~ r Al I r a IIIIII L ~ W I ptlll III u m uuu I , 1 71 F • ,fire y F .III III i ~ tHStLiIUBYtIf{44~ ~f I ~ ~ , yt(~~~ IIIIII (IIII 1 I~ pux 7 ~ 1illilii wulll1 VIII. um911 ~~~uuuuuuuuum ti 0 I k ~ ~-1~ I` ~ iI w ~ I~ ~ I fi ~ iir °~IIIII ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ I~ u I ~ ii~i;l;j~u u Illlllllumu~ III CD 0~~ 44 A y z - i ~ - D III Yu! ' 11111 11 II IUD Illulll Iilllllllllillllllll ~ I i VIII . ~ IIIluooooumlllllllliil ~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I~~~~~~~(. ; . , ~ ~ ' ""'I!!!!!I!II!II!IIIi10IIII I ~ ~ " IIIIIIIIIIIIII uu~u I f... I y4N4pkNNb'ik po>j {m~ 1"..k' III i 11 I N ''N~JD`r ~ n 111111 11111 q II Illllli,,,, „ °~~dml u IIIIIII ~ ~ ~ ~ i f , } I wa 1111111 111111 ,II1 ~IIIIIIIIII Illlliilllllllllll r I PFilllllll~l. m III I .............................m AAI~ I I II III I VIII 1 a _ I luuw 1111111 , NNNI I I I I I III. i n~ I IIII lllllllllllllllllll Illluululullllll I I 3 L.IIIII~~ w Ism I I iMilli uuN~'~n IOH ~i.~ or P I 4 I I ware mn~ I i. Il~i'~IIIIN . I A N I~~ I u~ III I I'~ r W I I 7 ~I ~ ~ I I' t° I I dla I I I II I IlWloolu ~IIII y ~ I I ,11111 q I I ull li I I I N uw ~ Ilppullluuum IIIIIIIIII,I„ dull ~,~~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII E3 C~~ ELM! ~~~~~IIIIIIIIIIIII ; ~Illillllllllllll , ~ II ~ i mll I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIII II . ~ 111 IIII lu I I IIIII 0 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I III II II ~ niiiip!!Il l uiiuuuu IIIIIIIIIIIIIII I I~, IIIIIIIIIIIIIII h ~I !11111 d~ I ~I ~~~I tllpuuuuulllll Ilgi~~~~lllllllllllllu I ~ ~I~ E3 II I I ~I a u ~ I~ y ray fll • 1`11 jlvl I ~ I I lum Im ~ I Illllllllllllliii'iiiiiiiilll II1° I „ I III ' ii'""Illlilllllll ~ III uuuul lllllll plllllliom Y w i i NI. n, II f u.:al Illllllll~u w. m II ~I ~;II pill Illlu I II II . I um II III Ilu ~ t 6 I ~ I I w ~ l,I I I uulll I I I I~~,II I iliuu ! ~ I ~ w I III II lllllllllluulj I _Il~~llll~ I ~Illlllluul I ; . N Wrv r- u { ~ , " .I~Illui ~ I I I Mill 11 ~llllllllllmi I Il y~"tl11IIIII h 1111111 IIIIIIIIIII 1 II ~I~I~ ~ I IIIIIIIIIII p I IIIII ~ t f l~ m -0 nV IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ~ llllluulllllllllllllll III ul,,, ..,Il~f I I ~II ' - .I onr l U. [ p[ lu y.. 1, lliiil L °a ~107 "IIIIIIIII„plllllllll- ~a I II ~V .....mill UIIIIII Uy I i II " Mo III IIIIIIIII II ui... { ~ it in^ XRi~ I"i4., I I ~ µ II, ~L Q ~ 4 ~ IIII uw IIII I °i l. ~~~~II~IIIII~IIIIIIIIII~~II~~ ,m 00 mN I ~I IC ry w~ I I IryI II III I I ~ I,I .II IIIII { ~I - IIII "'91111111 ~ I I• III I I ~ ,f I I I II tll II I ~~lllluuillliuuuuuulllll ~ ' i ~ ~ ~ f II I IIIIIII~~~ ..,,,II pipet 1 IIIIIIIIIIII f~' ~ ; ~IIIIIIIIIII ~ . `„pullllllluuu~ II!ugpilii~,,,llllll SAINT JOHN TRADE AND CONVENTION CENTRE Facility Assessment Draft Report JANUARY 2008 ~ -l'' I S 1,1111~11 120 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ..................................................................................................1 1.1 Background and Objective ...............................................................................1 1.2 Scope of the Analysis ......................................................................................1 1.3 Types of Events Held in Public Assembly Facilities ..............................................2 2. Current Situation 4 2.1 Saint John Economy ........................................................................................4 2.2 Saint John Trade & Convention Centre ..............................................................5 2.3 Facility Strengths and Weaknesses ...................................................................5 2.4 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Utilization ............................................7 2.5 Hotel Occupancy ...........................................................................................12 2.6 Saint John Tourism Marketing ........................................................................13 3. Atlantic Canada Public Assembly Facility Supply .........................................15 3.1 Saint John ....................................................................................................15 3.2 Atlantic Canada Supply ..................................................................................17 3.3 Additions to Atlantic Canada Public Assembly Facilities Supply ...........................17 3.4 New Public Assembly Facilities Conclusions and Implications .............................19 4. Atlantic Canada Public Assembly Facility Demand ......................................21 4.1 Conventions and Conferences ........................................................................21 4.2 Trade Shows .................................................................................................25 4.3 Summary ......................................................................................................26 5. Conclusions and Implications 27 5.1 Summary of Analysis .....................................................................................27 5.2 Recommendation 28 Appendix A ........................................................................................................30 121 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 1. Introduction The Saint John Trade and Convention Centre ("SJTCC'), built in 1983, is located on the harbour in downtown Saint John, New Brunswick. The SJTCC is one of several elements of "Market Square", a mixed-use development also accommodating a variety of retail and commercial uses as well as the Saint John public library. The SJTCC is one of the largest purpose-built convention and trade show venues in Atlantic Canada offering some 20,000 square feet of rentable area. The SJTCC is owned by the City of Saint John and operated by the management team of the adjacent and connected (via underground walkway) Saint John Hilton hotel (the "Hilton'). Over the past few years the City and the Hilton have identified a need update and refurbish the STJCC. Consideration has also been given to an expansion, should demand warrant. On behalf of the City, the Hilton engaged Conventional Wisdom to assess options to refurbish the STJCC as well as give consideration to potential expansion. Conventional Wisdom, in turn, engaged HLT Advisory ("HLT") to assess market demand and the potential need for additional convention and trade show space at the STJCC. 1.1 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE Conventional Wisdom retained HLT to determine: • whether demand exists to justify expansion of the SJTCC; and, if not • the degree to which the SJTCC should be refurbished and/or renovated; and • the range of options for expansion, refurbishment and/or renovation of the SJTCC. Essentially, HLT is to analyze potential demand levels for the SJTCC to help determine whether the venue should be expanded. 1.2 SCOPE OF THE ANALYSIS In completing the analysis, HLT undertook the following tasks: • Reviewed and analyzed events held at the SJTCC in 2006 and 2007. • Interviewed sales professionals at the SJTCC (Hilton staff), Harbour Station and Saint John hotels to understand the demand for meeting and exhibition space as well as customer perceptions of the venue. • Interviewed representatives from Tourism Saint John. • Toured the SJTCC and other Saint John meeting and exhibition venues. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 1 122 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 • Inventoried the supply of meeting and exhibition space in Saint John and other Atlantic Canada centres. • Reviewed demand for Atlantic Canada meeting and exhibition facilities. • Reviewed hotel occupancy for the Hilton, Delta and other Saint John downtown hotels. • Interviewed various industry representatives to determine expansion and new-build opportunities for convention and trade show facilities elsewhere in Atlantic Canada. • Investigated current event loads at other Atlantic Canada convention and trade show venues. • Analyzed air lift to Saint John and other Atlantic Canada destinations. At the conclusion of this analysis, the following report was prepared. 1.3 TYPES OF EVENTS HELD IN PUBLIC ASSEMBLY FACILITIES An understanding of the different event types accommodated in buildings like the SJTCC is essential to an appreciation of market demand. In addition to "conventions", conferences/congresses, trade shows and consumer shows round out the range of public assembly events. Convention, conference and congress owners require significant amounts of meeting space while trade show organizers look to the functionality of the exhibit area as the key site selection criterion. The primary objective of a trade show is to bring the sellers of goods or services, within a specific industry, together with buyers. While the general public is usually not invited to a trade show, consumer shows focus on selling product to the resident/area population. Consumer shows require large amounts of parking and, ideally, access to public transportation. Table 1 profiles the various event types held in convention centres. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 2 123 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 n l .x° ~ x ~i V h.: Table 1 Event Types and Definitions Characteristic I Conventions I Tradeshows I Conferences and Meetinqs I Consumer Shows Market Focus Information exchange between Forum to bring industry buyers and Smaller corporate or association Public shows where suppliers professional groups and associations sellers together meetings display/sell goods directly to public Can include a trade show componen t Sometimes sponsored by trade or More specific in purpose than a Typically charge admission technical associations convention Includes local business meetings, management and board meetings, technical meetings, sales meetings and training seminars Attendance Profile Most out-of-town attendance Some out-of-town attendees and Varies by event Local attendees exhibitors Visit often combined with vacation, spouse often comes along Visit seldom combined with vacation, spouse rarely accompanies delegate Facility Needs High quality meeting rooms with Exhibit/display space intensive High quality meeting rooms with Exhibit space intensive audio-visual capability audio-visual capability Suitable loading facilities Extensive parking requirements Banquet facilities Meeting rooms Some meeting rooms Meeting rooms Nearby hotel rooms Nearby hotel rooms Moderate but increasing exhibit space needs Adiacent hotel rooms Rotation Rotation determined by association Meet in major markets to maximize No rotation Locally produced charter number of buyers and sellers Prefer tourist destinations Little rotation Economic moact IHiah economic imoact (Moderate economic imoact (Limited economic imoact (Limited economic imoact The event focus of convention centres varies by the venue's mandate. Facilities with a mandate to maximize economic benefits to the community give priority to conventions and trade shows. In most cases in Canada, an annual operating subsidy is provided to such venues by one or more levels of government. Facilities with a mandate focused on profitability (e.g., a requirement to break-even annually) will focus on conferences and meetings and other events (e.g., social events such as banquets) that maximize profitability. It should be noted that in many Canadian jurisdictions, convention centres have restrictions, often express, against hosting such events as they may be easily accommodated in other local, privately-owned facilities. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 3 124 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 2. Current Situation In this section, the current situation at the SJTCC from a facility and demand perspective is analyzed. 2.1 SAINT JOHN ECONOMY Saint John, with a census metropolitan area population of 122,389 (2006) and a regional commuter base in excess of 175,000, is located along the Eastern seaboard of Atlantic Canada. Industrialist K. C. Irving and his family built industrial businesses in Saint John throughout the 20th century with interests in oil, forestry, shipbuilding, media and transportation. Today, the Irving companies remain dominant employers in the region with the most important businesses being eastern North America's first deepwater oil terminal, a pulp mill, a newsprint mill and a tissue paper plant. Traditionally, Saint John served as a major port city in Atlantic Canada and is home to Canada's largest shipyard - until recently, a major employer for the city. Current economic growth sectors in Saint John include energy and advanced manufacturing, information and communication technology, tourism, and health care. About half of New Brunswick's electrical generation capacity is located in the Saint John region. Saint John is also home to Atlantic Canada's only nuclear power plant. Within the past three years, major energy projects have begun construction in Saint John with a total development cost expected to exceed $2.5 billion. Projects include a liquefied natural gas (LNG) re-gasification plant, the Brunswick Pipeline, and refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear power plant. Further proposed energy projects (a new oil refinery and a second Point Lepreau reactor) could add an additional $11 to $14 billion in development within the next ten years. These energy projects are largely targeted at the northeast United States demand for energy - New England alone is forecasting a major, 6,400-megawatt energy shortage between 2015 and 2018. Saint John has also experienced growth in the area of information and communication technology, now hosting over 50 different companies specializing in e-commerce, software development, remote network management, technical support, multi-media and state-of- the-art Voice Over Internet Protocol ("VOIP') applications. In addition to Saint John's energy and IT sectors, tourism generates over $200 million in annual expenditures, and has been supported by revitalization initiatives in the City's Uptown district and across the region. Examples include: restoration of the Imperial Theatre, construction of Harbour Station, private-sector investment in historic King Street, a new cruise ship terminal and Harbour Passage. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 4 125 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 A strengthening economy can be expected to have a positive impact on the meeting and convention industry. The extent to which these meetings are held off-site will benefit public assembly facilities such as the SJTCC. While many of these meetings are local (i.e., limited economic impact), attendees could come from outside the local area. The business generated by the Irving companies is a case-in-point. In 2006, Irving companies hosted 57 events at the SJTCC representing 14.5% of total volume. The majority of these events were meetings suggesting further need for meeting spaces as the LNG and related business activity occurs over the next two years. 2.2 SAINT JOHN TRADE & CONVENTION CENTRE The SJTCC was constructed in 1983. The venue offers 20,354 square feet of rentable space comprised as follows: • a 15,136 square foot exhibit hall divisible into two (9,976 square feet and 5,160 square feet); and • seven meeting rooms ranging in size from 336 square feet to 1,100 square feet. • 480 indoor parking spaces The parkade is used by patrons of the SJTCC and Market Square. The SJTCC is owned by the City of Saint John and located adjacent to, and is managed by, the Hilton Saint John. The SJTCC is connected to the Delta Brunswick (the "Delta') and Harbour Station by an indoor walkway. 2.3 FACILITY STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES Strengths of the SJTCC include: • Location, specifically the proximity to and interrelationship with o the downtown commercial core; o Saint John's two largest and leading hotels: Delta and Hilton; and o Market Square offering a range of retail, restaurant and service businesses. • Accessible to loading docks and easy access to the exhibit floor. • A venue size well-suited for the regional (Atlantic Canada) market. • A reputation for above average customer service. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 5 126 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Weaknesses of the SJTCC include: • Inadequate crush space-The Great Hall (15,136 square feet) can accommodate 1,300 people for banquets. However, the SJTCC foyer can only accommodate 300 people in a reception setting. • Limited storage space-Analysis of bookings at the SJTCC in 2006 and 2007 uncovered several occasions where meeting rooms were used as storage areas. A garage area near the loading dock was used as a storage area in the past can no longer be used as a storage area, even on a temporary basis, as this is the only access for fire trucks. • Poor sense of arrival The foyer outside The Great Hall is a public thoroughfare. As a result, the venue can not be closed off for events nor can the foyer be used for exhibits, etc. Further, the use of the foyer as a public thoroughfare exacerbates the inadequate crush space issue described above. • Access to the kitchen crosses a public hallway/service corridor-The SJTCC kitchen is separated from the Great Hall by public corridor used to service other parts of Market Square. As a result, food is transported back and forth across the corridor leading to operational inefficiencies. • Lack of high-tech amenities for facility users-The SJTCC does not have internet connectivity, either hard-wired or wireless. Technology is becoming an increasing important part of convention centre design. Tradeshow Week studies indicate that facility users desire faster, better, less-expensive internet as well as more (and better qualified) customer service staff and technicians. • Inadequate coat check area-The size of the coat check area is insufficient for the size of the SJTCC. For example, if the Great Hall is being utilized to its capacity by an event, the size of the coat check is inadequate to accommodate the demand for this service. In addition to these specific negatives, the SJTCC is in need of general refurbishment given its age and usage levels since opening. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 6 127 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 2.4 SAINT JOHN TRADE AND CONVENTION CENTRE UTILIZATION Two methods of measuring utilization at convention centres are the number of events held and the occupancy level (i.e., the number of days in any given period that the venue, or parts of the venue, are used). While these measures demonstrate activity-and an obvious extension to revenue and bottom-line profitability levels-occupancy does not necessarily demonstrate "success." For the purposes of this analysis, HLT assumed that 11success" at the SJTCC will be defined as the degree to which the SJTCC is able to host convention events (and any other events) that generate visitation to the City of Saint John by non-residents. As a result, the analysis of utilization is more a function of type of event (i.e., conventions versus local meetings) than quantum of events. Event Data An analysis of event data provided by the SJTCC indicates that 393 events were held in 2006, as shown in Table 2. Table 2 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre - 2006 Events by Type Convention Trade Consumer Food and Conference Show Show Meeting Beverage Other Total Events 33 3 13 265 67 12 393 Discussions with Hilton representatives indicate that 2006 was an exceptional year for the SJTCC in terms of conventions and conferences while 2007 represents "more typical" business levels. Table 3 compares the events by event type for the January through November period in 2006 and 2007. Table 3 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre - Events by Type (January through November) Convention Trade Consumer Food and Conference Show Show Meeting Beverage Other Total 2006 32 3 13 240 52 11 351 2007 25 1 13 253 48 5 345 Variance (7) (2) - 13 (4) (6) (6) Source Saint John Trade and Convention Centre DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 7 128 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Table 3 shows that while the number of events held at the SJTCC between January and November in 2006 and 2007 was similar, significantly fewer conventions and conferences were held in 2007. Further, while the average number of delegates at conventions and conferences was relatively consistent between 2006 and 2007, the average number of occupied room nights was lower in 2007 suggesting fewer out-of-town delegates. Convention and conference events tend to use a much greater proportion of SJTCC (i.e., more exhibit and meeting space) and for multiple days. As a result, these events generate more significant economic impact in the community. Over the past few years, the SJTCC has hosted several national associations and organizations for large (by Saint John standards) convention and conference events including: • Canadian Country Music Awards (2006) • Canadian Life & Health Insurance Association - Claims Section Annual Conference (2005) • Canadian Nuclear Association Annual Conference (2007) • Canadian Physiotherapy Association National Congress (2006) • Canadian Society of Respiratory Therapists Convention (2006) • Canadian Water and Wastewater Association Conference (2006) • Federation of Law Societies of Canada National Criminal Law Program (2006) • International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Convention (2006) • Kinsmen & Kinette Clubs of Canada Convention (2006) • National Healthcare Leadership Conference (2005) • North Atlantic Ports Association Convention (2006) • Union of Taxation Employees (2005) • United Pentecostal Youth Convention (2006, 2007) • Victorian Order of Nurses Canada Annual General Meeting (2005) These groups used a significant portion of the SJTCC for multiple days as well as generated significant occupied room nights at area hotels. In addition to convention and conference events, the SJTCC has a base of annual events. An example of which is Port Days, which uses the entire facility for several days in June each year. Tim Issac antiques produces about six consumer shows/auctions each year, often on holiday weekends when convention venues such as the SJTCC have limited demand. J.D. Irving and its various subsidiaries appear to be the most frequent customer DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 8 129 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 n l .x° ~ x ~i V h.: of the SJTCC, holding several meetings and social events throughout the year. The annual event base at the SJTCC, however, is limited. Despite the size of the Great Hall, the SJTCC hosts relatively few trade shows. Most of the large trade shows in Saint John (about two or three per year) are held at Harbour Station. Venue Occuoancv Tables 4 and 5 show occupancy rates for the SJTCC for 2006 and for the January through November period in 2006 and 2007 respectively. Table 4 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre - 2006 Occupancy Great Hall Great Hall Welcome Cntr Loyalist Marco Polo Spencer l Spencer II Spencer III Montaqu I Montaqu II Montaqu III Boardroom Total Area (square feet) 5,160 9,976 525 625 1,100 924 924 784 336 20,354 Usage Days* 167 151 142 149 171 212 194 164 147 Occupancy So=e Saint John Trade an * Wage day~ do not indude 45.8% d convention Centre aet up day~ ~ internal ( 414% Hiffon Saint John, 38.9% Saint John Trade 40.8% and convention Ce 46.8% ntre) event~. 58.1% 53.2% 44.9% 40.3% 44.1% Table 5 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre - Occupancy 2007 and 2006 (January through November) Great Hall Great Hall Welcome Cntr Loyalist Marco Polo Spencer l Spencer II Spencer I I I Montaqu I Montaqu II Montaqu III Boardroom Total 2007 Area (square feet) 5,160 9,976 525 625 1,100 924 924 784 336 20,354 Usage Days* 115 107 91 88 107 157 157 139 94 Occupancy 34.4% 32.0% 27.2% 26.3% 32.0% 470% 470% 416% 28.1% 34.0% 2006 Area (square feet) 5,160 9,976 525 625 1,100 924 924 784 336 20,354 Usage Days* 156 144 129 137 160 199 182 155 139 The overall SJTCC occupancy, as well as the occupancy of each exhibition hall/meeting room was significantly lower January through November 2007 than for the same period during the previous year. This disparity occurred despite the venue holding a similar number of events (Table 3), reflecting the fewer convention/conference events that use multiple rooms over multiple days. The last two weeks of December are typically slow periods at most convention centres. The SJTCC 2007 occupancy could reasonably be expected to be lower than the 34.0% achieved by the end of November as a result. The theoretical maximum occupancy rates for exhibit halls (at the SJTCC the Loyalist and Marco Polo rooms) is thought to be around 70% as a result of the requirement of move-in and move-out days for trade shows and consumer shows. A more likely (and efficient) occupancy level is thought to be in the 50% to 60% range. Greater occupancy levels may be achieved in meeting rooms. An annual study by PriceWaterhouse Coopers ("PWC') focusing on North American venues (with an emphasis on convention centres) suggests average exhibit hall occupancies in the 50% to 60% range for those venues located in gateway cities (major United States and Canadian cities with excellent air access), and lower levels for regional venues. The 44.1% occupancy achieved by the SJTCC during 2006 (reportedly an "exceptional" year) and the 2007 occupancy likely to be below the 34.0% achieved year to date (November) are well below North American industry averages as reported by PWC. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 9 130 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 During 2006, the SJTCC ran at 100% occupancy (i.e., one or more groups used all exhibition and meting space) on 59 days. In 2007, only 100% occupancy was achieved on 31 days (year-to-date November). Turn AwavAnaivsis An analysis of the business "turned away" or declined at venues provides additional insight into utilization levels (i.e., business that was turned away as other event(s) were booked on the requested dates) as well as whether the venue is large enough and configured properly to accommodate potential demand (i.e., events turned away because the facility was too small or due to other issues with the facility). Turn away reports can be a valuable tool in evaluating whether a venue should be expanded or reconfigured. The value of such reports, however, depends on the accuracy and completeness of the information included in the reports. For example, a venue might not track inquiries for events too large to fit in the facility. The resulting analysis might erroneously conclude that demand for an expansion does not exist. Hilton representatives provided two different sources on turn away business- monthly Hotel Sales Activity Reports from September 2002 through September 2007 as well as reports from the Delphi Property Management System ("PMS') installed in January 2007. While the information from the Delphi PMS is specific to the SJTCC, the Hotel Sales Activity Reports may refer to function space at both the SJTCC and the Hilton. Turn away business from these two sources is shown in Tables 6 and 7. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 10 131 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Table 6 From Hotel Sales Activity Reports (September 2002 Through September 2007) Function Space Not Available/Inadequate Function Space Room Length SJTCC Group Date Nights (Days) Revenue Department of Health & Wellness 11/22/2002 118 6 $ 2,500 Atlantic Herring Coop 2/20/2003 30 2 $ 2,150 Department of Education 3/12/2003 130 2 $ 2,000 National Energy Board 4/22/2003 unknown 7 unknown Canadian Administrative Housekeepers Association 5/1/2003 118 7 $ 2,500 Kent Sales Awards 1/18/2004 80 2 $ 8,200 International Trade & Security for Small Business 5/1/2004 306 3 $ 52,800 HRDC 5/17/2004 unknown 5 unknown Wesleyan Women 10/1/2004 160 2 unknown PSAC - Environment Component 10/1/2004 90 3 unknown New Brunswick Crime Stoppers 10/22/2004 200 2 $ 13,800 The Women's Alliance (luncheon) 10/7/2004 0 1 $ 7,500 District 45 Toastmasters 11/5/2004 40 2 unknown New Brunswick Federation of Home & Schools 4/29/2004 80 2 unknown New Brunswick Federal Council 5/31/2005 25 1 unknown Bell Canada 10/11/2005 30 1 unknown Ivey School of Business 10/16/2005 221 5 unknown Equine Canada 2/5/2006 422 7 comp. rental Kennebecasis Toastmasters 5/25/2006 225 1 unknown Women's Issues Branch Executive Council Office 6/6/2006 120 4 unknown Maritech 2006 10/25/2006 300 1 $ 5,300 Canadian Association of Speech & Lanauaae Therapists 3/28/2007 540 7 $ 39.000 Table 7 From Hilton Saint John Delphi System (February 2007 forward) Group Date Function Revenue Lost Reason Source Atlantic 4/17/2007 $ - Function Space Unavailable New Brunswick Special Care Home 4/25/2007 $ 380 Function Space Unavailable Pfizer 4/27/2007 $ 25,106 Function Space Unavailable Department of Transport 5/4/2007 $ 2,850 Function Space Unavailable J.D. Irving Limited 10/12/2007 $ 3,529 Function Space Unavailable Addison Travel Marketing 10/18/2007 $ 3,588 Function Space Unavailable The Conference Board of Canada 11/26/2007 $ 1,137 Function Space Unavailable Scotia Bank 9/21/2008 $ 7,580 Facility Limitations - See Activity Source: Hilton Saint John Delphi Analysis of the Tables 6 and 7 shows: • Between four and nine events have been turned away per year (2003 through 2007). In 2006, according to Hilton representatives an "exceptional" year for the SJTCC, only four events were turned away. • Of the 30 events turned away, 25 events or more than 80% were to occur in the months of April through June or September through November. While the high season for convention venues differs by location and event type, these months DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 11 132 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 represent the high season for most convention venues in Canada. Most Canadian venues experience some excess demand for conventions during these months. • Either no events were turned away because the SJTCC was not large enough to accommodate them or no such events were tracked. • For some events, expected function revenue was reported. In only three of 17 such events was the expected revenue higher than $25,000 suggesting some events turned away were relatively small. However, for many events function revenue was not reported, possibly because the inability to accommodate the group was determined early in the process. The turn away information provided by through the Hilton suggests limited excess demand for the SJTCC. 2.5 HOTEL OCCUPANCY A key consideration for any convention/conference planner, once the adequacy of the convention facility has been determined, is the availability of hotel rooms. Three hotels are located in downtown Saint John proximate to the SJTCC: • Hilton Saint John-197 rooms • Delta Brunswick-255 rooms • Hotel Courtenay Bay-122 rooms Figure 1 shows the monthly occupancy for these three hotels from January 2005 through October 2007. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 12 133 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Figure 1 Saint John Downtown Hotel Occupancy (Hilton Saint John, Delta Brunswick, Hotel Courtenay Bay) 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 45% 40% m~,u Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec -2005 2006 2007 The market occupancy is approaching, or exceeds, 70% in April through June and September through November (typically the high season for conventions at Canadian public assembly venues). These occupancy levels suggest that meeting planners assessing Saint John as a potential venue for an event targeting out-of-town delegates would likely have difficulty in securing a room "block" (rooms set aside by the hotel some years in advance for conference attendees) of any significance at the major Saint John hotels. Any expansion of the SJTCC could not reasonably be considered without assurance of additional hotel development in the downtown core proximate to the SJTCC. 2.6 SAINT JOHN TOURISM MARKETING Saint John is positioned as a leisure and convention/business destination by Tourism Saint John (and various other City-funded/controlled entities, such as Venue Saint John). These entities have historically been funded through allocations from the City budget. Recently the Saint John Hotel Association ("SJHA") initiated a "destination marketing fee" (DMF) program similar to that in place in several other Canadian cities. A DMF levy of 2% will be applied to room revenue on every stay at participating hotels. This levy is expected to generate in excess of $400,000 annually and will be combined with funding from the City of $900,000 for a total of $1.3 million. The resulting total is expected to be allocated as follows: DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 13 134 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 • Meeting and convention marketing-45% or about $585,000 • Sport tourism and special event marketing-35% or about$455,000 • General leisure marketing-20% or about $260,000 Success in attracting conventions is dependent on the development and funding of a long- term marketing strategy given that lead times are often 3+ years long. The increased funding is expected to generate an increase in meeting and convention events at the SJTCC as well as special events that may use the SJTCC and/or Harbour Station. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 14 135 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 3. Atlantic Canada Public Assembly Facility supply In this section, the supply of meeting and exhibition space in Atlantic Canada is reviewed. 3.1 SAINT JOHN In addition to the SJTCC, other downtown venues offer meeting and/or exhibition space. Harbour Station Harbour Station, a 6,200-seat arena located in downtown Saint John, opened in 1983. The bleachers are retractable, allowing the arena floor to be converted into a 56,000 square-foot, column free exhibition area. The conversion from arena to trade show venue takes approximately eight hours. An additional 20,000 square feet of exhibit space is located on the arena's concourse. Harbour Station is connected to many downtown attractions and hotels by an indoor walkway and has parking facilities for 500 vehicles. The facility is located about 300 metres north of the SJTCC. Downtown Saint John Hotels In addition to the space in the SJTCC, the Hilton Saint John has six meeting rooms totaling 5,027 square feet. The largest room is 1,450 square feet. Four other hotels in downtown Saint John offer a range of meeting space of various sizes, specifically: • The Delta Brunswick (connected to the SJTCC by an indoor walkway) has nine meeting rooms with 15,792 square feet of rentable space. The largest room is 9,000 square feet. • The Fort Howe Hotel has nine meeting rooms with 13,650 square feet of rentable space. The largest room is 7,410 square feet. • Hotel Courtenay Bay has seven meeting rooms the largest of which is 2,666 square feet. The total meeting space available at the property is 5,250 square feet. • The Colonial Inn has three meeting rooms totaling 5,029 square feet with the largest room being 3,500 square feet. Table 8 summarizes Saint John convention, trade show and meeting venues. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 15 136 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Table 8 Downtown Saint John Meeting and Exhibition Venues Meeting Rooms Venue Hotel Rooms Maximum Break Out Total Rentable Space Largest Room Harbour Station' n/a 2 76,000 56,000 Saint John Trade & Convention Centre n/a 9 20,354 15,136 Delta Brunswick 255 12 15,792 9,000 Fort Howe Hotel 137 9 13,650 7,410 Hotel Courtenay Bay 122 7 5,250 2,666 Colonial Inn 100 3 5,029 3,500 Hilton Saint John 197 6 5.027 1,450 Totals 811 48 141,102 The major meeting and exhibition venues in downtown Saint John total 48 meeting rooms (at maximum breakout) and over 140,000 of rentable space. Figure 2 shows the location of the meeting and exhibition venues included in Table 8. Figure 2 Saint John Hotels and Convention Facilities C4 Legend Convention Facilities -Y - U A) Saint John Trade and % d Convention Centre gdPA at B) Harbour Station - Hotels 1) Holiday Inn Express 2 Fort Howe Hotel 3) Hilton Saint John 4) Hotel Courtenay Bay 5) Delta Brunswick Hotel x v„r„,,,wt 6) Coloniallnn The SJTCC and Harbour Station are close enough to support large events (i.e., a convention with a trade show component). However, based on information provided by Tourism Saint John, only one convention/trade show event has been jointly held at the two venues since 2005. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 16 137 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 3.2 ATLANTIC CANADA SUPPLY Table 9 inventories those Atlantic Canadian hotels and stand-alone public assembly facilities offering at least 10,000 square feet of meeting/exhibit space. Table 9 Atlantic Canada Public Assembly Facilities (at least 10,000 square feet of rentable space) Meeting Rooms Venue Facility Tvpe Hotel Rooms Maximum Break Out Total Rentable Space Larqest Room Saint.lnhn Saint John Trade & Convention Centre Convention Centre n/a 9 20,354 15,136 Delta Brunswick Hotel 255 12 15,792 9,000 Fort Howe Hotel Hotel 137 9 13,650 7,410 Other New Rrunswirk Moncton Coliseum Complex* Mixed-Use n/a 3 109,000 75,000 Delta Beausejour, Moncton Hotel 310 16 22,454 8,540 Chateau Edmunston Hotel 102 18 20,000 6,200 Fairmont Algonquin Hotel 234 9 18,814 4,833 Capital Exhibit Centre, Fredericton Exhibition Centre n/a 1 18,000 18,000 Delta Fredericton Hotel 222 10 13,000 7,500 Ramada Fredericton Hotel 114 7 11,508 2,075 Crowne Plaza Fredericton Hotel 168 13 10,784 4,294 NPwfnnndland & I ahradnr Pepsi Centre, Corner Brook* Arena n/a 10 27,085 18,525 Delta St. John's Hotel 403 21 20,265 11,760 St. John's Convention Centre Convention Centre n/a 3 18,200 16,000 Fairmont Newfoundland, St. John's Hotel 301 17 15,718 7,319 Holiday Inn St. John's Hotel 250 9 12,105 5,625 Prince Fdward Island Delta Prince Edward, Charlottetown Hotel 211 12 25,649 12,075 Charlottetown Civic Centre* Mixed-Use n/a 11 1,200 Nnva Srntia Exhibition Park, Halifax* Mixed-Use n/a 4 82,500 61,000 World Trade and Convention Centre Convention Centre n/a 21 58,877 20,000 Annapolis Basin Conference Centre, Digby Mixed-Use 95 62 51,483 5,581 Membertou Trade & Convention Centre Mixed-Use n/a 8 47,000 10,000 Keating Millennium Centre, Antigonish Mixed-Use n/a 8 46,095 23,100 Westin Nova Scotian, Halifax Hotel 296 14 19,294 8,400 Marriott Halifax Harbourview Hotel 352 15 17,000 7,620 Centre 200, Sydney* Arena n/a 7 14,562 6,612 Holiday Inn - Halifax Harbourview Hotel 196 14 13,067 4,477 Best Western Truro Trade & Convention Centre Hotel 92 13 12,010 8,000 Dartmouth Sportsplex* Arena n/a 9 11,688 7,200 Park Place Hotel & Conference Centre Hotel 178 14 10,950 2,920 White Point Beach Resort Hotel 159 9 10,034 3,240 The SJTCC is one of more than thirty public assembly facilities in Atlantic Canada offering in excess of 10,000 square feet of rentable space. 3.3 ADDITIONS TO ATLANTIC CANADA PUBLIC ASSEMBLY FACILITIES SUPPLY Several additions to the supply of public assembly space in Atlantic Canada are being contemplated, both new facilities and expansions. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 17 138 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Moncton A convention centre has been contemplated for downtown Moncton as early as 2000. A market analysis was recently completed for the City of Moncton by PKF Consulting. The market analysis concluded: • Sufficient demand exists in Moncton to support a convention centre. • The recommended facility profile is 24,000 rentable square feet including a 16,000 square foot ballroom. Two downtown locations are being contemplated - adjacent to the Delta Beausejour and the "Beaver Lumber" site. The City of Moncton is determining whether to proceed with the construction of a convention centre. Financing for facility, expected to cost $25 to $30 million, is not yet in place. Fredericton Fredericton is also contemplating a convention centre in the downtown core. A $21 million facility with 20,000 to 27,000 square feet of rentable square feet is being considered for downtown Fredericton on Queen Street, across the street from the Crowne Plaza Hotel. The venue, as currently proposed, will include underground and surface parking as well as a 150,000 square foot office facility. According to Team Fredericton (Fredericton's economic development corporation), Fredericton Council has decided to proceed with this project despite not having a funding commitment from the Federal Government. A development contract has been signed and the project is expected to break ground in the spring of 2008. A timetable for the opening of the facility has not yet been set. Charlottetown A 20,000 to 25,000 square foot convention centre is being contemplated for Charlottetown. Two options are being considered: • a stand-alone facility on the waterfront; and • an expansion of the Delta Prince Edward hotel that would include a reconfiguration of some vacant retail and office space. A consultant has been engaged to conduct a market study. Funding for the construction of the facility is not in place. Additionally, an RFP has been issued for the expansion of the Charlottetown Civic Centre. [Following up with Stu Dunn at Charlottetown Civic Centre I DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 18 139 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Halifax An expansion of the World Trade Centre in Halifax has been discussed for several years. The current proposal would see the arena, the Halifax Metro Centre, relocated to another site and the vacated space (currently used on occasion for exhibition space) becoming part of the convention centre. This expansion is in the early planning stages and funding for the new arena and convention centre expansion is not yet in place. Other Canadian Centres Several public-assembly facility projects are currently under construction in other Canadian centres including: • Casino Windsor Conference and Entertainment Facility (Windsor, Ontario)-opening in 2008 • Toronto Congress Centre Phase I expansion-opening in 2008 • Toronto International Centre Conference Facility-opening in 2008 • Vancouver Island Conference Centre (Nanaimo, British Columbia)-opening in 2008. • Victoria Conference Centre Crystal Garden (expansion)-opening in 2008 • Vancouver Convention and Exhibition Centre (expansion)-opening in 2009. In addition, new or expanded public assembly facilities are being planned or discussed in many other cities across Canada including Barrie (Ontario), Calgary (expansion of the Calgary TELUS Convention Centre), Niagara Falls (a new facility with federal and provincial government support), Ottawa (and major rebuild of the Ottawa Congress Centre) and Edmonton (a possible expansion of the Shaw Convention Centre). 3.4 NEW PUBLIC ASSEMBLY FACILITIES CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The construction of new public assembly facilities, or the expansion of existing facilities is often a long process. None of the Atlantic Canada projects described above is under construction nor are they guaranteed to proceed. Further, the funding for the construction of the proposed facilities is not finalized. While the quantum of convention centre projects under consideration in Atlantic Canada is significant, likely all projects will not proceed even if funding can be secured. The "universe" of regional and national conventions that can occur in Atlantic Canada is somewhat finite. As construction begins on one or more of the proposed projects, other projects will likely be delayed or cancelled as projected demand levels are re-evaluated. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 19 140 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 The SJTCC is currently the only dedicated convention centre in New Brunswick, although several hotels offer comparable meeting and exhibition space. If the proposed convention centres in Moncton and Fredericton are realized, they will compete with the SJTCC for provincial events. In addition to the convention centre projects proposed in Atlantic Canada, several projects are under construction or proposed for other Canadian centres. As additional supply is added, it may impact the rotation of national events to Atlantic Canada. Further, the growth in the supply of convention space will likely exceed the growth in national events suggesting competition to host these events will increase. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 20 141 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 4. Atlantic Canada Public Assembly Facility Demand This section focuses on conventions/conferences and trade shows - the event types that typically generate the greatest economic impact on the local community. 4.1 CONVENTIONS AND CONFERENCES Venue Saint John recently conducted an exercise where 199 national associations were contacted and asked about the potential of holding an event in Saint John. This exercise provided some valuable insight into the attractiveness of Atlantic Canadian destinations to national association event organizers. Of the 199 associations contacted, 85 have held, or have booked events in Atlantic Canada. Table 10 shows a summary of this analysis that is presented in more detail in Appendix A. Table 10 Canadian Associations Holding Events in Atlantic Canada Have Held Event Future Event Booked U) U) 0 p c O -0 U 0 0 c o U) m 0 U L X 0 Q 0 co 0 U C X 0 Q 0 N L C C C L M C C C 0 (B U L ~ (2) ~ (u = c0 C VJ VJ VJ (B ~ L ~ Q ~ (B = cc0 G VJ VJ VJ 1 7 8 20 6 4 16 121 1 7 4 11 1 0 2 1E Sixteen of the 199 national associations contacted had previously held an event in Saint John. Saint John compares favourably to other Atlantic Canadian destinations, hosting more events than only Halifax. The Venue Saint John survey however, must be analyzed with caution as the results for Saint John included a longer time period than that considered for other Atlantic Canada destinations. Nevertheless, the strong showing by Saint John reflects past interest in the community as a convention destination. A more reliable comparison may be future event bookings in Atlantic Canada. Two of the national associations contacted have booked a future event in Saint John. For comparison purposes, 16 associations have events booked in St. John's, 11 in Halifax, seven in Charlottetown and four in Fredericton. Halifax and St. John's appear to be the most popular destination for Canadian associations. In addition to Canadian associations, regional (Atlantic Canada) and provincial (New Brunswick) associations could also potentially hold an event at the SJTCC. Table 11 summarizes New Brunswick local and provincial associations and head office locations, as well as regional, national and international associations with head offices in Atlantic Canada. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 21 142 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Table 11 Associations with Head Offices in Atlantic Canada Saint John I New Brunswick Newfoundland Nova Scotia Local" 1 2 Provincial" 22 188 Regional (Maritimes) 4 24 1 55 National 1 13 7 27 International 0 0 0 3 Total 28 227 8 85 PEI Total 2 188 4 84 7 54 1 4 12 332 A total of 332 local, provincial, regional, national and international associations have head offices located in Atlantic Canada. Of note: • 22 or 11.7% of the 188 New Brunswick provincial associations are located in Saint John. Fredericton, the provincial capital, is the location of the vast majority of provincial associations. This may make Fredericton a more attractive destination for many New Brunswick provincial association events. • Nova Scotia is the location of considerably more regional, national and international associations than New Brunswick. The majority of the associations with head offices in Nova Scotia are located in Halifax. Destination Selection Criteria Tradeshow Week Research has recently completed research on destination selection criteria for event planners. These criteria are summarized in Table 12. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 22 143 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Table 12 Destination Selection Criteria Hotel Room Price/Quality 63% Finding Open Dates 49% Labour Costs and Service Issues 46% Number of Hotel Rooms, Capacity 44% Hotel Block Attrition Clauses and Issues 41% Regional Professional Demographics 33% Quality of Area Near the Venue/Headquarter Hotel 33% CVB/City Government Marketing Efforts and Support 28% Airport Capacity 25% Parking Capacity 23% Restaurants - Quality, Reputation, etc. 22% Safety Issues/Low Crime, etc. 19% Road and Highway Access 19% Cultural Amenities, Nightlife 19% Technology Service Costs and Service Issues 14% Regional Consumer Demographics 13% Public Transportation Access 13% Total Population 12% Health of City/Regional Economy 10% Golf Courses and Other Sporting Opportunities 10% Family-Oriented Activities Nearby/In City 10% Gambling/Gaming Nearby 5% Space for Outdoor Exhibits and Tents 4% Amusement Parks Nearby 2% Professional Sports in City/Nearby 1% Other 11% Some of the above criteria are easily comparable among Atlantic Canada destinations. Number of Hotel Rooms Table 13 shows the number of hotels and hotel rooms for selected Atlantic Canada destinations. Table 13 Hotels and Rooms - Selected Atlantic Canada Destinations Average Size Hotels Rooms (rooms) Halifax/Dartmouth, NS 41 5,066 124 Halifax, NS 27 3,783 140 St. John's, NF 18 2,155 120 Moncton, NB 23 2,097 91 Fredericton, NB 15 1,488 99 Saint John, NB 13 1,389 107 Charlottetown, PE 14 1,290 92 DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 23 144 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Halifax, St. John's and Moncton each have considerably more hotel rooms than Saint John. As a result, these destinations are likely more attractive to association event planners - especially those planning events with a significant number of out-of-town delegates. Hotel Room Price/Oua/ity Table 14 shows average hotel rates for selected Canadian destinations. Table 14 Average Hotel Rates Selected Atlantic Canada Destinations 2006 St. John's $ 123.88 Prince Edward Island $ 114.37 Halifax/Dartmouth $ 124.34 Moncton $ 108.90 Other New Brunswick (including Saint John) $ 99.58 Hilton Saint John Competitive Set* $ 107.05 Atlantic Canada $ 111.94 Canada $ 123.52 Holiday Source: PKF Consulting, Hilton Saint John * The Hilton Saint John competitive set includes the Hilton Saint John Delta Brunswick, Coastal Inn While St. John's and Halifax/Dartmouth slightly exceeded the Canadian average in 2006, all Atlantic Canada destinations are well positioned from a hotel room price perspective. "Other New Brunswick", which includes Saint John, had among the lowest average hotel rates in 2006. The Hilton Saint John tracks the occupancy and average daily rate of the five hotels located in their competitive set (all located in downtown Saint John). The average rate for the competitive set in 2006 was above the $99.58 average for "other New Brunswick" in the PKF data but below the Atlantic Canada average as well as the other Atlantic Canada urban centres. Further, the average rates for downtown hotels typically exceed those for all hotels in a market. Saint John appears to be well positioned from a hotel price perspective. However, the number of quality hotel rooms in Saint John may be considered limited by some meeting planners. The Hilton (197 rooms), Delta (255 rooms), Holiday Inn Express (100 rooms) the Hotel Courtenay Bay (122 rooms) as well as the 116-room Hampton Inn (which opened in January 2008) are likely to be considered the "highest quality" hotel rooms in downtown Saint John. Only the Hilton and Delta are full-service hotels. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 24 145 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Ai=rt Cadacity The number of destinations with scheduled flights, the frequency of service to those destinations and the capacity of the aircraft are important criteria for national association event planners considering Atlantic Canada. Table 15 shows the destinations served with scheduled flights from selected Atlantic Canada airports. Table 15 Air Lift from Atlantic Canada Centres Domestic Transborder m International Y O ~ 0 U L ( 6 LL (6 C (6 N O 4.7 N M C O 0 O U (6 m C C (B O L t/1 C C N > Y Y m C~ _ O J o N 0 O N (6 ~ O L O O O 0 y O } } U O - O - m (6 N E -O p w E C C ( 6 C ' Q Q O C t/1 ` >i >i >i to E C O O C (6 L N fl -O III O (6 O (6 T (6 T O O O n p (!1 (!1 (!1 N (!1 (!1 O M O fYl N fl N 7 N 7 N 7 (6 O O Saint John ✓ ✓ ✓ Fredericton ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Moncton ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Charlottetown ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Halifax ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ St John's ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Halifax, and to a lesser extent, St. John's enjoy scheduled air service to more destinations than other Atlantic Canada centres. Of the selected Atlantic Canada centres included in Table 15, Saint John has scheduled air service to the fewest destinations. Air fares to and within Atlantic Canada are relatively steep. This may result in price- conscious national association event planners selecting an "eastern" destination to consider Quebec destinations more attractive than Atlantic Canada destinations. Summarv An analysis of hotel room prices, number/quality of hotel rooms and airlift suggests that Halifax and St. John's are the most attractive Atlantic Canada destinations for national association conventions and conferences. In 2007, 22% of the events held at Halifax's World Trade Centre were by national associations and groups. St. John's has become a popular destination for national association events since the St. John's Convention Centre opened in 2001. 4.2 TRADE SHOWS An important selection criterion for those planning regional trade shows (i.e., those that generate economic impact) is the population in the market area. Table 16 shows the current and projected population within a 3.5 hour drive of various Atlantic Canada urban centres. We have limited our analysis to Canadian-based population as currency, excise and other constraints limit foreign participation at most trade shows. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 25 146 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Table 16 Total (Candadian) Population within a 3.5-hour drive* 2007 2010 2012 2017 Due to its central location within Atlantic Canada, Moncton has an advantage in attracting regional trade shows. Moncton is located within a 3.5 hour drive of a significant portion of Atlantic Canada's population. For comparison purposes, the population base within a 3.5 hour drive to Saint John is just over half that of Moncton. Not surprisingly given the data in Table 16, Moncton and Halifax (the Atlantic Canadian city with the second greatest population base) are home to the largest two exhibition venues in Atlantic Canada-the 109,000 square foot Moncton Coliseum Complex (excluding the arena) and the 82,500 square foot Halifax Exhibition Park. In addition to trade shows, the central locations of Moncton and Halifax make them attractive destinations for regional conventions and conferences. 4.3 SUMMARY For national convention events, Halifax and St. John's appear to have an advantage based on the selection criteria reviewed in this section. Saint John could be considered part of a second tier of Atlantic Canada destinations that includes Fredericton, Moncton and Charlottetown. For regional trade shows and conventions, Moncton and Halifax appear to have an advantage over Saint John and other Atlantic Canada destinations due to a central location. An expanded SJTCC would not likely significantly improve Saint John's position within these markets. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 26 147 Moncton 1,352,764 1,364,655 1,372,583 1,396,143 Halifax 955,398 968,594 977,385 1,000,971 Fredericton 729,651 733,371 735,844 744,848 Saint John 607,122 613,586 617,872 631,108 Charlottetown 550,610 556,309 560,103 570,732 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 5. Conclusions and Implications The SJTCC was constructed in 1983. The facility now requires capital investment to support the current level of operations. In parallel with necessary refurbishment and updating, the City and Hilton management are contemplating the need for expansion and/or reconfiguration. Essentially, three options are being considered: • refurbish the venue by addressing necessary cosmetic modifications but leave the space largely as is; • reconfigure the venue to provide more usable and efficient space; and • expand the venue. Discussions with Hilton management and representatives of Market Square management suggest additional area may be available within Market Square to accommodate a larger SJTCC footprint. 5.1 SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS The SJTCC has been successful in attracting a modest number of major national and regional events. Hilton management should be commended on overcoming some of the disadvantages Saint John faces as a convention destination in securing this business. Such disadvantages include: Limited air access when compared to other Atlantic Canada destinations. • Limited number and availability of quality hotels and hotel rooms proximate to the SJTCC. • Weather issues (real and perceived) that may not be considered attractive by event planners (and cause additional challenges when taken together with restricted air access). Analysis of the current utilization levels at the SJTCC and current market parameters suggests: SJTCC occupancy (44.1% in 2006, 34.0% year-to-date November 2007) below industry averages and below levels of most first and second tier convention centres across Canada. • A modest level of turnaway business (i.e., 30 potential events have been "turned away" since September 2002). • A limited number of "full use" days where the SJTCC operates at 100% capacity. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 27 148 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Strong current competitors in Halifax and Saint John (and to a lesser extent, Charlottetown) each possessing superior air access, larger resident population bases, regional head office centres and profile. Within New Brunswick, Saint John is the least well located (from a regional access point-of-view). The presence of three major population centres within the province (Saint John, Fredericton and Moncton) tends to limit any one centre from being in a dominant position (e.g., St. John's, Halifax and Charlottetown are clearly the major destinations in each of the other four Atlantic provinces). The hotel supply and air access issues are not likely to improve in the short- to mid-term. As a result of these factors, we believe expansion (to any significant extent) of the SJTCC is not warranted. Recurring annual regional demand, as well as more infrequent national demand, for convention and conference space is likely to be ably accommodated within existing and proposed venues. The success of St. John's in hosting national and regional events should be noted, in particular the fact that no single St. John's venue offers more exhibition or meeting space than the SJTCC. While not all of the potential Atlantic Canadian venues discussed in this report are likely to occur, a reasonable expectation is that either the Moncton (a strong regional trade show venue) or Fredericton (the home of the majority of New Brunswick associations) proposal will proceed. 5.2 RECOMMENDATION The main exhibit hall of any convention centre is the primary factor in determining the building footprint and, ultimately, site size and parameters. Once the size of the primary exhibit hall is determined, the balance of the components (e.g., meeting space, crush space, service areas) may be incorporated into an overall building layout. In the case of the SJTCC, the primary exhibit hall (i.e., the Great Hall) is sufficiently large to accommodate current and anticipated market demand, suggesting the SJTCC footprint is adequate. However, while current demand levels do not support additional exhibition space, the venue is almost certainly not reaching existing potential as a result of: • inadequate crush space outside the Great Hall; • location, orientation and attributes of meeting rooms; • a poor sense of arrival; and • a lack of high-tech amenities and connectivity. Given the location of the SJTCC within Market Square as well as historical (and projected future) demand levels at the venue, consideration of a reconfiguration/refurbishment plan that: DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 28 149 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 • Provides substantially more crush space adjacent to the Great Hall, likely necessitating the removal of the Montagu meeting rooms. Creates meeting space at least equal to the amount lost on the ground floor (i.e., the Montagu rooms) as well as additional meeting space (perhaps up to 4,000 sq. ft.) and improved flexibility (i.e., ability to create multiple break out rooms). A site visit to Market Square and preliminary review of building plans suggests additional meeting space may be accommodated on the floor directly above the Great Hall (and current Montagu meeting rooms). • Creates a better "sense of arrival" at the SJTCC main entrance. • Allows for greater separation between users of public areas (general public in Market Square), SJTCC customer areas, and service areas (e.g., SJTCC kitchen). • Addresses current requirements for communications connectivity throughout the facility. • Improves the connection between the SJTCC and the Hilton Saint John. • Undertakes facility-wide cosmetic improvements including the replacement of worn furniture, fixtures and equipment, updating design elements to current standards and ensuring maximum comfort to potential users. To an extent, the ability to add more meeting space within the current footprint (extending up to the second floor) as well as addressing the other recommendations noted above will be a function of space availability (within Market Square) and the associated cost. Once Convention Wisdom determines reconfiguration options within Market Square, these recommendations should be re-evaluated with a cost-benefit analysis. DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 29 150 Saint John Trade and Convention Centre Facility Analysis January 2008 Appendix A Canadian Associations that have held, or have booked future events in Atlantic Canada Canadian Associations Holding E vents in Atlantic Cana da Have Held E vent Future Event Booked w ~ w Q Q Appra sal Institute of Canada " ~1 T s rn rn rn r s rn rn r' Association of Canada Land Surveyors 1 Association of Canadian Archivists 1 1 Canadian Association of Chain Drug Stores 1 Canadian Association of Chemical Distributors 1 1 Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police 1 Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 1 1 Canadian Association of Exposition Management 1 Canadian Association of Family Enterprise 1 Canadian Association of Independent Living Centres 1 Canadian Association of Independent Schools 1 Canadian Association of insolvency and Restructuring Professionals 1 1 1 Canadian Association of Interns & Residents 1 1 Canadian Association of Members of Public Utility Tribunals 1 Canadian Association of Mutual Insurance Companies 1 Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists 1 1 Canadian Association of Optometrists 1 1 Canadian Association of Police Boards 1 1 Canadian Association of University Teachers 1 1 Canadian Association on Gerontology 1 Canadian Bureau for International Education 1 Canadian Call Management Association 1 1 Canadian Cooperative Association 1 Canadian Council on Professional Engineers 1 Canadian Counseling Association 1 1 Canadian Dental Assistants Association 1 Canadian Education Association 1 Canadian Egg Marketing Agency 1 Canadian Farm Business Council 1 Canadian Federation of Nurses Union 1 Canadian Funeral Services Association 1 Canadian Health Information Management Association 1 Canadian Independent Adjusters Association 1 Canadian Iinstitute for Steel Construction 1 Canadian Institute of Actuaries 1 Canadian Institute of Food Science Technology 1 Canadian Institute of Forestry 1 Canadian Institute of Planners 1 1 Canadian Institute of Plumbing & Heating 1 1 Canadian Labour Congress- Pride Gathering 1 Canadian Labour Congress- Women's Retreat Committee 1 1 Canadian Life & Health Association 1 Canadian Lung Association 1 Canadian Manufacturers & Exports Association 1 1 1 Canadian Newspaper Association 1 Canadian Organization of Campus Activities 1 1 Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists 1 Canadian Orthopaedic Society 1 Canadian Parent for French 1 Canadian Parking Association 1 Canadian Payments Association 1 Canadian Payroll Association 1 Canadian Printing Industries Association 1 Canadian Property Tax Association 1 1 Canadian Public Relations Society 1 1 Canadian Real Estate Association 1 1 1 Canadian Research Knowledge Centre 1 Canadian Roofing Contractors Association 1 Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology 1 1 Canadian Society for Training & Development 1 1 Canadian Society of Diagnostic Medicine 1 1 Canadian Trucking Human Resources Council 1 Canadian Veterinary Medical Association 1 Canadian Water Network 1 Canadian Window and Door Manufacturers Association 1 Coaching Association of Canada 1 Construction Specifications Canada 1 Dairy Farmers of Canada 1 1 Denturist Association of Canada 1 1 Dieticians of Canada 1 1 1 Federation of Law Societies/Criminal Law Program 1 1 Insurance Brokers Association of Canada 1 Key Clubs of Canada 1 National Golf Owners Association 1 North American Packaging Association 1 Packaging Association of Canada 1 Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada 1 Ringette Canada 1 Royal College of Physicians & Surgeons of Canada - General Surgeon's AGM 1 Royal College of Physicians & Surgeons of Canada - Pathologists 1 Skate Canada 1 Thermal Insulation Industry Association of Canada 1 Trans Canada Telephone Employees Curling Association 1 Treasury Management Association of Canada 1 United Ostomy Association of Canada 1 Totals 1 7 8 20 6 4 16 12 1 7 4 11 1 0 2 16 DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION 30 151 Hilton Saint Jahn September 24, 2009 Mr.Greg Yeomans, Commissioner of Finance City of Saint John PO Box 1971 Saint John, NB E2L 4L 1 Mr. Yeomans: Please find attached our request for capital funding for the Saint John Trade and Convention Center. The first request addresses the renovation of the Trade and Convention Center and the project scope. The second request, is the 5 year capital request for items that would not be included in the scope of work under renovations. Request $ Saint John Trade and Convention Center 1 - Complete Renovation of Trade and Convention Center $6.1 - 8.5M 2 - Operational Items 2009 - 2013 $669,500 Greg, if you have any questions concerning this request please don't hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely, i Tammy LeBlanc General Manager Cc: Kelly Moore, Director of Finance 152 2 CAPITAL FUNDING REQUESTS FOR YEAR 2009 SAINT JOHN TRADE AND CONVENTION CENTRE Project Name: Renovation, Trade and Convention Center Request: $6.1 - 8.5M Proiect Scone Description: The project will reconfigure and modernize the overall Trade and Convention Center as well as improve the operations and overall security. The project involves demolishing Montague rooms to expand and renovate the lobby and add washrooms at the west lobby. Replace existing operable wall as it is deteriorated and add an operable wall to two tracks in the Great Hall for more flexible space. Modernize the lightning, ceiling and update audio systems as it is substantially outdated. Improve aesthetics and acoustics. Secure back of the house from retail. Reconfigure and increase storage. Proiect Justification: The Trade and Convention Center was opened in 1983 and is now an outdated facility. This has become a necessity in view of the added competition to the City owned, Hilton managed Saint John Trade and Convention Centre when compared to upcoming similar new facilities in Fredericton and Moncton which are scheduled to open in the spring of 2010. Cost of Kev Elements Renovate Great Hall $1.2 - 1.5M Add operable Wall with 2 tracks Replace lighting, audio system Improve aesthetics and acoustics Reconfigure Back of House $1.0 - 1.3M Secure areas and control access Rebuild and support areas Exterior improvements to drop-off $0.5 -1.5M Expand lobby, demo Montagu Rooms $3.0 - 3.6M Rebuild Spencer to Boardroom and Admin $0.4 - 0.6M Subtotal Renovation Work $6.1 - 8.5M 153 CAPITAL FUNDING REQUESTS FOR YEARS 2009 - 2013 SAINT JOHN TRADE AND CONVENTION CENTRE Project Name: Capital Funding Request 2009 - 2013 Request: $669,500 2009 Items Description Small Kitchen Items Coneotherm Oven Kitchen Flooring Part 2 of Hilton Meeting Grand Total 2010 Items Description Small kitchen items and operating equipment for new conference center Grand Total 2011 Items Description Small kitchen items Banquet Chairs Banquet Tables (6 x 6 rounds, 4 Foot, 18 inch, 6 foot, 8 foot and cocktail Tables) Grand Total 2012 Items Description Small kitchen items Ice Machine Podiums Auto Slice Chafing Dishes and small A ares Tray Stands Pipe and Drapes Heat Carts Grand Total 2013 Items Description Install and Implement Re-therm Banqueting System in kitchen Grand Total Quantity Unit Price Total Rlo,ooo 2 $75,000 $150,000 $30.000 $30.000 $20,000 $210,000.00 Quantity I Unit Price I Total $110,000.00 $110,000.00 Quantity 400 Unit Price Total $15,ooo.oo $137.50 $55,000.00 $ ;1,000.00 I $lo'-s,000.00 Quantity 1 1 5o Quantity 2 Unit Price Total $15,ooo.oo $5,ooo.oo $5,000.00 $l.ooo.oo $5,000.00 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 $ll,ooo.oo $5,000.00 $6,000.00 $41,000.00 $94,500.00 Unit Price Total 75,000 $150,000 $150,000 154 2009 Budget Request for the City of Saint John Version 1 o OCTOBER 16, 2008 155 Saint John Waterfront Development Contents Section 1. Operations Budget.... - - - I 1.1 Executive Summary & Stated Assumptions .......................................1 1.2 The Saint John Development Corporation (Combined) ......................3 1.3 Waterfront Development ....-A 1.4 Market Square Parking Garage ..........................................................5 ...........6 Section 2. Capital Budget.. 2.1 Waterfront Development & Coast Guard Site .....................................6 Appendix A. Confidential Document:2009_Budget Requestvlfinai i 2009 BUDGET 156 Saint John Waterfront Development 2009 BUDGET Section 1. Operations Budget 1.1 Executive Summary„ Stated Assumptions & Notes 2008 has been a year of transition and reconfirmation for Saint John Waterfront Development, with the arrival of a new General Manager and the fall 2008 Inner Harbour Land Use Plan review. Looking forward into 2009 there are no immediate changes to the corporate mandate, however over the course of the year the role of Saint John Waterfront Development in relation to advancing the development of the waterfront area and increasing its vibrancy will be reviewed. To this end Saint John Waterfront Development recognizes its ability to assist its partner's, most notably the City, in the many endeavors being made to continue the revitalization in the waterfront area and uptown core. More specifically, a key component of the 2009 task list is to complete an audit of the financial arrangements that govern the operation of Market Square. This audit will be carried out to assist Waterfront Development and the City in understanding the current financial calculations and. obligations related to the operation of Market Square, see assumption #2 below. The following assumptions and note's provide further contextual background for the 2009, (.operational Budget: • Assumption #1 - INo significant changes in 2009 to the mandate of the organization. However a new General Manager has joined the team and is currently working with the Board to review priorities and directions for the future. • Assumption #2 - Included in the 2009 budget are expenses related to carry out a financial audit for Market Square ($50,000). Assumption #3 - Coast Guard Site Project expenses are not covered in this budget. In the past these have been budgeted for by the City of Saint John. A recommendation with this budget should be provided for. These costs would include any and all soft costs including but not limited to; outside professional services for real-estate, designs„ site testing and evaluation. • Assumption #4 - As a result of on-going planning and capital improvements slated for the boardwalk in 2009, new demands for improvements to the park space in the residential area will result in design initiatives intended to improve this public area ($25,000). • Assumption #5 - As the role of Waterfront Development continues to grow and advance, with both the participation in City related projects and also facilitating projects with other groups, the operational costs associated with providing leadership, coordination and technical support as a service will continue to increase. In an effort to account for the cost of increased activity, Waterfront Development has provided for unforeseen requests for assistance with the creation of $2.0,000 miscellaneous line item, see note 4 below. This will be closely monitored by the Board. Confidential Document: 2009_Budget_Req uestvl final 157 Saint John Waterfront Development 2009 BUDGET • Note 1, As noted in the 2008 submission, the integration of The Saint John Waterfront Development Partnership and the Saint John Development Corporation into one operational unit "Saint John Waterfront Development' has resulted in changes to the 2009 budget and format. Specifically administration expenses have been combined and allocated to Waterfront. This replaces the practice of creating separate purchase orders/contracts for expenses. • Note 2. A recommendation made in 2008 for changes to the purchasing/expense approval process to have all expenses approved by the General Manager is still being implemented. • Note 3. Salary for General Manager is split between SJDC and Waterfront Development. • Note 4. Staffing levels to remain unchanged in 2009, however a proposed review of staffing levels in 2009 is recommended. As the Market Square Audit will be complete and it is anticipated this will include a detailed review of responsibilities for SJDC and the City. Additionally, work being completed under the Municipal Operations Review (Vision 2015) may change the requirements for SJDC. Examples include responsibilities for Trade and Convention Center, other Municipal Developments (a role in the Police and Justice Complex process, extended Coast Guard Mandate, possibility of discontinued parking management agreement at market square and consolidation with SJ' Parking Commission, etc.). • Note 5. Increased emphasis and awareness will be made on the service and assistance Waterfront Development provides. This will be done through increased engagement with partner's and the public. Tools for engagement include public presentations, direct meetings and the creation of high quality report's and marketing material that promote the Saint John waterfront and Waterfront Development's role. Confidential Document: 2009_Budget_Requestvlfinal 2 158 Saint John Waterfront Development 2009 BUDGET 1.2 The Saint John Development Corporation (Combined) SAINT JOHN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (COMBINED OPERATIONS) STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AS AT SEPTEMBER 30, 2008 YEAR END FORECAST & 2009 BUDGET PROPOSAL DRAFT #6 Y.T.D. Y.T,D. Y.T.D. 2008 2008 2008 2009 Actual Budget Variance Budget Forecast Variance Budget Revenues: Waterfront Development/Partnership 120,000 120,000 160,000 160,000 160,000 City Grant 147,020 147,020 - 196,029 196,029 190,000 Rental Income 41,250 41,250 _ 55,000 55,000 55,000 Administration Fees 19,331 19,422 (91) 25,900 25,900 26,637 Investment Income 28,390 15,100 13,290 20,000 35,000 15,000 30,000 PNB Funding 23,205 25,000 (1,795) 50,000 50,000 - 50,000 Grants, ACOA Funding 450) - (50) - X50) (50) - Total 379,146 367,792 11,354 506,929 521,879 14,950 511,637 Operating Expenses: - Waterfront Development 245,068 241,314 3,754 288,975 343,818 (54,843) 303,078 Salary & Benefits 71,947 74,512 (2,565) 98,092 98,092 - 98,322 Other Services/Training 1,161 2,250 (1,089) 3,000 7,000 (4,000) 3,000 Total 318,176 318,076 100 390,067 448,910 53,843 404,400 Administration Expenses: Office Lease 19,898 15,480 4,418 20,644 28,000 (7,356) 22,428 Audit Services 7,415 7,600 (185) 7,640 7,415 185 7,800 Office Electricity/Cleaning 453 1,763 (1,310) 2,350 500 1,850 2,670 Office Equiplcomputers 6,205 4,500 1,705 6,000 6,000 - 6,000 Directors Expenses 1,912 2,160 (248) 2,880 2,880 - 2,655 Business Affairs/Travel 7,315 1,875 5,440 2,500 7,500 (5,000) 6,500 Office Supplies/Mist 2,615 1,125 1,490 1,500 4,500 (3,000) 4,500 Bank Fees 1,006 1,125 (119) 1,500 1,450 50 1,500 Telephone 2,765 3,750 (985) 5,000 3,600 1,400 4,000 Postage & Courier 973 450 523 600 700 (100) 1,000 Waterfront Admin Allocation (26,749) (18,028) (8,721) (24„037) (35,000) 10,963 (26,276) Total 23,808 21,800 2,008 26„537 27,545 (1,008) 32,777 Operating Income 37,162 27,916 9,246 90,325 45,424 (44,901) 74„460 Other Expenses: - Legal Services 2,815 7,500 (4,685) 10,000 7,000 3,000 61,000 Insurance 38,965 39,000 (35) 39,000 39,900 (900) 39,984 Cathodic Protect. Electric 1,280 975 305 1,300 1,500 (200) 2,000 Cathodic Protect Inspection 2,064 9,750 (7,686) 13,000 15,000 (2,000) 5,000 S.S.P. Wall Maintenance - - - 90,000 82,000 81000 3,000 Residential Park 3,247 3,000 247 4,000 3,500 500 25,000 Boardwalk/f=loating Wharf 8,210 27,750 (19,540) 37,000 13,500 23,500 15,000 Snow Removal 1,800 1,500 300 2,000 1,600 400 2,000 Market Square Public Leases Audit - - - - - - 50,000 Miscellaneous - - - - - 20,000 Total 58,381 89,475 (31,094) 196,300 164,000 32,300 167,584 Surplus (Deficit) (21,219) (61,559) 40,340 (105,975) (118,576) (12,601) (93,524) Note 1: The 2008 Forecast is comprised of9 months of actual results and 3 months of forecast results, Note 2; The 2009 Budget Deficit forecas t of( $93,524) is comprised of a $25,000 SJDC contribu tion to Waterfront Development which will be expensed from SJDC investments. Also, $68,078 of unused Waterfront Funding forrasted to carryover. Confidential Document: 2009-Budget Requestvl final 3 159 Saint John Waterfront Development 1.3 Waterfront Development SAINT JOHN WATERFRONT PARTNERSHIP STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AS AT SEPTEMBER 30, 2008 YEAR END FORECAST & 2009 BUDGET PROPOSAL DRAFT" #6 2009 BUDGET Y.T.D. Y.T.D. Y.T.D. Forecast 2008 Forecast 2009 Actual Budget Variance Year End Budget Variance Budget REVENUE: WD Partner Contribution 120,000 120,000 0 160,000 160,000 0 160,000 SJDC Contribution 18,000 18,000 0 25,000 25,000 0 25;000 WD Carry Forward 58,500 40,500 18,000 53,975 53,975 0 88,078 WD ACOA FUNDING (249) 0 (249) (249) 0 249 0 WD PNB 23,205 25,000 (1,795) 50,000 50,000 0 50,000 CityofSaintJohn -Deferred Revenue 123,170 123.170 0 123,170 123,170 0 0 TOTAL REVENUE 342,626 326,670 15,956 411,896 412.145 249 303078 EXPENSES: WD Salaries 54,362 58,493 (4,131) 72,483 77,990 5,507 78,212 WD Benefits 8,706 7,938 768 11,608 10,584 (1,024) 15,351 WD Admin (SJDC Allocation) 26,109 18,028 8,081 34,812 24,037 (10,775) 25,276 WD Communications\Notices 1,974 6,750 (4,776) 2,632 9,000 6,368 8,000 Promotions & Marketing 4,987 20,250 (15,263) 6,649 27,000 20,351 10,000 Research I Analysis I Studies 0 8,148 0 20,000 10,864 0 27,238 WD Web Site Maintenance 0 2,625 (2,625) 0 3,500 3,500 3,500 WD Business Dev Activity 130,182 7,500 122,582 133,182 10,000 (123,182) 10,000 Computers & Software 591 0 591 788 0 (788) 0 WD Site Visits\Conferenoes 0 4,875 (4,875) 5,000 6,500 1,500 5,000 WD Design\Plan Fees 11,494 22,500 (11,006) 50,000 30,000 (20,000) 90,000 Strategic' Land Use Planning 0 0 0 0 70,000 0 20,000 Coast Guard 2,939 0 2,939 2,939 0 (2,939) 0 Harbour Passage Opening 3,725 7,125 (3,400) 3.725 9,500 5,775 9,500 TOTAL EXPENSES 245,069 164,231 88,986 343,818 288,975 (115,707) 303,078 PROFIT (LOSS) Surplus (Deficit) 97,557 162;439 (73,030) 68,078 123.170 115,956 0 Note: City of Saint John provided funding for Harbour Passage resurfacing received in December 2007 and expensed in July 2008. Confidential Document: 2009_Budget_Requestv1 final 4 160 Saint John Waterfront Development 1.4 Market Square Parking Garage The Market Square Parking Garage 2009 Operatiing Budget 2009 BUDGET 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 Actual Budget YTD Actual Forcast Variance Budget Revenues: Hourly Parking 597,641 650,000 424,380 636,570 (13,430) 658,850 Monthly Parking 220,351 348,400 241,814 360,000 11,600 380,000 Hotel Parking 327,324 225,000 142,631 215,000 (10,000) 216,000 Event Parking 36,838 35,000 21,313 32,000 (3,000) 35,000 Hotel Sub Lease Rent 40,000 40,000 26,666 40,000 - 40,000 Advertising 1,326 - 1,326 2,000 2,000 2,000 1,223,480 1,298.400 858,130 1,285,570 (12,8301 1,331,850 Expenses SalariesM/ages 181,476 183,300 125,035 187,500 (4,200) 199,400 Administration Fees - SJDC 24,443 25,968 17,163 25,711 257 26,637 Management Fees 15,500 15,545 10,363 15,545 - 15,545 Audit Services 3,345 3,500 3,457 3,457 44 3,600 Insurance 6,420 6,500 4,333 6,500 - 6,700 TelephonetRadios 2,624 2,600 1,718 3,200 (600) 2,600 Accounting 1,800 1,800 1,200 1,800 - 1,800 Bank Charges 1,800 1,800 1,200 1,800 - 1,800 Data Processing 1,500 1,500 1,000 1,500 - 1,500 ShopSu'pplies 1,152 1,500 847 1,200 300 1,500 Office Supplies 475 1,000 127 900 100 1,000 Tickets 3,585 3,000 325 500 2,500 4,000 Postage & Courier 830 1,000 692 1,000 - 1,000 Cleaning 660 2,000 220 1,000 1,000 1,000 Miscellaneous/Advertising - 1,000 - - 1,000 1,000 Snow Removal 13 500 37 100 400 500 Uniforms 115 200 - - 200 1,000 Damage Claims Deductible - 500 - - 500 500 Signage 21 1,000 55 510 490 1,000 HST 3,422 3,156 2,231 3,342 (186) 3,156 Total Variable Expenses 249,180 257,369 170,004 255,565 1,805 275,238 Total Contribution Margin 974,299 1,041,031 688,127 1,030,006 (11,026) 1,056;612 Camera/Monitors - - - - - 1,000 Maintenance-CO System 3,080 3,500 - 3,200 300 3,500 Maintenance-Equipment 330 2,000 1,079 1,700 300 2,000 Maintenance-Doors 1,176 1,500 96 1,000 500 11500 Maintenance-Electric 1,110 1,000 - - 1,000 1,000 Maintenance-Other 2,212 4,500 1,514 2,500 2,000 4,500 Maintenance-Sweeper 1,026 1,500 1,513 2,500 (1,000) 1,500 Lighting Improvements 1,870 2,000 - 1,500 500 2,000 Painting/Paving 2,440 2,500 - 2,600 (100) 2,600 13,245 18,500 4,203 15,000 3,500 19,600 Surplus(Deficit) 961,055 1,022,531 683,924 1,015,006 (7,5261 1,037,012 Note 1: The 2008 Forecast is comprised of 8 months of actual results and 4 months of forecast results. Confidential Document: 2009_Budget_Requestvlfinal 5 161 Saint John Waterfront Development Section 2. Capital udget* 2.1 Waterfront Development Improvements surrounding Market Square Boardwalk $ 600,000 Pugsley Park (A) & Broad St. Park $ 715,000 Reversing Falls Phase I & 11 $1,500,000 Marco Polo $ 150,000 Total $2,965,000 Coast Guard Site Consultants & Reports $ 400,000 Site acquisition $2,800,000 Sea Wall Reoairs $3,400,000 Capital Budget Request Grand Total $9,565M 2009 BUDGET Saint John Waterfront Development continues to seek out partnerships to help meet the capital goals related to the Inner Harbour Land Use Plan and to date has raised $4 million from the Federal & Provincial Government's and $1.4 million from the Private Sector. The spirit of partnership will ensure that the Saint John waterfront continues to grow. * see Appendix A for a 4 year Capital Budget forecast Confidential Document: 2009-Budget_Requestvlfinal 6 162 Saint John Waterfront Development 2009 BUDGET Appendix Previously Forecasted Carry-over for 2009 Total Request from 2008* Budget for 2009 2010** 2011** 2032** Water Street Saint Andrews Park Three Sisters Park Broad Street 361,435 361„435 Pugsley Park (A) 354,000 354,000 Pugsley Park (B) 1,156,279 1,156,279 S361,435 51,510,279 $715,435 1,156,279 Reversing Falls West Designs, Studies & Reports Phase 1 750,000 750,000 Phase 11- Lower Falls 750,000 750,000 Phase III - Lower Falls 2,400,000 Falls View Park 1,800,000 River View Dave 900,000 900,000 $750,000 $750,000 , $1,500,000 $4;200,000 $900,000 $900,000 Boardwalk - Hilton/York Point 600,000 $600.000 Coast Guard Site Consulting Fees 400,000 400,000 Land Acquisition 2,800,000 2,800,000 Seawall Repairs 3,400,000 3,400,000 1,800,000 Harbour Passage 0 1.200.000 1,200.000 53,200,000 $3,400,0001 $6,600,000.. $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,800,000 Lcivalist Plaza 1,800,000 600,000 Small Craft South Market Slin Marco Polo Proiect Harbour Passage Lower Cove Loop Partridge Island Net Municipal Requests * Projects in design phase/consulting phase These capital projects will involve partnership funding C©nridential Document: 2009_Budget-Requestvl final 360,000 150,000 $350,000 7 163 1,200,000 2,400,000 $9.565,435 8,356,2791 _ 5,100,0001 4,260,000 Application for By-law a Zoning modification Demande de ' r~ S r le zonage Applicant Related Information / Renseignements s r l a ur Name o Applicant I o Mailing A&~= of appLica& / Addnmc e d 1 D :Se) l- F Number / N ro tdl6mpieur Name of Property Owner different) / Nom du k i6taire (si diff6rent) scc+t Address / / Code pos~ Property Information / Renseignements; r i Locadon / Emplacement St ti c);)Ll1- z~ 75 Civic # / No voirie Street / Rue PID / NIP Lot Area / S cic lot U IV GlfttAy V,DStreet Frontage 1 d W1,2 h Existing Use of Property / Utilisation e dc la d a U on D6sigmation le plan ct Low Denqii~ i i t Amendment t/ i s i 164 Development Proposal / Proposition d'aminagement Description of Proposal / Description de la proposition W,t Wduld 11Iz" o c1 2-one_d -d - You must pravide a scaled site plan that illustrates your proposal. You may also provide photographs, building plans, elevation drawings and any other form of information. The plan must show the dimensions of the property, the location of all buildings, driveways, parking areas, landscaping and signs. It is important that the distance between the property boundary and buildings are shown. -bra & a -/k a e dwnev, muG her lives ur,, buildn y ap. does ii-le Vous devez fournir un plan du site a l'echelle illustrant votre proposition. Vous pouvez egalement fournir des photographies, des plans de bMment, des dessins de plan d'elevation et route autre forme de renseignement. Le plan dolt indiquer les dimensions de la propriete, 1'emplacement de la totalite des bdnments, des allees, des sires de stationnement des amenagements paysagers et des pannea= de signalisation. It est important d'indiquer la distance entre les limites de la propriete et les bdtiments. owne~r. Q Provide reasons why these amendments should be approved 1 Fourtur tout autre renseignement oonoernam votre proposition qui Pourrait &MC 3ppi'OlN6M. The home- (Veks 1~~Lrc~~c~ SPr~ o s (7 -ft)),-ge 4e-1-7epriel-il. 6,urretil otviier'had- no knowl-edje WI, M bu, d l'rv Wc1,-S f 7-lih ad QS a rr-t7+al apadnali. Provide awry other information about your proposal that would be helpful / Fournir tout autre renseignement concemant votre proposition qui panrait & re uWe. T7 L / OMe S Ji 4 ~~'f C.-' 14 ~`lJ~~. 5 -0wh eeY l/'?~P•~'~ f.Fx G 40 LI -5e- 1~' S Signature of Applicant / Signature du demande Date .T,7/v X C1 5400 Application Fee Enclosed / Ciyoint les finis de demaode de 400 $ If you are not the owner of the land in question Si vous n'etes pas le proprietaire du terrain en question, please have the owner sign below- The signature of veuillez obtenir la signature du proprielaire dons la pantie the owner is authorizing this application to proceed cklessous La signature du proprietaire autorisant le for consideration by Common Council. traftemerit de la presente demande pour que cette derriere itero e par le conseil communal. Signature of Owner (if applicable) 7~7 Signature due pmpridtaire (s'il y a lieu) 714,V Dater !O 165 Zj, Z N z, tj „w w ~Ah f, 1'l V , V l i-7 , . . , v / r~ / v l V / , V J L f , V L. ! V f- nt - 1!) N - ~ N N v - n1 f N ' o E N a Sri f O+- "n 0 a. 10 11 E m N 40 ~r 7.75N al., E r s9+at~,. ! ! r~ J 1 i r N Q1 O @ r( Q ~ 7 4 C r 3.J v' in 99. 121- 301 o09rrn 0 S-, lh 4 m' j O.O~n Fcal. J fn c 0 M +n N N (p Irs t] W W h co 6, HO LLANU I :THING 337 435.967 6za 797,112 2 103 337 473a 668 0 33 453.460 668 871g23C u " T R C E r (05 337 491.ia5 SS8 865.8198 1 123 337 442.964 66& 826,795 124 337'446,463 s88 641.607 125 337 484:071 668 835,53C 126 337 480,855 668 820.701 3839 337 540.283 669 005,31[ 3940 337 451.173 660 687.42E ; SCALE FACTOR • 1,000027 f` W r..----irt r wrLL/VI V7. V9 Ly.VI/U6 Nu.af0 Registrailon Dole DEED NO _243347 BUOK -LOA PAGt _Z_N]_._ REG SEPT 4, 1973 P,I.D. NO, 299875 Legend PL PI¢e■d FD Faun d I Me¢s Meaeured Dielonc■ IPYan. Plan Dislene■ 'Celc CcIculal■d Dilfancf 0, Airmulh. Co-ordinate Polnl fi*terent■ lY I Suevay IA f (SM1 I 0 Yl Iran Plpe. ( z I.oa Bar. (IB) Fsac■ ' ❑ My dra page. SIr4C14rr. wooden Surveyaf7 Pnsr Srrrbed (WP) (7 Caleulalre Co•orlIn alr point (Cale P1~ 20 r2 A Control point M _ m New Brunswick Ca-ordrrnal■ llaaumrnl ♦ _ _ _ CoNemrnr. 2 Nor to Seale. m: aquore Melree. Notes IIAIurnullhe refer to N R Grid Norih. 2)AiimuIhN B dis Ianc■N are rounded oil la the ■eorasl la' B 0 Olin rrspecllv■ly. A)Ar ea al Nur vey ¢ul trued I RUNOelele0Per r ph■ral in (armeliah is camp IIs d Iram var i oue Naar eee B should be vrrifled 4)AII docum.nI 6 plan references rotor to roe Registry Offla■ for the Caunly of SaIni John S)ATilnulhs S coardlnases vrer■ derived from N.B Grid Monlrmems 3939 a 3940 1 [fIIltleaQlan nor made as to I■pal title. bel11 Ih■ domain al a latryer, nor to Ih■ Toning by-tae or reguloliohs, being Ihr doendin of a development alireer. Surveyor's Certificate I herby cerlrly Io the eorreelnese of Ihie plan a Ihal 1 hove satisfied the requirements or the Surveys Act. 1 SURVEYED SY SRI N WALSH N.S.L.S.T DATED JULY 6 - r991S SURVEYOR'S REAL PROPERTY REPORT for Joseph a Rita Beckwith, Civic No. 99 Simpson Drive, City-of Saint John, County of Saint John, Province of New Brunswick, CoPrnIGW C / Ldt.B:LS. 19 "No la llson nuly copy, reproduce, d1mrUftfl or alter this plan in whole or in part without wrinan oermission." 6 4 0 5 10 15 CERTIFIED CORRECT IL4-G 1 300 g FULTON SURVEYS LTD 173 CHARLOTTE STREET SAINY JOHN. N.6 rna - F 11 onnrr 168 11 pars nrN PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT RE: 99 SIMPSON DRIVE Public Notice is hereby given that the Common Council of The City of Saint John intends to consider amending The City of Saint John Zoning By-law at its regular meeting to be held in the Council Chamber on Monday, November 24, 2008 at 7:00 p.m., by: Rezoning a parcel of land located at 99 Simpson Drive, having an area of approximately 590 square metres, also identified as PID No. 00299875, from "R-1B" One Family Residential to "R-4" Four Family Residential. PROJET DE MODIFICATION DE L'ARRETt SUR LE ZONAGE OBJET: 99, PROMENADE SIMPSON Avis public est donne, par la presente, que le conseil communal de The City of Saint John a Pintention d'etudier la modification suivante de Parretti sur le zonage de The City of Saint John, au eours de la reunion ordinaire du conseil prevue le Iundi 24 novembre 2008 a 19 h dans la salle du conseil: Rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 590 m6tres carres, situee au 99, promenade Simpson, et identifiee sous le NID 00299875, de zone r6sidentielle - habitations unifamiliales «R-1B» a zone residentielle - habitations de quatre logements ccR-4». REASON FOR CHANGE: RAISON DE LA MODIFICATION: To recognize an existing three-family dwelling as a Reconnaitre ]'utilisation d'un edifice a trois permitted use. logements existant. The proposed amendment may be inspected by any interested person at the office of the Common Clerk, or in the office of Planning and Development, City Hall, 15 Market Square, Saint John, N.B. between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, inclusive, holidays excepted. Written objections to the amendment may be sent to the undersigned at City Hall. Elizabeth Gormely, Common Clerk 658-2862 Toute personne int6ressee peut examiner le projet de modification au bureau du greffier communal ou au bureau de l'urbanisme et du developpement a Ph6tel de ville au 15, Market Square, Saint John, N: B., entre 8 h 30 et 16 h 30 du Iundi au vendredi, sauf les jours feries. Veuillez faire parvenir vos objections au projet de modification par 6crit a Pattention du soussigne a Ph6tel de ville. Elizabeth Gormley, Greffiere communale 658-2862 169 City of Saint John INTERNAL INSERTION ORDER For City of Saint John use only: Budget Number: 110 0801 442 2010 Department: Common Clerk's Office (Account # 71206) Contact: Elizabeth Gormley Phone: (506) 658-2862 Fax: (506) 674-4214 Special Instructions (if any): Reference: 99 Simpson Drive, public hearing, November 24"', 2008 Newspaper Insertion Dates (Check as applicable) (SJTJ= Saint John Telegraph Journal) SJTJ City Information Ad Date(s): Tuesday, October 28", 2008 and Tuesday, November 18", 2008 " SJTJ Independent Placement Date(s): SJTJ Classifieds Date(s): Information for Ad (Boldface anything you want Bold in Ad, Centre, Tab, etc.) Section Headline: [ General Notice ❑ Tender R Proposal ScQ Public Notice Sub-Headline (if applicable): Text: INSERT ATTACHED Call to Action: Elizabeth Gormley, Common Clerk/Greffiere communale Contact: Telephone: (506) 658-2862 170 BY-LAW NUMBER C.P. 110- A LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW OF THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN ARRETE N° C.P. 110- ARRETE MODIFIANT L'ARRETE SUR LE ZONAGE DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN Be it enacted by The City of Saint Lors dune reunion du conseil John in Common Council convened, as communal, The City of Saint John a follows: decrete cc qui suit : The Zoning By-law of The City of L'arretd sur le zonage de The City Saint John enacted on the nineteenth day of of Saint John, decrete le dix-neuf (19) December, A.D. 2005, is amended by: decembre 2005, est modifid par: 1 Amending Schedule "A", the Zoning Map of The City of Saint John, by re-zoning a parcel of land located at 99 Simpson Drive, having an area of approximately 590 square metres, also identified as PID number 00299875, from "R-IB" One Family Residential to "R-4" Four Family Residential 1 La modification de ('annexe aA)>, Plan de zonage de The City of Saint John, permettant de modifier la designation pour une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 590 metres carres, situee au 99, promenade Simpson, et identifiee sous le NID 00299875, de zone residentielle - habitations unifamiliales c<R-iB» a zone residentielle - habitations de quatre logements <<R-4» - all as shown on the plan attached hereto and forming part of this by-law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF The City of Saint John has caused the Corporate Common Seal of the said City to be affixed to this by-law the * day of A.D. 2008 and signed by: Mayor/Maire - toutes les modifications sont indiquees sur le plan ci-joint et font partie du present arrete. EN FOI DE QUOI, The City of Saint John a fait apposer son sceau communal sur le present arrete le 2008, avec les signatures suivantes : Common Clerk/Greffiere communale First Reading - Premiere lecture Second Reading - Deuxieme lecture Third Reading - Troisieme lecture 171 November 19, 2008 Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Rezoning Application - 99 Simpson Drive On October 27, 2008 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee considered the attached report at its November 18, 2008 meeting. Mr. Scott Blount, the owner of the subject property, appeared to speak on behalf of the application and indicated that he was not in agreement with the recommendation in the Staff Report. He spoke concerning the history of the property since he acquired it in 2001 and why he felt the rezoning to accommodate the additional dwelling units should be approved. In addition, Mrs. Gill Blount appeared to speak in favour of the application. No letters, either in favour of or opposed to the application, were received by the Committee. After considering the attached report and presentations, the Committee adopted the recommendation as set out below. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council rezone the property situated at 99 Simpson Drive (PID 00299875) from "R-IB" One Family Residential to "R-4" Four Family Residential subject to the following conditions, imposed pursuant to Section 39 of the Community Planning Act: 1) The maximum number of dwelling units permitted in the existing building be limited to two (2), 2) That there be no dwelling units contained in the basement, 3) In the event that the existing building is destroyed or demolished, any new building constricted on the site can only be used as a single-family dwelling. Respectfully submitted, Stephen Horgan Chairman 172 DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 2008 TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT FOR: MEETING OF NOVEMBER 18, 2008 Patrick Foran Planning Officer SUBJECT: Name of Applicant: Scott Blount Name of Owner: Scott Blount Location: 99 Simpson Drive PID: 00299875 Municipal Plan: Low Density Residential Zoning: Existing: "R-IB" One Family Residential Proposed: "R-4" Four Family Residential Proposal: To recognize the existing three-family dwelling as a permitted use. Type of Application: Rezoning JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE: 173 Scott Blount Page 2 99 Simpson Drive November 14, 2008 The Conn mitt, Plaiming Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to Common Council concerning proposed rezoning applications. The Committee's recommendation will be considered by Common Council at a Public Hearing on Monday, November 24, 2008. STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE: That the application be denied. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES: Municipal Operations and Engineering has no objection to the proposed rezoning. Buildings and Inspection Services indicates that this matter has been pursued by their office for more than a year. There are continuing issues with Minimum Standards and work being done without a permit. Fire Department has been advised of the application. ANALYSIS: The subject property is located on Simpson Drive on the block bounded by Holland Street and Walter Street in Glen Falls. The immediate area is primarily comprised of one-storey single-family dwellings although our records indicate that there are some two-family dwellings in the neighbourhood as well. The area also abuts the Rothesay Avenue service corridor, which contains a variety of commercial uses. The property was purchased by the applicant in 2001 and he has indicated that there were three dwelling units existing within the building at that time'. However, the Zoning By-law only permits single-family dwellings in this zone. The records for our Department, which date back to 1979, do not contain any information to indicate when the building on the site became a three-family dwelling although the building itself appears to have existed for some time. It is worth noting that the tax assessment data lists the property as containing two dwelling units. In addition, the old City Directories suggest that the additional dwelling units were established in the mid-'nineties or later. Further, the existing building does not conform to the standards of the Building Code pertaining to multi-tenant dwellings and it is Staff s understanding that significant modifications are necessary to bring it up to the minimum Code requirements. At present, no building permit to address the violations can be endorsed because the use of the property is not permitted. To bring the use of the property into conformity with the Zoning By-law, the applicant has submitted a i Our records do not indicate that any request for zoning confirmation was submitted to our office. 174 Scott Blount Page 3 99 Simpson Drive November 14, 2008 request to rezone the site to "R--t " Four Rimily Residewial in order to recognize the existing use'. The purpose of the rezoning is to resolve the conflict between the actual use of the property and the zoning of the site. No other changes are proposed. The subject site is located in the midst of the Marsh Creek Flood Risk Area, which is of particular note given that the third apartment is situated in the building's basement. It is Staff"s understanding that the basement has flooded on at least one occasion and given that the entire dwelling unit would be below grade, Staff cannot recommend changing the zoning to allow the third apartment in light of the flooding concerns. CONCLUSION: In light of the above, Staff does not believe that the use of the property as a three-family dwelling satisfies our standard for being considered a long-established or non-conforming use, such as in other situations where it appears the building was constructed as three- or four-unit building (and used as such) prior to adoption of the City's first Zoning By-law in 1945. Consequently, there is no planning rationale to support spot-zoning a property to condone a use that was illegally established. In addition, given the practical concerns of allowing a basement apartment in the Flood Risk Area, there is no compelling reason to support the zoning amendment and it is recommended that the application be denied. I'F Project No. 08-i 16 The Zoning By-lair does not contain an "R-3" Three Family Residential zone. In similar situations, Council has rezoned other properties to "R-4" Four Famik Residential with a condition imposed pursuant to Section 39 of the Conununin- Planning Act, restricting the use of the existing building to a maximum of three dig elling units. 175 T DEVELOPPEMENT St l ftf It4G ANA DEVELOPMENT~URgANI - 1 IM I ~ f PLAW4 » w I I`I • I f » B - 2 ! rue Walter St. I ~ w ■ r . Iw ■ , '1 I I ' ' w ■ w ' rue Holland St. r rl ' Z9 ~~.,.u,...,.,.~.,i,...•. ru S '768dSt. : I ~ - * cour Princess Ct. F,.,...,.,.,, :;r~,•e•xi,r 00299$7 u ect Sitelsite en question: S l 1 ~ Simpson Drive Location: 99, prom• ' vembre 4, 200$ November I n° pate: 1 scalelPas a pechelle • Scalelechelle' Not to 176 Sr av. Broad • r dwaraV. J Q o ry CT r 15 COM - 22 m MON j D z r fink f 17' y! ,,gym LANE p 15.22m 15 , `m ° cv 15.22 m +120° cn 15.2 2 in B L SEE 0 DRAWER C 1 k t_or is LOT 14 a No. 6t LOT ! 5 _ m 11:.. r PD_ 2 X! NO m tit l~ sb z 3 0 LOT 13 ip • ' S.oam °2.d3 -<098 m LOT 12 W i 4 ^3 CIVIC xp 99 p . ~ ".•~Q • a m 3 15 U -20, r 5. 24 m N Xn ' 1 J S~MPSpN pRly~ 1} tv ~ c U 0 41 t r-t- U1~~ ~ v 'ty w~act J 000-4 nQ~ a e 1 7jjj " voj ca m pc Section 39 Conditions - 861-891 Fairville Blvd. That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of a parcel of land with an area of approximately 2.3 hectares, located at 861-891 Fairville Boulevard, also identified as being PID Nos. 00032813 and 0032821, for a shopping centre be subject to the following conditions: a) The developer must pave all parking areas, loading areas, manoeuvring areas and driveways with asphalt and enclose them with cast-in-place concrete curbs to protect the landscaped areas and to facilitate proper drainage; b) The developer must provide adequate site drainage facilities in accordance with a detailed drainage plan, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate; c) The developer must provide all utilities underground, including power and telephone from the existing overhead facilities; d) The developer must landscape all disturbed areas of the site not occupied by buildings, driveways, walkways, parking and loading areas, including a minimum of 6 metres (20 feet) inside the front property line abutting Fairville Boulevard, and the required landscaping must extend onto the City street right-of-way to the edge of the City curb/sidewalk; e) Direct street access to the site is limited to a maximum of two driveways, as generally indicated on the submitted proposal, and the developer must also provide a vehicular interconnection between the subject site and the adjacent shopping centre site at 917 Fairville Boulevard; f) The developer must provide a landscaped walkway, through the parking lot, from the proposed building to the adjacent shopping centre site at 917 Fairville Boulevard to the satisfaction of the Development Officer; g) The site shall not be developed except in accordance with a detailed site plan, landscaping plan and building elevation plans, prepared by the developer and subject to the approval of the Development Officer, indicating the location of all buildings, parking areas, driveways, walkways, loading areas, signs, exterior lighting, exterior building materials and finishes, landscaped areas (including location and types of planting materials), and other site features; h) The approved plans mentioned in conditions (b) and (g) above must be attached to the application for building permit for the development, except that such plans are not required for permit applications for site preparation and/or foundation only; i) All site improvements shown on the approved site plan, landscaping plan and drainage plans, except for landscaping, must be completed prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for any part of the development; and the landscaping must be completed within one year of building permit approval. 179 t~ 10 % r ~ dp T N r ~ 4 ~ \ L ` ~ 1 ♦ 180 CC qq i • f ~ p A ' ~ I I I l I i i l I 1 I imp 4 ~ y y , I l 1 , y y , , 1y ~ y ' g l wl lig 1 •M y y I E E !I.iil!H R l I 1 1 I 'l I . I ` ~nl I I i 1 , 1 1 l I , r i 116 F lk ~#I r +I I 1 V .On, Ak dl& Am' Am AK a A4ft Am Alk A 0% A Im w w w w w w. w w w w w w "gig ~ ; r N ~~Qr 11 ' 1 1 lp, 1 1 1 1 Y,- 1 111 u~Y 11 1 1 wl IL ~A 3. r pit n 1 • 1 " ► r~ 1J~, r " "PWII 1~ TT11lItY 1~~ t t PP n b -..f"ttl .1 b, N " r-`' uF~ 11 N• 3 ~ Jill - , lip Ann. 1A1 1 11111 1 om Iju y _ - PAW, a 9 1 I ~ ` k I , ~ ~ I a tr _ ; 6 i i F~~~ 'r g~a°P ba %4H l C f 1 6 o-4 ~„}iq ~o 1 i i ~us~s k I • Wass ~ ~ _ ~ ~ i J w9 , a 218 m co a illy®,~►- All ~ 1~ L Z 1 ~I 4 I ~ ~a ,ypf, I 1 ~w 1 I I - I 1 a I I 1 I ~ f I 1 I I S I It i 6 _ A Q V h < < a 1ti~ytiS11ti1r ti~~M ~~as~asas3R~? ~aa~i p 6&M i M AN i. - A A AAM A• 0 ■ A A A 1 A!® AM *A M 1 A.A A LO IMF d_ c! The City of Saint John November 6, 2008 Mayor Ivan Court, Members of Common Council Subject: Budget Deliberations 1 Presentations Your Worship, Members Of Council: Council is about to commence with the process of establishing the financial plan for the year 2009. The budget deliberations and presentations from City Departments, agencies, Boards and Commissions is an essential part of informing Council members of the current service levels, issues and concerns, as well as future needs, goals, and wants. It is for this reason that Council must establish some standardized format for receiving information, written and oral. Council is about to enter into a complex process that requires a positive outcome. The process must be transparent, easily understood by all, with stake holders understanding how decisions are formulated. Recommendation: That the City Manager and the Commissioner of Finance establish standardized guidelines for written and oral presentations to be made to Council by departments, agencies, boards and Commissions Respectfully Submitted, (received via e-mail) Councillor Christopher Titus. z SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www,saintjohn.ca Q C.R 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 41-1 186 l }r ~ Lu ry The City of Saint John Nov. 20. 2008 Your worship Ivan Court Members of Common Council City of Saint John Dear Mayor Court and Fellow Councillors: Subject; building inspection of accommodations recently vacated by those eligible for subsidized housing A great deal of attention has been focused recently on the urgent need for affordable housing. While the citizens of Saint John applaud efforts to provide safe, affordable housing for those most in need, many are concerned that the vacated accommodations are frequently sub-standard and designed to perpetuate the unfortunate conditions that many in need of help face. Those seeking subsidized housing are frequently doing so to escape accommodations that are questionable in many respects. The city, through building inspection, has an opportunity to promote continuing improvements in existing accommodations as affordable housing becomes more available. Motion: That a plan be developed whereby premises vacated by those moving into subsidized housing are inspected immediately upon being vacated. Respectfully submitted. (received via e-mail) Councillor Killen SAINT JOHN RO. Box 1971 Saint Jahn, NB Canada E21- 4L1 I wwww.saintjohn.ca I C. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 187 J7 y _i~. The city of Saint John Nov. 20, 2008 Your worship Ivan Court Members of Common Council City of Saint John Dear Mayor Court and Fellow Councillors: Subject: 7 wonders of the'svorltld I received a call frorn Terry Munn regarding this issue. I include the tent of that email below. In light of the city's clear understanding of the importance of the Bay of Fundy in the region's tourism strategy, engaging citizens in its promotion in this way is appropriate. Vote Bay of Fundy for 7 Wonders of World Calling all <insert company name> employees - the Bay of Fundy needs your vote] Fundy is competing in a worldwide contest to declare the New7Wonders of Nature. `The Bay of Fundy is one of only 5 Canadian sites only Maritime site) selected to participate in this global contest. Vote online at www.ba),offtindvtourisin.com before December 31, when only one Canadian site is selected to represent our country during the contest's new phase in 2009 phase. Here's Fundy's awesome case for becoming a New7W onder of Nature: • compares in biodiversity to the Amazon Rainforest • home to the highest tides in the world • world renown geology and paleontology, including the world's best collection of Coal Age fossils dating from 300 million years ago • summer feeding area for endangered North Atlantic Right whales • critical feeding ground for 90+% of world's semi-palmated sandpipers • best site in the world for tidal power potential • UNESCO has recently recognized upper Bay of Fundy as a Biosphere Reserve and. Joggins Fossil Cliffs as a World Heritage Site Currently the New7Wonders of Nature contest has over 400 wordwide sites participating and expects 1 billion online votes by the contest's conclusion with the winning 7 sites, SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada 67L 4L1 I wwwr.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint Jahn, N.-B. Canada F2L4Lt 188 Vote online for Fundy now: www.bavoffundvtourism.com Need more info? Contact Terri McCulloch, Manager, Bay of Fundy Tourism, 902-254-2772 or terri@bayoffundytourism.com Motion: That council urge citizens to vote for the Bay of Fundy as one of the New Seven Wonders of the World. Respectfully submitted, Councillor Killen 189 j The City of Saint John November 21, 2008 Your worship Ivan Court Members of Common Council City of Saint John Dear Mayor Court and Fellow Councillors: Subject: Public Information session on Tannery Ct. Proposal Considerable public debate has followed the announcement of the proposed Tannery Ct. Coop subsidized housing development for non-elderly singles at 185 Carmarthen St. Through unfortunate circumstances, a meeting the city had planned for this past Thursday was cancelled. Through considerable discussion with representatives of Tannery Ct and through our attendance at an alternative meeting hosted by the South End Sustainable Community Group (SESC), Councillor Snook and I have found a willingness on the part ofthe parties concerned to seek: again an opportunity for an open sharing of information. Motion: That Council direct staff to organize and to promote a public information session at an appropriate location where representatives of the following stakeholders he given an opportunity to present their views on the Tannery Ct, development: 1) Tannery Ct. Coop 2) SF,SC 3) Social Housing with the Province of New Brunswick 4) The City of Saint John Planning Department. This meeting should be scheduled for the earliest possible date acceptable to all. As part of the planning process, staff should prepare an information bulletin, acceptable to all involved, that will promote the meeting in advance. It is essential that any meeting or bulletin provided by the city stress that all citizens are 4velcome and that no view will be promoted by the city at the expense of any other. Respectfully submitted, (received via email) Councillor Killen SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 ~ www.saintlohn.ca ~ C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E21. 41_1 190 p 4 /1 Jln G" rs The City of Saint John November 20, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Councillors Your Worship and Councillors: At the last meeting of Council I offered to provide some information that I had on the issue of vacant and derelict buildings from other jurisdictions. These items are attached. Motion: That the attached information on vacant and derelict buildings be received for information. incer , Peter McGuire Councillor SAINT JOHN P.O. Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 rwrw.saintjohn.ca C.R 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 191 PLANNING, PROPERTY & DEVELOPMENT Wirmi eg DEPARTMENT A Guide to the Vacant and )ere-.ict Bui-Aings By-Iaw 351Z(( 4 A By-law to establish a system to regulate the condition and maintenance of vacant buildings and establish a process to take title to derelict buildings July 2004 192 Copies of the by-law may also be obtained at: City Clerk's Office Council Building, 510 Main Street PH: (204) 986-2171 FAX: (204) 947-3452 www.winnipeg.ca/clerks Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of information contained in this booklet. However, this booklet is not the By-law. It is your responsibility to comply with the By-law as enacted. 193 The Vacant and Derelict Buildings By-law No. 3512004 comes into effect on July 151, 2004 What is the objective of The Vacant and Derelict Buildings By- law? The goal of the By-law is to ensure that vacant buildings meet basic standards of maintenance so that they do not detract from neighbor- hoods, the City as a whole, and do not pose an undue hazard for firefighters or the general public. What types of properties are covered by this By-law? The By-law affects all buildings that are vacant. A vacant building is defined as any residential or non-residential building that is not being used or occupied. A building is not considered as being used or occupied solely by reason of equipment storage or unauthorized trespass. What are the By-law requirements for each . j,~ fir. r' r vacant building? The owner of a vacant building must ensure that i { r the building is maintained to the standards set out in the By-law and is secure from unau- r thorized entry. The Fire Prevention Branch ' must inspect vacant buildings annually. The fees for the annual inspection are r - r ~k b ' $100.00 for dwellings and $ 500.00 for . =fi I commercial and all other types of buildings. Owners are also required to file a fire safety plan with the Fire Prevention Branch for all non- residential and multi-family residential buildings within 60 days of the building becoming vacant. What is involved in maintaining a vacant building? Schedule "A" of the By-law sets out basic standards of maintenance for the exterior and interior of vacant buildings and for the yards surround- 194 ing them. It covers such things as exterior walls, roofs, foundations, porches, stairs, guards, balustrades, handrails, floors, walls and ceilings, fire protection systems, walks, driveways, fences and accessory buildings, the requirement to file a fire safety plan, and storage of combustible materials. What is involved in securing a vacant building from unautho- rized entry? In securing a vacant building, the owner has 2 choices. One option is to ensure that, a) every exterior door to the building is operational, fits tightly within its frame when closed and is locked so as to prevent entry; b) all windows are either permanently sealed or locked so as to prevent entry; c) all windows, doors, basement and attic hatchways and their frames are so constructed and maintained to completely exclude rain and substantially exclude wind from entering the structure; d) every window is kept in good repair, and properly glazed. The second option is to board up all openings to the building. What are the requirements for vacant buildings that are boarded? If an owner chooses to board a building rather than securing the building more conventionally, he or she must still meet all the mainte- nance requirements set out in Schedule "A". In addition, the owner must comply with the requirements set out in Schedule "B" for boarded buildings. Finally, if the building is boarded up the owner must obtain a boarded building permit. For Schedule A & B please see By-law document at www.. win n ipeg. calcl erks/pdfslbyl aws1200413 5.2 004, pdf What does Schedule B require? Schedule B has specific requirements for boarding up all doors, win- dows, and other openings. It also requires the owner to maintain electricity, natural gas and water where necessary to maintain fire protection or fire alarm systems. 195 How much does a permit fora boarded Building Permit cost and how long does it last? For residential buildings, and so long as the owner provides an address for contact and keeps his or her buildings in compliance with the By- law, he or she is entitled to three boarded building permits within a five- year period. The first permit costs $10.00, the second permit costs $200.00, and the third permit costs $800.00. Each permits lasts for 6 months. For commercial buildings, and also so long as the owner provides an address for contact and keeps his or her buildings in compliance with. the By-Law, the number of boarding permits is unlimited. The first permit costs $200.00, the second permit costs $800.00, the third permit $1500.00, the fourth permit costs $3000.00, and the fifth and each subsequent permit costs '$1500.00 more than the subsequent permit. Each permit lasts for 1 year. T_ 7 ll } r n, {1~ 196 Is there a penalty for failing to obtain a boarding-up permit? An owner who lacks a valid permit for a boarded building is guilty of an offence. The minimum fine for the offence is $2000.00. Are there provisions for the City to enter vacant buildings? An enforcement officer is entitled to inspect a vacant building with the consent of the owner to determine whether it complies with this By-law. If the owner cannot be located or refuses to give consent, the officer can apply for an entry warrant. Alternatively, the enforcement officer can send a notice to the owner indicating that an inspection will take place on a specific date and time. The owner is entitled to object to this entry and the Director of Plan- ning, Property and Development or Fire Paramedic Chief will rule on the merits of the objections. What happens when the City determines that a building does not comply with this By-law? The City is entitled to prosecute the owner for failing to keep the building in compliance with the By-law. More typically, an enforcement official will issue an order specifying the points of non-compliance with the By-law and the date by which the building must be brought into compliance with this By-law. A failure to comply with the order is an offence. What action will the City take when there is non-compliance with an order? In addition to prosecuting the owner for failing to comply with an order, the City may take steps to bring the building into compliance with the By-law. After providing notice to the owner, the City may also have the building demolished. The costs of either action will be added to the property taxes. Additionally, the City may proceed with the process established in the By-law to declare the building as derelict and proceed to take title ownership without compensation to the owner. What is the penalty for failing to comply with this By-law? The minimum fine for a first offence under the By-law is $500.00. The minimum fine for a second offence is $1000.00 and a third offence is subject to a fine of at least $2000.00 197 Who enforces the By-law? The by-law is administered and enforced jointly by the Planning, Property and Development Department and Fire Paramedic Services. The Fire Prevention Branch enforces the maintenance standards set out in Schedule "A" and requirement for an annual inspection. The Existing Buildings Branch enforces the security and structural requirements of Schedule "B„ How do l file a complaint about a vacant or derelict building? Contact the Fire Prevention Branch by either phone at 986-6358, fax at 986-6198 or by email at: FPS-fp-Inspections@winnipeg.ca 198 r f~ Win.nTeg Formore information on the Vacant Dwellings By-lawplease contact either: Housing and Existing Buildings Branch Planning, Property & Development Department 41h Floor 65 Garry Street, WINNIPEG, Manitoba, R3C4K4 PH: (204) 986-5300 FAX: (204) 942-2008 www.winnipeg.calppd or The Fire Prevention Branch Fire Paramedic Service, 604 St. Mary's Road, WINNIPEG, Manitoba, R2M 31-5 PH: (204) 986-6358 FAX: (204) 986-6198 email: FPS-fp-Inspections@winnipeg.ca 199 Agenda Item No.: E.4.c. Problem Housing Recommendation: That the City Manager write a letter to the Minister of Municipal Affairs requesting an amendment to Section 546(1) of the Municipal Goi,ernment Act as outlined in Attachment 2 of the June 9, 2004, Community Services/Planning and Development Departments report 2004PDDO 11. Report Summary This report compares how Edmonton handles derelict housing issues with other jurisdictions. Previous Council/Committee Action At the October 15, 2003, Executive Committee meeting, the following motion was passed: That the October 1, 2003, Planning and Development Department report be referred to the City Manager to review the current process and provide an action plan. The review to include information on the legislation and experiences of Manitoba, Winnipeg and Portland. This report be brought back to a special Executive Committee meeting at a date to be determined by the Office of the City Clerk. Report The October 1, 2003, report outlined current practices for dealing with problem housing indicating the successes to date and the limitations of existing municipal and provincial legislation in going beyond issues of structural safety and comparative appearance in directing the demolition of housing. Representatives from the Community C Action Project spoke to the Committee calling for more aggressive action on sites where the housing was the focus of a number of social and community issues. The City's present action has its beginnings with the original Safe Housing Task Force initiative of the mid 1990's. This initiative focused on co- ordinating the efforts of all regulators of low density rental accommodation to improve the standard of this type of housing. The effort included co- ordinated inspections, appropriate legislative efforts to improve health and safety conditions and the implementation of incentive programs such as Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP). Where necessary for safety reasons housing was ordered demolished. The October 15, 2003, Executive Committee meeting was presented with information that suggests that Manitoba and Winnipeg were developing new tools to address the issue of housing that was a problem in the community. Information was also presented that Portland, Oregon was also taking some innovative actions. Since that time the Administration has had opportunity to look in detail at the Manitoba and Winnipeg situations. In addition, Portland was reviewed, but significant governance issues prevent a comparison with Edmonton. Winnir, eg • Both Edmonton and Winnipeg are grappling with similar issues but in a much different environment. In the Routing: Executive Committee Delegation: K. BamhartfM. Garrett Written By: K. Barnhart/M. Garrett „Tune 9, 2004 Community Services/Planning and Development Departments File: 2004PDDO 11 (Page 1 of 4) 200 Problem Housing Winnipeg example the City has projected that the scope of the problem includes from 700 to 800 homes and any . particular time while in the Edmonton example the number is well less of 100. • The Provincial Legislation that governs what a municipality might do is also radically different. • However, the situation facing the two Cities is similar and might best be described under three separate Scenarios. 1. The first Scenario is a house that is structurally unsound or unfit to live in. 2. The second Scenario is a house that by its appearance is out of step with the appearance of surrounding properties. 3. The third Scenario is a house which by virtue of being vacant is attracting unwanted activity within the community. Both Winnipeg and Edmonton are doing similar things with regards to the first scenario. Orders are issued to demonstrate that the house can be made structurally safe or to have it demolished. Edmonton has had reasonable success within this scenario and in the core area of north central Edmonton 160 houses have been demolished in the last five years. The October 15, 2003, report indicates that Edmonton has the jurisdiction to deal with second scenario. This is done through a combination of the Minimum Maintenance Standards Bylaw and potentially a Show Cause hearing under the provisions of the Municipal Government Act. The Show Cause hearing can lead eventually to a demolition of the house but has not been frequently used. In Winnipeg things are taken a couple of steps further. Winnipeg has a bylaw similar to Edmonton's Minimum Maintenance Standards Bylaw but has added several requirements. Firstly, there is a requirement that a licence be granted to leave the house vacant. The licence is for a specific period of time and renewals of the licence are progressively more expensive. The Winnipeg model also specifies how and in what form the boarding of the structure takes. For example, if plywood is used then it must be painted in a manner sensitive to the existing structure. Finally, the Winnipeg model includes a provision for the taking of the property without compensation should bylaw infractions continue. Both Edmonton and Winnipeg struggle with the third scenario. In the October 2003 report the Administration recommended that Municipal Government Act changes were needed in order to deal more completely with this situation. Winnipeg does not have any unique or special way of dealing with. this scenario either and the Administration continues to recommend Provincial legislation changes. • How Winnipeg deals with scenario two is on the surface attractive. The licencing provisions and their associated costs present an incentive for property owners to do something with their property. The augmented aesthetics considerations in Winnipeg's bylaw also encourage a certain sensitivity to the neighbourhood. However, Winnipeg has appropriately recognized that a property owner violating these bylaw provisions in terms of either licencing requirements .1111 Problem Housing or appearance is unlikely to be persuaded by fines and have included the taking provision in their process. This presents two problems for Edmonton. Firstly, there is absolutely no similarity between the powers provided in Manitoba and the fact that Winnipeg has a City charter and Edmonton's legislative ability. Edmonton could not design a similar taking provision and it is unlikely Provincial changes would be considered to allow such. Secondly, the taking provision means that Winnipeg eventually owns a number of properties that it has no corporate need for and must dispose of. Presently, Winnipeg has procedures to offer these properties to non-profit groups but there is little guarantee that the properties will immediately improve or might not be passed onto others. Another problem arising from the Winnipeg approach is that it can in fact lengthen the process. The approach of actually licencing a building to remain vacant and boarded up means that little may happen during the period of the licence and any renewal of the licence. Furthermore, while the taking approach does represent a significant intervention it is a lengthy process in its self. Taking the combined licencing effort and taking action to the full length of the process 1'/2 - 2 years actually elapse. This is significantly longer than the approach used in Edmonton. Manitoba In addition to what Winnipeg is doing with regards to derelict houses the Province of Manitoba has adopted the Safer Communities and Neighbourhood Act. This Act provides for the demolition of houses that fall into the third Scenario described in this report. Review by the City of Edmonton Law Branch points out that Alberta certainly has nothing similar to this and also raises questions as to the constitutional legitimacy of the Act. Winnipeg is not presently using any of the powers provided by this Act in their efforts. Portland The Administration also looked at efforts in Portland but given significant governance differences it is not possible to reasonably compare Portland's efforts to Edmonton's. Summary • In summary Edmonton and Winnipeg are doing similar things around houses that are structurally unsound or uninhabitable. Winnipeg has gone much further with regards to houses that are out of step with the appearance of surrounding properties but have significantly different legislative powers. Also the actions to licence and possible take property without compensation bring issues with them and actually lengthen the process. Finally, both Cities struggle with issues around houses that are neither unsafe nor unattractive but present neighbourhood issues by virtue of being vacant. There are elements of the Winnipeg example that might be helpful. These might include additions to Edmonton's Minimum Maintenance Standards Bylaw regarding the aesthetics of any required hoarding or boarding efforts. o The Administration would not recommend adding any requirements for (Page 3 of 4) 202 Problem Housing the licencing of vacant property. In Winnipeg it was recognized that a big stick was required at the end of such a process to make it work and in their case this results in the taking of the property without compensation. Legislation in Alberta is not in place to allow that in Edmonton. In addition, the Winnipeg model actually takes longer than the Edmonton model. In preparing this report the Administration has worked with the Derelict Housing Sub Committee of the Safer Cities Imitative. This Committee worked on the development of Edmonton's Minimum Maintenance Standards Bylaw and has representation from the Community Action Project. The Committee met on May 28, 2004, to review the direction presented in this report and the Committee approved the following motion. 1. Derelict Mousing Sub Committee supports requesting an amendment to the MGA Section 546(01). (Detrimental to the neighbourhood). 2. Derelict Housing Sub Committee recommends the Minimum Maintenance Standards Bylaw be amended: a. Appearance provisions around boarding (Winnipeg Bylaw). b. Maintain access to property (e.g. sidewalk, driveways). c. No storage of combustible material including gases and liquids. 3. Derelict Housing Sub Committee recognizes community concerns about the process and will continue to work on innovative solutions (e.g. improve Safe Housing, MMSB). Justification of Recommendation The recommended changes to the Municipal Government Act as outlined in Attachment 2 will broaden the options for municipalities particularly as it applies to Scenario three of this report. Currently, as a precondition to a property being detrimental it must be unsightly. The proposed amendment broadens that definition to include other factors including human activities associated with the property. Background Information Attached 1. Highlights of the Winnipeg Vacant and Derelict Building Bylaw. 2. Existing and Proposed Wording to Section 546(1) of the Municipal Government Act. Others Approving this Report D. Kloster, General Manager, Community Services Department (Page f 4) Attachment 1 Highlights of the Winnipeg Vacant and Derelict Building Bylaw The Winnipeg Vacant and Derelict Buildings Bylaw does not place any time limit on the length of time a building may remain vacant, if secured by conventional methods. However, it does impose standards of maintenance on these buildings designed to reduce the impact of vacancy on the neighbourhood, and to insure the interior of these buildings are not conducive to fires and pose no threat to fire fighter safety. The Bylaw does require that owners obtain permits if they wish to secure a building by boarding it up. Fees are levied on owners of buildings that fall under the jurisdiction of this Bylaw for permit and inspection requirements. There is no limit to the number of boarding-up permits for commercial and industrial buildings, apartment blocks, and multiplexes. However, residential one and two family dwellings have a maximum of three six - month permits allowed. Escalating fees are imposed for the required boarding permits as follows: Single & Commercial & 2 Family .industrial, Dwellings Apartment Blocks & Multiplexes First Permit (six months for 1&2 family dwellings and one $ 10 $ 200 year on all other) Second Permit I $200 $ 800 Third Permit I $800 1 $1,500 Subsequent Permits (yearly for commercial/industrial, NIA $1,500 over the cost of apartment blocks and multiplexes only) previous permit In addition to the escalating permit fee, owners of commercial and industrial buildings, apartment blocks and multiplexes are required to file security and fire plans when their buildings are vacated. The Winnipeg Bylaw takes advantage of recent power granted to the City, by the City of Winnipeg Charter by having the ability to take title to vacant buildings without compensation to the owner when: - the building is not in compliance with the standards set out in the Bylaw; - the owner has been convicted in Court and continues to be non-compliant; the building has been declared derelict by the Standing Policy Committee on Property Development; and - where there is a viable alternative plan for redeveloping the building. NOTE: The average time to take title to a building for non-compliance is between 1% to 2 years. The City of Winnipeg greatly prefers all other alternatives to demolishing the buildings and expects only 10% of the 700-800 single and two family dwellings presently vacant will be demolished. Winnipeg also expects only 10% of the 160 commercial/industrial, apartment blocks and multiplexes to be demolished under their Bylaw. Municipal and Provincial legislation within Alberta does not have similar provisions to take title from an owner with or without compensation. Attachment 1 - Page T of 2 204 Attachment 1 Highlights of the Winnipeg Vacant and Derelict Building Bylaw Winnipeg's Bylaw relies on an innovative division of responsibility between their Planning and Development and Fire Departments. Fire Department personnel would conduct inspections of vacant buildings to determine compliance with maintenance standards, while Inspectors from the Planning and Development Department would focus on the security of vacant buildings, as well as structural issues. Winnipeg's maintenance Standards referenced ii appears to resemble the standards contained Maintenance Standards Bylaw with only a few contained in Winnipeg's Bylaw; . their Vacant and Derelict Buildings Bylaw within the City of Edmonton's Minimum exceptions. Following are additional items Every walk or driveway and parking space on the property on which a vacant building is located must be surfaced with stone, asphalt, concrete or other material capable of providing a hard surface and must be maintained and cleared of snow so as to afford safe passage under normal use and all weather conditions. - Unless approved in writing by an Enforcement Officer, combustible materials, flammable or combustible liquids or gases must not be stored within a vacant building. - Where plywood is applied to opening, it is installed from the exterior, fitted within the frames in a watertight manner, and protected from the elements with paint or preservatives in a manner that does not detract from the value of other properties in the immediate vicinity. Winnipeg's Bylaw for Vacant and Derelict single and two-family dwellings has been in force for nearly two years. An update to this Bylaw is very close to third reading by Winnipeg's City Council to include all other Vacant and Derelict buildings. The innovative division of responsibility between their Planning and Development and Fire Departments is proposed in this new update and it is therefore premature to report on successes or otherwise. In addition a requirement in the initial Bylaw for early fire detection to be maintained in all Derelict and Vacant single and two-family dwellings was removed as it was felt to be too onerous on the owners of these buildings. Attachment)5Page 2 oft Attachment 2 Existing and Proposed Wording to Section 546(t) of the Municipal Government Act Existing Order to remedy dangers and unsightly property 546 (0.1) In this section, (a) "detrimental to the surrounding area' includes causing the decline of the market value of property in the surrounding area; (b) "unsightly condition", (i) in respect of a structure, includes a structure whose exterior shows signs of significant physical deterioration, and (ii) in respect of land, includes land that shows signs of a serious disregard for general maintenance or upkeep. Proposed Order to remedy dangers and unsightly property 546 (0.1) In this section, (d) "detrimental to the surrounding area' includes causing the decline of the market value of property in the surrounding area; (b) "unsightly condition", (iii) in respect of a structure, includes a structure whose exterior shows signs of significant physical deterioration, and (iv) in respect of land, includes land that shows signs of a serious disregard for general maintenance or upkeep. (1) If, in the opinion of a designated officer, a structure, excavation or hole is dangerous to public safety or property, because of its unsightly condition, is detrimental to the surrounding area, the designated officer may by written order (.a) require the owner of the structure to (i) eliminate the danger to public safety in the manner specified, or (ii) remove or demolish the structure and level the site; (b) require the owner of the land that contains the excavation or hole to (i) eliminate the danger to public safety in the manner specified, or (ii) fill in the excavation or hole and level the site; (c) require the owner of the property that is in an unsightly condition to (i) improve the appearance of the property in the manner specified, or (ii) if the property is a structure, remove or demolish the structure and level the site. (2) IL in the opinion of a designated officer. a structure, excavation or hole is dangerous to public safetv or is detrimental to the surrounding area because of its unsightly condition, vacant and boarded condition. incidents of trespass or arson. the designated officer may by written order (a) require the owner of the structure to (iii) eliminate the danger to public safety in the manner specified, or (iv) remove or demolish the structure and level the site; (e) require the owner of the land that contains the excavation or hole to (iii) eliminate the danger to public safety in the manner specified, or (iv) fill in the excavation or hole and level the site; require the owner of the property that is in an unsightly condition to (iii) improve the appearance of the property in the manner specified, or (iv) if the property is a structure, remove or demolish the structure and level the site. Attachment 2 - Page I of 1 206 From Abandonment to ~a 11 Nip ""I M F~ u ,s 0 I Ole, a, M IIOIu i JI _ 1 i7 ~'11 n„owe, P:,~, lug '...a i; ~r P m _iI r i r 1211 u Policy options for addressing Toronto's abandonment issues David Wachsmuth Abandonment Issues June 16, 2008 207 Executive summary In Detroit, choking on tens of thousands of abandoned properties, the housing abandonment problem is easy to see but effective solutions are hard to imagine. In Toronto, the opposite is true. `Ihe abandon- ment problem is easy to miss, but it is real, and effective solutions are available. This report presents the City of Toronto with a logical and timely new strategy to help address the city's affordable housing crisis by addressing the problem of abandoned properties: a Use It or Lose It bylaw. Abandonment has often been conceived of as an `on-or-off' state, but it is actually a multidimen- sional process, with functional, physical, and financial aspects. Toronto has relatively few function- ally abandoned (vacant) buildings, and speculation in gentrifying neighbourhoods seems to explain the existence of many of the ones the city does have. A larger problem is physical abandonment-in particular the deterioration of private rental stock. Some low-rent high-rise apartment buildings in the inner suburbs have vacancy rates higher than 50 per cent, and no one knows the state of old walk-ups in the central city. Financial abandonment is not a problem in Toronto per se, but may be a useful area indicator of other abandonment issues. Our report recommends that the City adopt a three-pronged strategy of: More effective monitoring of abandonment with a problematic-property tracking system Preventing existing rental stock from being abandoned through a landlord licensing scheme and better demolition and conversion control Reclaiming abandoned housing with vacancy fees and an expropriation scheme that would see suitable abandoned buildings converted into affordable housing with non- profit partners To co-ordinate these strategies, the City should adopt a Use It or Lose It bylaw, which would de- fine abandonment and outline the various consequences for property owners of neglecting their responsibilities to the people of Toronto. In the short term, the Affordable Housing Office should incorporate a commitment to preventing and reclaiming abandonment and enacting a Use It or Lose It bylaw into Housing Opportunities Toronto, the ten-year affordable housing strategy cur- rendy being drafted. From abandonment to affordable housing 208 Tab e of contents 1. From abandonment to affordable housing ........................................................................................1 1.1 Why should Toronto have an abandonment policy? The importance ofa made-in-Toronto approach ............2 1.2 Report methodology and plan ..........................................................................................................................4 2. Understanding abandonment 5 2.1 Abandonment is a process 6 2.2 Abandonment is multidimensional .................................................................................................................7 2.3Abandonment. a multidimensionalprocess 10 3. Toronto's abandonment issues .........................................................................................................11 3.1 What kind ofabandonment issues does Toronto have, and where are they concentrated? 12 3.3 Why are there so few abandoned properties in Toronto? 22 4. Policy options for Toronto's abandonment issues ...........................................................................24 4.1 Monitoring ahandonment issues 26 4.2 Keeping rental housingfrom beco m ing a ba ndon ed 27 4.3 Reclaiming abandoned properties 4.4,4n enablingframework: The Use It or Lose It bylaw and Housing Opportunities Toronto 40 Appendices ..........................................................................................................................................43 References 55 From abandonment to affordable housing 209 4 ~ n i ~ _ ' F 1. i 1111 i I ' I II , . ~ I I i .tent Figure I:An abandoned building in Parkdale From abandonment to affordab e housing n the summer of 2006, the City of Toronto expropriated an abandoned building at the south-west corner of Queen St. W. and Dowling Ave. with the intention to redevelop it as affordable housing. Expropriations in the city, if not rou- tine, occur from time to time, and have sometimes occurred in order to build affordable housing-Regent Park is an early, famous example. But 194 Dowling Ave. was unique. It was a single building, expropriated because it was abandoned and residents of the lower-income Parkdale neighbourhood want- ed a wasted space returned to them. From abandonment to affordable housing 210 Taken as a precedent, it arguably represents a circumscription, in the face of an affordable housing crisis, of the right of private property owners to use-or not use-their property as they see fit. It also represents a vindication of local activists, such as the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (0 CAP), who have been call- ing for over a decade for the City to adopt a Use It or Lose It policy that would see abandoned buildings routinely expropriated and converted into affordable housing. The Affordable Housing Office has made it clear that it does not consider the expropriation of 194 Dowling Ave. to be a precedent, but for commu- nity members, the genie may already be out of the bottle. Writing about the expropriation in a grassroots newsletter produced by "individuals who have experienced homelessness and poverty", Parkdale resident Phillip Hazer (2006: 5) wrote: [The expropriation] can be taken as a victory for affordable housing advocates throughout the city.This event has set a new precedent that should be taken seriously by owners of dilapidated or abandoned buildings in Toronto. The purpose of this report is to present the City of Toronto with a set of policy options for addressing housing abandonment, with a specific emphasis on strategies for maintaining and adding to the city's stock of affordable housing. In some cases the discussion will touch on the role of senior levels of government, but only in brief; the focus is on municipal policies and municipal actions. As we shall sec, there are many ways to define abandonment, but all uses of the term in this report will refer to privately-owned residential property. This leaves aside abandoned commercial and industrial lands, which tend to present a different series of challenges and opportunities. This also leaves aside public property that is abandoned, although this is a significant problem in its own right, and one certainly deserving of policy attention. 1. 1 by shout Toronto have an abandonment policy? The Importance of a made-in-Toronto approach Most research and policy work on abandonment has been done in the United States, and is oriented toward declining American central cities whose economies, property markets, and housing systems are consider- ably different from Toronto's. There is no 'off-the-shelf' package of suitable policies available; and while various jurisdictions in North America and elsewhere have lessons to offer, the City will have to pick and choose from among them to craft a made-in-Toronto approach. There is one common lesson that is unam- biguously applicable to Toronto, however: the City needs an abandonment policy. Other cities in Canada are reaching similar conclusions: the City of Winnipeg (2004) (which, admittedly, has a far more pressing From abandonment to affordable housing 211 problem i abandonment than Toronto) adopted a comprehensive `Vacant and Derelict Buildings By- law' in 2004, and Victoria city council began to consider a drafi bylaw in late 2007 (Heiman, 2007). e policy rationale fortaking action against abandonment is clear on a number of levels. There is an economic ar u entThe public has made substantial investments-in transit, in roads, in utilities---in the properties that sit vacant or are deteriorating-These investments are going towaste if the properties are abandoned. Moreover, abandoned properties (and particularly vacant lots) not only may generate less property tax revenue themselves, but they often negatively affiect property values of neighbouring buildings (Mallach, 2006). Abandonment costs cities money, and a proactive response is likely cheaper than no response. There rs also a public-health-and-safety argument: Abandoned properties are tears in the fabric of communities and are magnets for ve in, garbage dumping, fires, and crime (Mallach, 2006; Spelman, 1993; S ek 1989; Brady, 1983). The City has a unique opportunity at the present moment tot a action on abandonment, The City of Toronto Act (2006) has opened u a number of new policy options that were not previously available to From abandonment to affordable housing 212 rental apartments that provide the overwhelming majority of Toronto's affordable housing-should be integrated into this strategy. 1.2 Report methodology and plan bibliography. From abandonment to affordable housing 4 213 Y Y x , lit Figure 2:A be-de 'I-up buRding on Coll0e,ge 5t i. Understanding abandonment he housing bubble that has seen real estate prices soar to unprecedented levels in the United States over the last several years has finally begun to burst. (Toronto, at least so far, has remained immune.) As the NewYork Times reported in late December, the effects have been particularly severe in Florida, where the bubble inflated first and fastest (Goodman, 2007). In Lee County, where the housing market collapse has led to hundreds of homes being abandoned (fully one quarter are va- cant), residential burglaries are up by a third and unemploy- ment by almost 90 per cent. The article in the Times explicitly links the declining housing market, the housing abandonment, From abandonment to affordable housing 5 214 and the rise in crime; if the connection is an accurate one, increase in scholarly interest in abandon- meet might be expected as the housing bubble continues to deflate. Indeed, although abandonment was frequently studied in the 1960s and 1970s, academic attention has subsided since then, especially outside the United States (Keenan et A, 1999; Wilson et 41., 1994). 2.1 Abandonment i Although early researchers often theorized abandonment as the end state of a well-defined and perhaps inevitable process of decline, and municipal governments in particular continue to treat buildings as either 'abandoned' or 'not abandoned, there is now occasional recognition that abandonment is not a binary state, nor a one-way progression either. O'Flaherty (1996. 207). for example, observes: From abandonment to affordable housing 215 Still, there is an expediency to using the term `abandoned property', in what follows, it should be under- stood as descriptive of a continuum of abandonment rather than conditions necessary for a structure to pass from 'non-abandoned' to 'abandoned. pancy status-and, in modified form, these form the basis for many cities' classification systems. Munici- palities commonly use structural condition and length of vacancy (past or projected) to define abandoned buildings (Cohen, 2001). 2.2 Abandonment Is multidimensional Structural upkeep is only one of allach's "significant responsibilities of property ownership'; although since it implicates city governments responsible for building code enforcement it tends not surprisingly to be a key municipal indicator. It coincides with what Hillier et al. (2003) term physical abandonment, they suggest that abandonment has two other aspects as well: financial and functional. Financial abandonment occurs when an owner discontinues property tax payments, perhaps because the property has accumulated negative equity. Functional abandonment occurs when a building ceases to be used: a row house in good repair, for which all property taxes are being paid, but which is boarded oft and therefore vacant, is functionally abandoned. A building that is still occupied but no longer has mail service or utilities is likewise func- tionally abandoned to a certain extent These three aspects of abandonment are interconnected and often occur simultaneously, but they are suf- ficiently distinct analytically to justify treating them distinctly (see Figure 3). Abandonment should thus be understood as both a process-rather than a state-and as multidimen- sional. It should not, for example, be reduced simply to 'vacancy: And while many subtle approaches to abandonment treat it as a multi-dimensional process rather than a single state, they all still tend to con- ceptualize the process teleologically, with total vacancy as the endpoint (e.. Mallach, 2006; Hillier et al., 2003; 'Flaherty, 1996). From abandonment to affordable housing 216 runctional abindonmeat 11h d: iCa I Financial abaridC)n rI iv, 11t, abandonment Figure 3. Abandonment is multidimensional-it has three distinct but related aspects. issue ofvacancyperse is not the determining one. Conversely, scholars and governments do not necessarily consider every vacant building abandoned. Field- er and Smith (1996; quoted in Keenan et 41., 1999: 706) distinguish between "transactional vacant? and "problematic vacants" The former are units that are still viable or are being redeveloped, and thus are likely to return to the market without intervention. The latter are units that may be in poor condition and for which "the vacancy is likely to be prolonged". The length of time for which a vacant building is vacant has functional implications: a building left vacant for ten years is more likely to remain vacant for another year than one only vacant for a few months, and the deterioration it suffers in the meantime will likely make it harder to rehabilitate. Plainly there is some From abandonment to affordable housing B 217 period of time during which a property owner may peep her property vacant without negative implications or the likelihood of the vacancy extending indefinitely, as in the context of renovation or intended sale. New Jersey sets a threshold of six months, after which a property is considered abandoned if it fulfils other criteria as well (Mallach, 2006). Six months is the same period of time that OCAP (2002) suggested as a trigger for its proposed Use It or Lose It bylaw. Most American approaches are somewhat less strict than New Jersey or OCAP; Accordino and Johnson (2000), for example, follow the United States General Accounting Office by describing a building as abandoned if it has been vacant for more than two years. Islington, a borough of London, England, employs a nuanced classification scheme that separates vacant properties into three categories based on the period of vacancy: short-term vacancy (under six months) is not considered problematic, while medium-term (six months to two years) and long-term (more than two years) vacancies are approached with increasing urgency (Islington Council, 2007). "Abandoning a building, especially a multiunit apartment building, is a messy process... letting the hallway lightbulbs burn out, going into tax ar- rears, stopping utility payments, no longer seeking new tenants, stopping rent collection, permitting squatters, and so on." O'Haherty, 1996:207 In another measurement of vacancy as an indicator of abandonment, American municipalities that seize vacant properties following tax foreclosure generally do so after a period of several years. New York only waits one, but Detroit waits three and Atlanta waits five (Bowman and Pagano, 2000). (Toronto will initi- ate a tax sale after three years of tax delinquency, but, as we shall see in the next chapter, tax-delinquent properties in the city are rarely vacant.) A precise vacancy threshold is not required or even necessarily tenable, but these practices suggest an understanding of vacancy as a contributing factor to abandonment that intensifies over time. If there is some controversy over the relationship between abandoned and vacant structures, there is a simi- lar ambiguity concerning abandoned buildings and vacant land. Northam's (1971) definition of vacant land included land with abandoned structures on it, and subsequently these two phenomena have often been discussed together. The rationale for doing so is generally that both represent undeveloped resources for a city or community, or that both are symptoms of disinvestment. But Bowman and Pagano (2000: From abandonment to affordable housing 218 2.3 Abandonment: a multidimensional From abandonment to affordable housing to 219 ~M }F~ • Ear A~ z: A I. 5`r , v a ~I + ~ N M1 I ( kl ~ ~ I J, I I ~i i I I III Figu 4A --axed cammeucual... a„pdential property among a block of bc,,r-rded-up IbuiHngs oat Il w)rorth Ave. 3. Toronto's abandonment issues A major impediment to tracking abandonment in To- ronto is the quality of available data. Broadly speak- ing, there is no data. There is no public tracking of vacant or boarded up properties, nor readily accessible information we are aware of about deteriorating buildings (ones in the process of being abandoned). The present study, therefore, relies heavi- ly and unavoidably on incomplete and in some cases anecdotal data. The locations of vacant buildings were gathered by Aban- donment Issues through a combination of tips, most signifi- cantly from the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty, which has scouted abandonment extensively in the downtown; but also From abandonment to affordable housing ~I 220 i 7 g 4 39 23 2~.. 41 42 pry 40 __j 25 3 38 44 33 77 ( - 26 35 3 ?r 36 ;T. - Vacant buildings [Deteriorating high-prisas Residential t sales Figure 5:76ronto's abandonment issues by ward from attendees at group events and emails; surveying on foot; and research in the municipal property reg- istry and tax rolls. At present, there is a heavy bias toward the downtown-a reflection of Abandonment Issues' limited resources-but subsequent work will attempt to broaden the scope of investigation. 3.1 What i issues does Toronto have, and concentrated? where are they Recalling Hillier esal s (2003) distinction between functional, physical, and financial abandonment from the previous chapter, it is possible to examine each of these aspects of the problem as they occur in T'oronto, rec- ognizing that they may well overlap and be implicated in each other's incidence. Figure 5 shows the location From abandonment to affordable housing 12 221 au Vacant buildup (cur-rent) IIIIIII Vacant bulldrkp (recent) Figure 6: Current and recent vacant buildings in downtown Toronto by ward of all the properties discussed below. .Even despite the evident downtown bias to the data, it is clear that abandonment is a city-wide problem. Some neighbourhoods have more concentrated abandonment than others, but it is likely that complete data would show that nearly every neighbourhood is affected. Functional abandonment: speculation-driven vacancy Functionally abandoned buildings are what most people think of when they think of abandonment: vacant and boarded-up. Figure 6 shows the location of some currently or recently vacant buildings, mainly in the downtown. (See Appendix II for a list of these properties.) Because of the aforemen- tioned difficulty obtaining data on these properties in Toronto, it is hard to be certain how represen- tative this sample is of the functionally abandoned buildings across the city but, within the sample, a number of patterns are evident. The majority of these buildings are small multi-unit buildings located in areas with historically low but increasing property values-that is to say, gentrifying, or potentially gentrifying neighbourhoods. The largest concentration of buildings is in the east end from Sherbourne Ave. over into Riverdale, but there are also a relatively large number in Parkdale and the junction to the west. It is likely that there are proportionately more vacant buildings in the From abandonment to affordable housing 13 222 central city than in the inner suburbs, but the lack of any buildings outside the downtown is more a reflection of Abandonment Issues' limited resources than it is strong evidence that none exist. Two cases where long-term vacant buildings have recently begun to be redeveloped both fit the profile of speculative ownership as a prelude to `highest and best use': a set of properties at Bloor St. and 0akmount Rd., opposite High Park, which were boarded up for many years are now being torn down in preparation for a condominium development; and 207 Beverley St., located south of University of Toronto in the An- nex, which is being converted into loft condominiums after a decade ofvacancy. Yet in certain respects the details of these and other properties do not match the standard narrative of gentrification-fuelled spccula- Lion. Specifically, relatively few of the vacant buildings have been bought or sold in recent years. It is more typical for them to have stayed under the same ownership for a decade or more. 207 Beverley St. is a case in point. It was a night club in the 1990s that suffered a fire sometime after 1997 and before 2000; it was subsequently boarded up, and has remained under the same ownership through the fall of 2007, when the redevelopment began. So it seems likely that many of the properties are being held speculatively, but by the same owners under whom they fell into disuse.' Case study: North St. James Torun The area immediately south-east of Bloor St. and Sherbourne St., part of North St. James Town, is the most spectacular example of speculative abandonment in Toronto, and moreover has the highest concentration of abandoned buildings in the city. Figure 7 shows the study area, bounded by Bloor St. to the north, Sher- bourne St. to the west, Howard St. to the south, and Parliament St. to the east. The properties indicated in red-a majority of the lots-are owned by various holding companies sharing the same Unionville mailing address, almost certainly all creatures of a three-man team that developed some of the St. James Town high rises. A number of the lots contain boarded-up buildings, and a number more are vacant. It is difficult to verify the facts in this case, but a combination of interviews and archival research suggests that the developers tried to buy up afl the property in the two-block radius in order to build more high rises like those south of Howard St. The City did not allow the plans to proceed, the acquisitions stalled, and now the properties are unused and deteriorating. The vacant buildings have been boarded up for a decade or more, and arc steadily deteriorating. A number of the buildings have heritage status--the six ' For more discussion of speculation and other causes of abandonment, see Appendix IV. From abandonment to affordable housing 14 223 Bloor St. E E S Howard SL Alf caner Occupied Vacant uiIditns~ Vacant lot Developers rs 4 properties ~ proper 6p_,5 ~ ' properties I 0 ProP pE J Publichnstitutional I 3 properties 0 properr,e, l r s Figure 7: ownership and land use in North St JamesTown semi-detached houses on Glen Rd. (see Figure 8), built in the late 19th cenrury and now boarded up, were listed in January (City of Toronto, 2007e) following concerns about their poor and worsening condition (City of Toronto, 2007h). The concerns are probably well founded; there is evidence that the owners intentionally caused the collapse of the roof of 6 Howard St. in 2006 by stacking palettes of bricks on the roof (Bozinovic, 2007). 6 Howard St., like the building beside it, had heritage status. The opportunity cost ofabandonment Although North St. James Town is a low-income neighbourhood, the properties awned by the three develop- ers are not abandoned because they cannot be rented out. Instead, the owners purposely beep them vacant while continuing to pay property taxes. The neighbourhood seems to be in the early stages of gentrification: between 1996 and 2001, the number of owner-occupied housing increased by 18 per cent (it still represents only two per cent of the neighbourhood's tenure type) and the number of families with more than $80,000 in annual income tripled (again, the absolute numbers are very small) (City of Toronto, 2004b). The opportunity cost to the City of these properties remaining vacant is doubly high: not only has there has been significant public investment in infrastructure serving them which has gone to waste (particularly transit; the houses are minutes away from Sherboume subway station), but if they were to be redeveloped From abandonment to affordable housing I5 224 Figure 8:Abandoned buildings on Glen Rd. as affordable housing they could serve as modest firewalls against gentrification. Positive incentives, such as rehabilitation funding through the federal Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP) would ac- complish nothing here, since the owners do not want to rehabilitate the properties. The City can address this abandonment only by intervening directly (expropriating the properties) or changing the financial incentive structure (e.g. through vacancy fees). Both of these possibilities will be explored in the next chapter. Inheritance disputes and other legal complications There are certainly examples in the city of functionally abandoned (vacant) buildings that are not being held speculatively-where inertia or lack of capital for renovation costs provides the roadblock. One mod- est category is single-family homes caught up in inheritance disputes or other legal complications. These are sprinkled throughout the city, including in neighbourhoods with high property values (there is one such house in Rosedale, and another boarded-up house in the Beaches is likely also tied up in a legal dis- pute). But they are of little interest from the perspective of affordable housing; they contain few units, and single-family homes with medium or high property values are unlikely to be affordable even if not vacant. From abandonment to affordable housing 16 225 Physical abandonment: deterioration of multi-rental i rises People do not always associate poor living conditions in apartment buildings with abandonment, but a crumbling building that still has tenants is not much different from a crumbling building that does not. Moreover, the number of units of affordable housing at risk because of the deterioration of the private rental stock is certainly orders of magnitude higher than the total number of units that could be reclaimed from all boarded up buildings. And since practically no new rental housing has been built in the past decade or seems likely to be built in the near future, preserving the existing stock is probably the most important task for affordable housing policy in Toronto. Most units are located in the large multi-rental high rises that are spread throughout the city, but par- ticularly inhabit the inner suburbs. It has not been possible to do anything like a comprehensive survey of these, but ACORN Canada and Abandonment Issues have identified a handful of buildings that are in particularly bad condition, with ACORN estimating vacancy rates to be between 30 and 50 per cent in many of these buildings. These ten buildings are represented in Figure 9 by their vacancy rates estimated from the 2008 assessment rolls, prepared by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (PAC). The vacancy rates indicated by PAC range from 13 per cent to fully 65 per cent, and average to 46 per cent. (The fact that the buildings are mainly located in North York and Etobicoke reflects ACORN's pri- mary area of operation; Scarborough probably has similar problems.) units vacant. From abandonment to affordable housing 17 226 IIBuildiing Address Vacant units (2007) Vacancy rate (2007) II 2667 iplingAve. 1371228 j~ 60% 2677 ICIF1ung Ave, 1021227 45% :1 2737 KiI)ling Ave. 751408 18% 4 l 765 Weston d. 160/246 65% l775 Weston Rd. 103/245 42% 2467 Keele 5t. 14/41 34% 7 101 11..ansdowne Ave. 172/351 49% 8 730 5t. Clarens Ave. 39/304 i 12% 9 165 Jameson Ave. 15/77 ~I 19% 110 500 Dawes Rd. 63/284 22% Figure 9° High vacan cy rates in high-rise apartment b uildings (sourcers ACORN Canada; Abandonmen;t Issues-, IM PAC) The vacancies are a recent problem. Figure 10 shows vacancy estimates from MPAC assessment data for a subset of the high-rise buildings in Figure 9 in comparison with Canada Mortgage and Housing Corpora- rion (CMHC) vacancy rates for Toronto. (The broader trend of vacancy rates in the city will be addressed in the next chapter.) While the high rises had consistently higher vacancy rates than Toronto through 2003, the rates in the former skyrocketed in 2004, slighter later than-and completely out of propor- tion with-the general rise in vacancies across the city. The trend was the same for each of the buildings From abandonment to affordable housing IB 227 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 596 ,,,,,,,,,,,,s 096 ,r-,, , 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 High rises Toronto Figure 10: Rental vacancy estimates in selected high rises, compared to rates in Toronto, 1999-2005 (sources: CMHC, 2007; M PAC) sampled: relatively high but stable vacancy rates through 2003, and then a roughly sevenfold increase in 2004 and 2005. From abandonment to affordable housing 19 228 Toronto's vacancy rate has been remarkably high in recent years, but many of the'vacancies' may well be illusory, in the sense that, when the rate tightens again, the cost to bring units in these high rises back to up code will be high. The challenge of code enforcement The pair of buildings at 1765 and 1775 Weston Rd. (owned by the same landlord that owns 1011 Lansdowne Ave., and the former of which has the highest vacancy rate of any building examined here) have also posed continual problems for municipal stab; to the extent that the City authorized a grant of $5,000 to the tenants of the buildings to help cover their legal fees in grievance proceedings against the landlord (City of Toronto, 2005a). In both these cases (as well as many others), sustained staff attention has produced improvements in the buildings' conditions, but only at a high cost of time and resources. The City requires both more capac- ity for monitoring and more capacity for enforcement; as the next chapter will discuss, a landlord licensing system would be one means of acquiring both. Financial abandonment In the American cities worst affected by abandonment, it is common for owners to cease paying prop- erty taxes on their properties, and these cities often acquire large inventories of vacant buildings and lots through tax foreclosure. In contrast, Toronto has almost no financial abandonment. The vast majority of properties-and the vast majority of vacant properties- in the city have their taxes paid; in the rare cases where a property-tax bill remains outstanding for three years, the City can initiate a public auction of the property under s. 342 of the City of Toronto Act to recover the taxes. From abandonment to affordable housing 20 229 Public abando ent Abandonment is a public-private partnership. Although this report addresses abandoned properties in the private sector only, it is important to note that housing abandonment is not simply a private-sector From abandonment to affordable housing 21 230 problem. Toronto has well-publicized problems with both functional and physical abandonment in its public-housing stock, administered by the Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC). While maintenance conditions in the most run-down private rental in the city are probably worse than anything found in TCHC buildings, conditions in the latter have been sufficiently poor to prompt one resident to file a class-action lawsuit against the City (Monsebraacen, 2007). Moreover, it was recently reported in the media that TCHC owns fifty single-unic dwellings that are currently vacant because of their poor scare of repair (Bradshaw, 2007). The cause of this abandonment is easy to pinpoint: consis- tent under-invesrment by all levels of government-but particularly the senior ones, who have greater fiscal capacicy-in social housing. 3.3 Why are there so few abandoned properties in Toronto? Because there has not been any comprehensive Toronto-specific research, it is impossible to state with any certainty why there is so little abandonment in the city, but a few factors are suggestive. The two condi- tions most strongly associated wirh abandonment in American cities are sagging property markets and downtown decline. Particularly in negative- or low-growth cities, there simply is not sufficient residential From abandonment to affordable housing 22 231 Figure 1 hAnnounced residential tax-sale properties in Toronto, 2005-2007 demand to occupy the existing housing stock, a fact which is exacerbated in central cities by decades of rampant suburbanization. Neither of these factors exists in Toronto. especially in recent years, property values have boomed, and residential demand downtown is high. Moreover, until the last few years, vacancy rates were extremely low, which may have acted as an incentive for landlords to keep their rental units on the market. Bests some potential means for doing so. From abandonment to affordable housing 23 232 g' - t i Yeti i Nsdr f ~I~r .1' ij , ,ffi, •',~~~i 3~~~ f ~ ~ JS~'~' ~ j ~ r + 1 tr ~7 - l IF igu I I A boara._-d,..a~S I~ 'Ur ak„ng on George g ~ ~ y Viisked ror her ge ~atus St ~ re~°ee•+i~ll by the City (photo, Scott W6~r) 4. Po icy options for Toronto's abandonment issues As stated in the first chapter, there are a variety of pol- icy rationales for addressing housing abandonment in Toronto, but perhaps the most persuasive is the affordable housing crisis facing the city. this crisis is primarily a crisis of private-rental housing-the large majority of the affordable housing stock in Toronto. Recent years have seen the deterio- ration of the position of low-income households in the rental sector in Toronto and across the country-no surprise, given that Canada has the most free-market approach to housing in the West, and the second lowest rate of social housing, af- ter the United States (Hulchanski and Shapcott, 2004). An From abandonment to affordable housing 24 233 TorontoCanada Figure 13: Rental vacancy rates in Toronto and Canada, 1992-2006 (source: CMHC, 2007) additional worrying trend in Toronto over the last few decades has been the disappearance of mixed-in- come neighbourhoods in the face of the increasing spatial segregation of the working poor (overwhelm- ingly immigrants) in the city's inner suburbs and the wealthy in the downtown: what David Hulchanski (2007) has called the "three cities within Toronto". Toronto's abandonment strategy (see Figure 14). From abandonment to affordable housing 25 234 II:Figure 14: Schematic of abandonment policy options .1 Monitoring abandonment issues The first step in addressing an abandonment problem is understanding it. The previous chapter has dem- onstrated the enormous uncertainty that surrounds housing abandonment in Toronto, and only the mu- nicipal government has access to the necessary information to properly track the issue. Experience from jurisdictions in the United States and England suggests that an effective property tracking system is a pre-requisite to any further action the City might take, and can be assembled without an inordinately heavy investment of resources. This will especially be the case if the City adopts, as it has signalled that it intends to do (City of Toronto, 2004a: 6-7), a public disclosure system for property complaints as part of a landlord licensing scheme. Problematic-property tracking system As part of the property tracking the City will do under landlord licensing, it should maintain a centralized database of abandonment indicators and problematic properties, to serve as the basis for properly mea- suring abandonment and implementing the other recommendations of this report. The database should track, at a minimum: Property tax payments • Code Violations Outstanding and historical work orders From abandonment to affordable housing 26 235 Although this is not a short list, almost all this information is readily available right now; the challenge is simply to co-ordinate the data collection. Sean Gadon (2007), the director of the Affordable Housing Office, suggested building a database of aban- doned properties with a set of relevant data points: the problematic-property tracking system outlined above is the more systematic, integrated version of that suggestion. Such a system will give the City early warning about properties falling into abandonment, and allow more efficient and effective enforcement of regulations against delinquent property owners. The City of Los Angeles has had a good deal of success with the Neighborhood Knowledge Los Angeles system; a key feature is that it is designed for interactive public use (Mallach, 2006: 22). A side benefit of public access is that concerned citizens are able to provide virtual 'eyes on the street Maintaining this database should not be difficult; the chief challenge will likely be initial implementation-establishing the necessary data sources and staffing. Sponsoring abandonment research For a city the size of Toronto to have so little knowledge about the state of its abandonment problems is a missed opportunity. The City (through the Affordable Housing Office or Municipal Licensing and Stan- dards) should commission high-quality research to answer definitively many of the questions this report was only able to tentatively address. 4.2 Keeping rental housing from becoming abandoned The old sports maxim applies to abandonment: the best defence is a good offence. Mallach (2006: 13), for example, states: "The best strategy for dealing with abandoned properties is to prevent them from being abandoned in the first place. The financial and social cost ofkeeping a property in use is often far less than the cost of restoring the property to productive use once it has been abandoned." A particularly important From abandonment to affordable housing 27 236 policy focus for Toronto in this context should be fighting the increasing concentration of poverty. This requires diversity in the housing stock, which means mitigating market forces that would other lead to greater homogenization. There are two aspects to preserving existing rental stock: keeping units habitable and up to code, and en- suring that apartment buildings remain apartment buildings. Code enforcement and rehabilitation assis- tance are consequently the two means by which governments generally attempt to preserve stock. Both are important, but Toronto's limited financial capacity constrains its ability to do both effectively. So beyond the actions it should take on its own, the City should lobby senior government for more funding for reha- bilitating rental stock in Toronto. The federal RRAP program, which provides per-unit forgivable loans for major structural repairs, has been useful in keeping some marginal small rental buildings and rooming houses on the market, but the funding envelope is far short of what will be necessary to keep Toronto's large stock of high rises properly maintained. The Affordable Housing Office has pointed to energy retro- fits for high rises as an issue that will be vital yet particularly challenging to provide. The remainder of this section looks at municipal code-enforcement mechanisms for keeping rental stock in operation. Landlord licensing Code enforcement is the most common municipal strategy for preventing the deterioration of rental hous- ing. Current enforcement mechanisms in Toronto suffer from two weaknesses: It is relatively costly for the City (in terms of staff resources) to oblige landlords to make repairs to buildings found to be in code violation, and the penalties landlords face for not complying, or for complying poorly, are not sufficiently strong to motivate proper maintenance. 1765 and 1775 Weston Rd. are cautionary examples of the conse- quences of these weaknesses. These buildings have seen over one hundred work orders issued since 2000, and large fines levied against the landlord. ACORN Canada has spent considerable time over the last several years fighting to improve conditions for the tenants of these two buildings, and despite a victory at the provincial Landlord and Tenant Board (formerly called the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal), chief Toronto organizer James Wardlaw (2008) says conditions have only somewhat improved: "It's a constant battle to get problem landlords to make repairs and take care of their buildings." Landlord licensing could be part of the solution to this problem. If structured properly, it would be a revenue-neutral mechanism for improving code compliance in rental buildings throughout the city that- crucially-would alter the economic incentives in favour of landlords performing required maintenance From abandonment to affordable housing 28 237 following characteristics: It should be self-funded maintained. It should be universal but targeted As the Federation of Metro Tenants' Association (2007) argues, any landlord-licensing scheme adopted by the City should be universal, in the sense that for-profit as well as non-profit landlords be subject to regulation. City documentation (e.. City of Toronto, 2004a) simply refers to 'privately owned' apart- ment buildings, but is not explicit about whether this would include non-profits. The Toronto Network of Non-profit Housing Providers (2007) has raised important concerns about regulatory overlap and bud- getary limitations, but the non-profit sector is not immune from poor landlord practices, and its tenants deserve the mast effective code enforcement possible. Including TCHC in the licensing scheme might be politically unpalatable, but private non-profits and co-ops (represented by the building manager) should be covered in some respect. 238 Since municipal resources will inevitably be insufficient to allow equal monitoring and enforcement of all code violations, a targeting strategy is needed (Mallach, 2006: 41-43). A problematic-property tracking system, such as described above, would allow Toronto to make informed decisions about how to best al- locate staff and financial resources in addressing code violations. Whether this system is tied to a universal, mandatory licensing scheme (with nominal fees for compliant landlords) or one that only regulates of- fenders is not in itself a crucial question; what is important is that any scheme allow municipal resources to be focused effectively. In the event that Toronto adopts a universal, mandatory licensing program, there are various ap- proaches to ensuring enrolment. The City has contemplated using financial penalties for non-com- pliance, for example (City of Toronto, 2004a: 5). The State of New Jersey has a different strategy, which could be complementary to fines: eviction orders are not enforced on behalf of landlords who have not been licensed Wallach, 2006: 43). This approach has the benefit of requiring almost no staff or financial resources. The City could request that the Landlord and Tenant Board behave in a similar fashion. It should mandate proactive inspections At the present time the City performs inspections on rental housing reactively--only in response to com- plaints it receives, and not with sufficient vigour to prevent landlord abuses (City of Toronto, 2004a). This state of affairs is inevitable at the moment, given Municipal Licensing and Standards' severe staffing short- ages, but a landlord-licensing scheme with annual registration fees would supply the income necessary to carry out proactive inspections and to follow up more effectively where there are problems. It should use escrow For landlord licensing to work effectively, it should make use of escrow accounts to apply economic pres- sure on delinquent landlords to make mandated repairs. Currently, it is sometimes cheaper for a landlord to pay the fines levied by the Landlord Tenant Board for poor maintenance than to make the repairs (Wardlaw, 2008). A strong landlord-licensing program, like the City of Los Angeles, is one that relies on escrow both to motivate repairs and to recover costs (ACORN Canada, 2007). In such a scenario, if a landlord fails to perform required maintenance on a unit, the tenant's rent is diverted into an escrow ac- count until the landlord rectifies the situation; moreover, if the City is forced to issue a work order for the From abandonment to affordable housing 30 239 repairs, the payment can be taken from the escrow account. The escrow system being considered by the City of Toronto (according to a brief description in City of Toronto, 2007d) would not allow rents to be diverted (it would work as a down-payment instead), and consequently might not be as effective a deter- rent to maintenance delinquency as possible. An escrow system will further help the City to avoid what the Toronto Network of Non-Profit Housing Providers (2007: 6) has called "the tension between revenue generation and tenant protection"-the pos- sibility that, with large per-unit licensing fees in the worst buildings but limited staff resources to ensure that repairs are carried out, the City might simply be content to collect a steady stream of revenue from these buildings while the costs are passed on to tenants. It sbould operate per landlord, notper building In general there are two effective ways to grant licenses under a landlord licensing scheme: licenses can be assigned to buildings or to owners. The former is used by a number of jurisdictions in North America, including Vancouver and Los Angeles (City of Toronto, 2004a). The latter is used in some American cities (as well as Calgary and Edmonton) as a means of enforcing claims against absentee landlords liv- ing out of state (Mallach, 2006: 42-43). Toronto has indicated a preference for a per-building scheme, particularly in comparison with operator licensing, which it was considering prior to the passage of the City of Toronto Act, when the City was not permitted to license buildings (City of Toronto, 2004a). The City considered operator licenses sub-optimal, because they could be frustrated by frequent chang- es in property management. But licensing the owners themselves circumvents this problem, and allows more effective deter- rents and penalties to be applied to delinquent landlords. Owners with code violations in multiple buildings could have their penalties increased; similarly, owners could have the most expensive reg- istration fee class (a function of the maintenance of the building, according to the most recent City From abandonment to affordable housing 31 240 It should provide for landlords having their licenses revoked as a final recourse Under current municipal laws and policies, the ultimate penalty for a landlord flagrantly failing to maintain a building is section 433 of the Municipal Code, which allows municipalities to obtaining a court order shutting down a building for up to two years as a public nuisance. This course of action was contemplated in February 2006 for 10 11 Lansdowne Ave, but the drawback is obvious: closing a building means displacing the tenants. An alternative would be for the City to revoke a landlord's license to a building-taking control of its management and possibly ownership without shutting it down. Such a procedure, which due to its severity would likely be a deterrent more often than an actual course of action, could be carried out under the policies discussed below, in 4.3 Reclaiming abandoned properties, and would start with the building being declared 'abandoned' under the pro- posed Use It or Lose It bylaw. It should be linked to rehabilitation funding Experience in other jurisdictions suggests that landlord licensing will not be successful unless owners have access to funding sources to help make mandated repairs. While the City does not have suffi- cient financial capacity to offer large-scale financial support to landlords seeking to make renovations, it should take whatever steps possible to make rehabilitation economical. These could include targeting RRAP funding (which the City administers, even though the source is the federal government) and short-term tax abatements. Demolition and conversion control As noted above, high and rising property values in Toronto place pressure on property owners to replace their rental apartment buildings with condominiums, through demolition or conversion. In the interests of protecting rental stock, the City has instituted controls on both demolition and conversion, previously under the Official Plan and more recently under Municipal Code Ch. 667, Residential Rental Property Demolition and Conversion Control, adopted in July 2007. This policy, implemented under authority granted to the City in s. 111 of the City of Toronto Act, pro- hibits any demolition or conversion that would affect six or more rental units, except where an applica- tion is made to Council and approved. This aggressive approach to maintaining rental housing stock is From abandonment to affordable housing 32 241 Figure 155oronto protected and unprotected rental housing stock by type, 2001 (source: City ofToronto, 2006c) necessary but insufficient, since it applies only to buildings with six or more units in the'primary' rental sector (purpose-built apartments with at least three units). These buildings account for 242,000 of the approximately 465,000 rental units in the City; 91,000 more are assisted units which are generally pro- tected by long-term subsidies. What remains are 132,000 units-28 per cent of the total-unprotected by demolition and conversion control (see Figure 15). Most of these (122,000) are what is considered to be'secondary' rental housing: apartment buildings with fewer than three units, condominium rent- als, and ad-hoc situations. The remaining 10,000 units are in apartment buildings with three to five units. These represent only 4 per cent of primary rental stock, but fully 40 per cent of all private rental apartment buildings (City of Toronto, 2006c). With the secondary rental housing taken into account as well, it is likely that a majority of the rental buildings in the city are not protected by demolition and conversion control. A staff report on the demolition and conversion control bylaw states that "municipal policy interest" extends only to protecting "permanent rental housing" (City of Toronto, 2007b.. 5); given the fact that one quarter of rental households do not live in "permanent rental housing" (i.e. the primary rental and assisted rental sectors), this policy is arguably misguided. In either case, at a 6are mini- mum the City should ensure that permanent rental buildings with fewer than six units are protected from demolition and conversion as well. The City of Toronto Act does not permit regulation of these buildings, however (s. 111). The Community University Research Alliance (2007: 6) suggests that the City could provide incentives to maintain this stock, "such as modifying the tax rules for small landlords". From abandonment to affordable housing 33 242 Leveraging the heritage designation Another potential approach would be to use the City's heritage designation aggressively. In the wake of the `demolition by neglect' of 6 Howard St. in 2006, the City has taken steps to maintain heritage buildings more effectively, particularly by amending the Municipal Code in September 2007 to carry stricter upkeep standards (City of Toronto, 2007f). Designating buildings under Part IV of the On- tario Heritage Act would prevent their demolition and allow far a more aggressive approach to ensuring proper maintenance. The City could then offer tax reductions conditional upon the buildings retaining their rental units, under s. 334 of the City of Toronto Act (which allows the City to offer conditional tax reductions to heritage properties). Demolition control through the HeritageAct could serve as the stick, and tax abatements the carrot, Either of these approaches-tax incentives or more aggressive use of heritage listing (with possible tax incentives) -would require some municipal financial resources, if simply as tax revenue forgone, but could patch a gaping hole that currently exists in the City's rental protection strategy by protecting rental hous- ing in buildings with fewer than six units. Reclaiming 4.3 is Regardless of the effectiveness of policies to deter housing abandonment, there will inevitably be cases where deterrents are unsuccessful. For these cases, the City should consider what tools could be effective in reclaiming severely abandoned (usually vacant) properties. Many of the approaches commonly used by American municipalities in particular are not appropriate to Toronto, since they are designed to address rampant abandonment (thousands or revs of thousands of vacant buildings).'Ihcse approaches are usu- ally predicated on triage, and ofren involve widespread demolition as a means of securing properties when returning them to the market is deemed unfeasible. Toronto, with its currently robust economy and strong real estate market, can make better use of economic incentives. By financially discouraging property owners from letting their property slip into disuse, the City can create a win-win situation, where units are returned to the housing stock if the incentives are successful, and the City receives income it can use for affordable housing if the incentives are not. In circumstances where it would make economic sense, the City should consider expropriating abandoned buildings and converting them directly into affordable housing From abandonment to affordable housing 34 243 with non-profit partnerships. Although the policies discussed in this section are oriented toward reclaiming properties that have already been abandoned, it is clear that they would serve addition- ally (or even primarily, depending on the severity of the measure adopted) as a further deterrent to abandonment. Vacant property fees When John Sewellwas mayor of Toronto, he investigated the possibility of taxing vacant land at a higher rate than other land (Gadon, 2007). Washington D.C. does exactly this: residential land is taxed at $1.85 per $100 in assessment, while vacant land is taxed at $5.00 per $100 (Mallach, 2006: 145). But the Mu- nicipal Act did not allow Toronto to tax vacant land differently; nor do the City of Toronto Act and the AssessmentAct today. Increasing the cost to a property owner of keeping her property vacant is an excellent strategy for re- claiming abandoned property, since it creates incentives for the owner to rehabilitate or sell, and in the meanwhile raises revenue for the City. Toronto should strive to enact such a plan, but a property tax change is not the best means to this end. Better is to charge some sort of vacancy fee, since it is more flexible and can be more precisely targeted. OCAP (2002) proposed in 1997 a Use It or Lose It bylaw that would have seen a fine equal to 25 per cent of the assessed value of a property levied each year that a building is vacant; it is unlikely that such a high fine would gain political support, but the basic principle is an excellent one. By financially discouraging property owners from letting their property slip into disuse, the City can create a win-win situation, where units are returned to the housing stock if the incentives are successful, and the City receives income it can use for affordable housing if the incentives are not. The City of Toronto Act (s. 262.2) grants the City authority to levy a fee based on "the location of the property, the physical characteristics of the property, including buildings and structures on the property, or the zon- ing of property or other land use classification" 'This is likely sufficient for enacting a vacant-properry fee. A From abandonment to affordable housing 35 244 potential model is the City of Winnipeg, which received expansive provision to respond to abandonment, including with vacancy fees, through provincial amendments to the City of Winnipeg ChartcrAct. The City of Winnipeg's (2004) approach is elegant: property owners with vacant buildings must maintain them to a high standard, waterproof, with functioningdoors, and board-free. If a property owner wishes to board up a building, she must apply for a vacancypermit, the cost ofwhich increases with each successive application. Own- ers of small residential properties are limited to four six-month permits per five years, which range in cost from $100 to $2,000. Owners of larger multi-rental properties can board them up indefinitely, but the annual cost (which starts at $200) increases to $3,000 by the fourth year, and increase $1,500 each year after that. Properly enforced, this system will discourage abandonment by compelling property owners to maintain their buildings in better condition than they might otherwise wish to do. In the process, it will reduce the likelihood of serious structural damage that would compromise a building's chance of being rehabilitated. The biggest challenge for Winnipeg in the enforcement of this bylaw is the weakness of the property mar- ket. Concerns that the financial penalties may actually push marginal buildings into abandonment lead to the penalties not being rigorously applied. But in Toronto such an approach would likely work much better, and would either bring abandoned buildings back on the market faster or would allow the City to raise revenue for affordable housing. A number of American municipalities have instituted some form of a vacancy fee. Wilmington, Delaware has escalating annual registration fees for vacant properties; Portland conducts mandatory quaterly inspec- tions of vacant buildings at the owner's cost; San Diego imposes fines every 90 days for vacant properties that do not have rehabilitation plans registered with the City (Mallach, 2006: 146-151). All of these mod- els could potentially be used in Toronto. Expropriating properties to guarantee affordable housing Another option for reclaiming abandoned properties is to take them away from their owner. Although this is a politically-charged course of action, when an owner chooses to treat housing as a commodity to be speculated with instead of a home for people to live in, the moral case for interfering with her private property rights is not hard to make. The principal advantage to this strategy is that, unlike the others discussed above, it provides a clear path for the development of social housing, which is to say housing From abandonment to affordable housing 36 245 subsidized by government and guaranteed to remain at least nominally affordable for a relatively long period of time. The City expropriates a qualifying property, paying the market value to the existing owner. The City issues an request for proposals for non-profit organizations to take on a nominal, long-term lease and redevelop the property as long-term-guaranteed affordable housing. The non-profit uses federal and provincial subsidies (currently $70,000 a unit, under the Affordable Housing Program) to help finance the redevelopment MiLis was the process followed by the municipal government in 2006 and 2007, when, for the first time ever, it expropriated an abandoned building to build social housing. Case study: 194 Dowling.4ve.2 e building at 194 DowlinA,ve. is unique in Toronto: it is a formerly abandoned building that has been expropriated by the City and is now being converted into affordable housing. It is therefore a potential model for further reuse of abandoned buildings. But the circumstances that led the City to use their pow- ers of expropriation in this way were far from straightforward. 2 See also Wachsmuth and Pasternak (2008). From abandonment to affordable housing 37 246 The neighbourhood had elected a new city councillor, Sylvia Watson, in 2003, whom members of the community began pressuring to take action on 194 Dowling Ave. Two years later, in February 2005, the City passed a wide-ranging policy on housing and homelessness, which, among many other provisions, called for a working group to "identify unused or derelict publicly and privately owned buildings and land suitable for development or conversion to supportive, transitional and affordable housing use" (City of Toronto, 20056: 6). Watson identified the building on Dowling Ave. (the only building brought forward by a councillor which proved to be suitable) and expropriation proceed- ings were initiated. After the provincial government, which has approving authority over all expro- priations, allowed the expropriation to continue, the landlord managed to win a reprieve at the City's Administrative Committee, and a community meeting was held to discuss redevelopment possibili- ties. At this meeting, the landlord failed to demonstrate a credible intention to carry out renovations, even presenting 'redevelopment plans' which were simply photocopied site plans overwritten with magic marker. The community expressed an overwhelming desire for the building to be taken away from the landlord, and following a cross-city lobbying effort led by PARC, Council decided to proceed. A bidding process, only open to non-profit charitable organizations, was arranged and PARC won the contract to redevelop the property into affordable housing, which they will fund with subsidies from the Affordable Housing Program and a mortgage to be repaid with tenant rents (Willis 2007, 2008). The challenges of expropriation The convoluted story of 194 Dowling Ave. points to one of the main challenges of using expropriation to turn abandoned buildings into affordable housing; the expropriation process is time-consuming and dif- ficule. To satisfy the provincial Expropriations_lct, the City needs to demonstrate that an expropriation is "fair, sound and reasonably necessary in the achievement of the objectives' of the City; a first step would be to make it explicit in Toronto's abandonment policy framework that expropriating abandoned build- ings will help the City achieve its affordable housing objectives. The means of financing expropriation are a second challenge; since the City must pay the fair market value of the property it is expropriating. The acquisition of 194 Dowling Ave. was paid for out of the Land Acquisition fund, which currently stands empty. 'there is another possible model, though-if the City were to expropriate a building with less need for repairs and renovations than 194 Dowling Ave. From abandonment to affordable housing 36 247 C 9i U 4! I I / ~ I t; 21 Cd u Pd ,,IW~. f ~ .4V ~V V V V ~ i ~ P .r III Figure 16: Potential decision tree for reclaiming abandoned properties From abandonment to affordable housing 9 248 raining such powers would not likely lead to many expropriations (because property values are too high in Toronto for owners to let their properties go for free), it would act as a powerful deterrent to owners considering letting their buildings deteriorate. Other disincentives to speculation Two other potential policies for addressing speculation and getting abandoned properties back into use are zoning restrictions and mandatory leasing arrangements. The logic of the former is that the zoning of a particular property could be held at a low density to discourage the owner from holding the property hoping to intensify. The potential problem with this approach is that low-density property will incur lower property taxes, which may make speculative ownership more feasible. Another potential policy for the City to explore-one which cannot currently be reconciled with the legal regime in Toronto but is sufficiently interesting to warrant attention-is mandatory leasing. This approach was introduced in the United Kingdom in 2006 under the name'Empry Dwelling Management Order' (EDMO). By securing an EDMO from an independent housing tribunal, municipal housing providers can actually take over management of a rental property from the owner without purchasing it, leasing out the units and funding necessary repairs with proceeds from rents (Department for Communities and Lo- cal Government, 2006). A similar arrangement in Toronto could apply to vacant buildings and/or be the final penalty under a landlord licensing system. The benefit of EDMOs is that they are substantially less capital intensive than expropriation, but at least in the short term (the building must be reverted to the control of its owner after no more than seven years) accomplish much the same effect-abandoned buildings converted to social housing. Still, lack of available funding is the main reason that only a dozen EDMOs have been secured since 2006, despite the enthusiasm of housing advocates and many municipal governments for this new policy tool (Howard, 2008). 4.4 An enabling framework: The Use It or Lose It bylaw and Housing Opportunities Toronto The abandonment strategies laid out in this chapter are wide ranging, and implementing some or all of them will need to be approached thoughtfully. Some of the policies could stand on their own, others From abandonment to affordable housing 40 249 following conditions: It has been vacant for six months or longer with no building permits issued It has substantial code violations outstanding, such that the suitability of the building to house tenants is seriously compromised (with the meaning of `substantial' to be synchronized with the forthcoming landlord licensing scheme) It has an outstanding property tax bill of more than three years Housing Opportunities Toronto Now is the ideal opportunity for Toronto to start taking action on abandonment, since the City's (2007a) Affordable Housing Office has tabled a draft for public consultation of a ten-year affordable housing strat- egy: Housing Opportunities Toronto. 'The Affordable Housing Office should integrate a commitment to fighting abandonment into HOT in at least the following three ways: Action area three,'Preserve and Fix Rental Housing and Keep K Affordable' should be updated to include a statement about preventing abandonment as a strategy for preserving affordable housing, and, crucially, should recommend the policies outlined above under . Keeping rental housing from becoming abandoned. From abandonment to affordable housing 41 250 Ongoing policies to monitor and prevent abandonment Information Action ` .0 , -of ~ 4 f v Reclaiming abandoned properties: the Use It or Lose It bylaw Authorization 1 J Action r III I~~_ry r~•f.i,rl-_r~. Figure 16:A comprehensive framework-ongoing monitoring and prevention policies, and the Use It or Lose It II • Action area five,'C ate New Affordable Rental Housing', should be updated so that To nto's first action ('identify and k C' land and other properties and buildings for affordable housing') places high priority on reclaiming abandoned properties for affordable housing through the policies outlined above under 4.3 Reclaiming abandoned properties, • Action area seven,'Create Housing Opportunities in All Neighbourhoods', should be supplemented with a commitment to enacting a Use It or Lose It bylaw to coordinate the City's response to abandonment. In short, Toronto should adopt comprehensive strategy for fighting abandonment-including a Use It or Lose It bylaw-and thereby assert a collective claim to the buildings and land in our neighbourhoods hilc taking a concrete step toward resolving the city's affordable housing crisis. From abandonment to affordable housing 42 251 Appendix . Summary of recommendations Recommended Means of addressing Senior government Resources required policy option abandonment action for implementation wwf ~u~~tNw~Y~f~'~ tlts~es' ddifC Problematic-property Better information NIA Staff time tracking system gathering Abandonment research Understanding abandon- NIA Funding for researchers ment in Toronto r1 0000, Province: enabling legis- Landlord licensing More effective code lation already passed System self-funding enforcement Federal: expand rental rehabilitation programs Prevent demolition or Province: allow control Demolition and conversion of smaller of buildings with fewer Staff time conversion control rental buildings than six units . Vacant-property fees ~ Raisin money for NIA System self-funding affordable housing Expropriation for social Convert vacant buildings province: allow expropriation without Capital for expropriation; housing into social housing compensation (optional) staff time ~,~Nti tilt ,Wsaq'sti~ddgS"pbr; Establish legal and policy Province: make omnibus Use It or Lose It bylaw framework for other amendment to City of Staff time strategies Toronto Act Prioritizing abandon- None beyond those Abandonment policies ment intervention by NIA required for the policies in HOT integrating it into HOT above From abandonment to affordable housing 43 252 Appendix Vacant properties in Toronto The following table lists properties that Abandonment Issues believes are vacant and not being actively redevel- oped, as well as some notable examples of long-term vacant properties that have recently seen redevelopment activ- ity. Some addresses have been omitted because there may be squatters living in the buildings. Although we believe that the derails presented below are accurate, due to our limited resources we cannot be certain, and City staff should verify the status of all the properties. Property address Current status Heritage? Additional notes df l I 2-16 Sandcliffe Rd. Vacant No Mrd ' 1''2 1844-1854 Bloor StW; 6-14 Redevelopment No Block of houses demolished for Oakmount Rd.; 35,27 Pacific Ave, condos; were vacant for years 22 Brad St Vacant No Signs of redevelopment '147 Cowan Ave. Vacant No 194 Dowling Ave. Redevelopment Yes Expropriated by City 1510 King StW Redevelopment No `Pope squat' location d, 668 BrockAve. Vacant No 1004, 1006 College St Vacant No 1486 Dupont St. Vacant No Signs of redevelopment 39 GladstoneAve. Vacant No 0410 1 165 Grace St. Vacant No Ambiguous 767 Dovercourt Rd. Vacant No Signs of redevelopment 2 Ossington Ave. Vacant No From abandonment to affordable housing 44 253 Property address Current status Heritage? Additional notes 43 BellevueAve. Vacant lot NIA 45 BellevueAve. Vacant No 207 Beverley St Redevelopment No Was vacant for years 357 College St Redevelopment No Was vacant for years 27 StAndrew St Vacant No 32'1, 323, 327, 329 Albattiy Rd. Vacant No 329 Albany Rd. in bad condition 35 Astley Ave. Vacant No 295,305 George St Vacant No 305 George St in bad condition „ Wdrd St,- 6-16 Glen Rd'. ne acant es ome have heritage status ~ St 607 Sherbour 603, 6,24-30,58-64,76 Howard St; Vacant lot NIA 6 Howard St was demolished 609, 611 Sherbourne St by neglect in 2007 399-403 King St E Vacant Yes 307 Sherbourne St Vacantlot NIA 312 Broadview Ave. Vacant No Former Salvation Army building 1195,12-11, 1215-1223 Vacant Yes 1215 Danforth Ave. has Danforth Ave, heritage status 558 811, Gerrard St E Redevelopment Yes 558 was'Gatekeeper building` , and has heritage status 6 McGee St Vacant No I dO omm 1635 Gerrard St Vacant No Ambiguous 9 Lee Aye. Vacant No Address is approximate From abandonment to affordable housing 45 254 Appendix The sca a of the prob em Although abandonment has been studied much more frequently in the United States than anywhere else, it is dif- ficult even there to know how prevalent it is. This appendix provides a brief overview of what is known about the scale of the abandonment problem in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. Abandonment in the United States The diversity in definitions of abandonment, discussed above in the second chapter, has led to a similar diversity in operational descriptions of the scale of the abandonment problem. There is therefore nothing approaching a reliable estimate of the number of abandoned structures for any jurisdiction larger than a municipality, and munici- pal estimates are only occasionally comparable. There have only been two attempts to assess abandonment levels throughout the United States (Pagano and Bowman, 2000; Burchell and Listoken, 1981), and only one in the last 25 years. Severe (and in some cases insurmountable) methodological limitations mean that neither can be taken seriously as more than a rough sketch. Still, abandonment is widely recognized to be a serious problem through- out the United States, and particularly for large- and medium-sized US central cities with declining populations (Accordino and Johnson, 2000). Cities such as Detroit and Philadelphia are generally estimated to have tens of thousands of abandoned structures (Hillier etal., 2003; Bowman and Pagano, 2000; O'Flaherty, 1996). The worst relative incidence of abandonment is likely to be in smaller towns affected by regional economic slowdowns: Mal- lath (2006) states that an astonishing ten per cent or more of properties in some smaller cities such as East Sr. Louis, Illinois and Camden, New Jersey are abandoned. But the problem is by no means limited to slow- or no-growth cities: a majority of even the fastest-growing quartile of cities in the United States characterized abandonment as a `problem' or a `big problem (Accordino and Johnson, 2000: 306.) Abandonment in the United Kingdom This overview of abandonment in the United States, fragmented though it is, is more complete than is possible for any other country. The scale of the problem in the United Kingdom is less well known, partly because there is very little British scholarship into abandonment (Keenan et 4 1999). Still, it is clear that many British cities experience something similar to American-style abandonment, if not necessarily to the same extent. A countrywide survey (Department of the Environment, 1993) identified 250,000 potentially problematic vacant dwellings, not all of which are necessarily `abandoned' (under the definitions discussed above). More targeted studies have confirmed From abandonment to affordable housing 46 255 the presence of abandonment, particularly in inner cities (Power and Mumford, 1999; Bell, 1996). We are not aware of any systematic studies of abandonment in other European countries; if they exist, they are not frequently discussed within the American and British literature. Abandonment in Canada Canadian cities, with the notable exception of Winnipeg (Carter and Polevychok, 2003), have generally been spared abandonment on the scale seen in the United States or the United Kingdom, and consequently have been even less frequently studied. We have identified no research conducted specifically on abandonment in Toronto, Vancouver, or Montreal; O'Flaherty (1996) discusses the first of these in passing, concluding simply that Toronto seems to have very few abandoned buildings. The problem does exist, however, if more modestly than south of the border. Toronto's abandonment issues were discussed in the third chapter; elsewhere in Southern Ontario, aban- donment seems to be a problem of cities with declining or threatened industrial economic bases, such as Windsor, Hamilton, and Oshawa.' Still, the overwhelming focus in abandonment research and policy is the United States, and to a lesser extent the United Kingdom, so it is difficult to know if or how Canadian abandonment differs from the more well-studied cases. 9 As in Toronto, there have been no studies ofabandonment in these cities that we are aware of, but personal surveys plus infor- mal discussions with public-space activists in Windsor and Hamilton suggest a visible but not rampant abandonment problem in these municipalities. From abandonment to affordable housing 7 256 A:)Dendix -VWiat causes abandonment.? What causes abandonment? The basic answer is: the owner decides to abandon her property. Mallach (2006: 5), for example, states: "(Abandonment] most often occurs when an owner concludes, rightly or wrongly, that the poten- tial losses from continuing to occupy or maintain the property exceed the potential benefits." So the real question to answer is, what causes an owner to abandon property? As Mallach points out, different types of property are generally abandoned for different reasons: many causes, one effect. A derelict factory in a de-industrialized port area and a boarded-up row house in the inner city may have nothing in common except the fact that they are both currently abandoned. The focus in this report is housing abandonment. In the US academic literature, two broad perspectives emerge, sometimes in combination with each other, sometimes in contradiction to each other. The first perspective-as- sociated, although not exclusively, with neoliberalism-is chat a specific interaction of market forces and demo- graphic change leads to neighbourhood decline, and that abandonment is an inevitable or 'natural' result of this decline. The second perspective is that abandonment is not'natural; but is the product of actors negotiating specific political and institutional arrangements. The distinction between these two perspectives is critical from a practical as well as a theoretical standpoint, as Shlay and Whitman (2006: 155) argue with reference to the more general question of neighbourhood blight: Proposing that a problem emerges unintentionally, as a product of accident or natural cause (e.g., economic and demographic forces), supports one type of policy solution while arguing that it is not accidental but due to human agency supports another.The natural causal argument will support poli- cies revolving around the inevitability of blight A human agency causal argument resolves around the opposite frame of reference--that blight is not inevitable and can be mitigated. Abandonment as economic decline: the `neighbourhood life-cycle' theory The standard explanation for housing abandonment is that it results from "the normal functioning" of housing markets (Accordino and Johnson, 2000: 302). Thirry-five years ago, Edson (1972: 382) was able to say that the causes were "well known" The process begins when rents do not keep up with upkeep costs in the low-end rental market, either because housing demand falls (and with it, rents) or maintenance costs increase exogenously (from increases in labour costs or property taxes, for example). In response, the property owner cuts back on maintenance spending, and the building begins to deteriorate. As deterioration proceeds, the owner continues to'milk' the prop- From abandonment to affordable housing 48 257 erty, 'dropping services and generally trading off immediate profits against a lengthening of the owned lifetime of the building' (White, 1986: 313). disinvestment and decay. Neigbbourbood cbange: "an inevitable trend toward decline" This characterization informs (explicitly or not) much of the current scholarship and policy on abandonment, and its roots can be found in neighbourhood life-cycle theory, which, as Metzger (2000) explains, emerged in the early 20th century as an attempt to explain observed patterns of neighbourhood development and, importantly, neigh- bourhood decline. A landmark 1959 report brought the theory into the mainstream of urban policy, influencing 4 Such a line of indifference can easily be defined theoretically, but the fact that it has force in practice is made clear by the co- existence of homelessness and rental vacancy in every Western city, whether or not there is abandoned housing. From abandonment to affordable housing 49 258 planners across the United States on the basis of two fundamentals: that "the general pattern of neighborhood change was characterized by an inevitable trend toward decline", and that this decline was often associated with the arrival of ethnic minority groups (Metzger, 2000: 8). This report divided the neighbourhood life cycle into five stages, with increasing density and development in stages one through three giving way to deterioration and popu- lation decline in stage four and then large-scale, government-led renewal in stage five. By the 1970s, housing abandonment had ravaged many American inner cities and the appetite for renewal mega- projects had waned. The neighbourhood life-cycle theory changed as well: in 1975 the federal Real Estate Re- search Corporation (RERC) published an updated five-stage life cycle, which notably replaced 'urban renewal' with 'abandonment' for its final stage while renewing the emphasis on minorities and the lower class as harbingers of decline (Metzger, 2000). Brady (1983:9) argues that the way that the RERC report and others published around the same time helped to imbue abandonment with an aura of racialized inevitability: These attempts to explain abandonment clearly echo the deviant subculture theory and, in their persistent use of language borrowed from physics or biology, give the impression that neighborhood decline is somehow natural or inevitable, or that poor and ethnic people are infected with the problem and are therefore responsible for it 'Infected is an apt word choice here, since an important manifestation of the life-cycle theory in abandonment discourse was the notion of contagion. Aalbers (2006) notes that a distinctive feature of the neoliberal analysis of neighbourhood decline (of which the neighbourhood life-cycle theory was a precursor) is that it has assumed that socioeconomic decline causes physical decline. So Sternlieb et at (1974: 33), for example, characterize abandon- ment as a contagion problem that is 'most frequent in structures inhabited by blacks and Puerto Ricans". Although they also acknowledge that it is white property owners, not minorities, who are most prone to abandoning their property, the issue is framed in terms of a problematic population entering a neighbourhood and 'spreading' aban- donment by degrading the local housing market. From abandonment to affordable housing 50 259 7be legacy of the neighbourhood life-cycle theory The neighbourhood life-cycle theory, particularly in its most overtly racialized form, has fallen out of favour in recent years, but despite this fact, and despite the fact that it is hopelessly Hawed, it is still worth discussing. This is because its underlying assumptions continue to animate contemporary planning concepts. As Aalbers (2006) has argued, the distinguishing characteristic of the neoliberal approach to neighbourhood decline is that it holds that socioeconomic decline causes physical decline. Abandonment, as a severe manifestation of physical decline, is seen as fundamentally the product of socioeconomic changes, which are expressed through a worsening of the property and rental markets in a neighbourhood. This remains a common understanding of abandonment, and one that informs policy-making; the strategy of 'social mix' as a response to neighbourhood decline is perhaps the most prominent example. Abandonment as an outcome of political and institutional arrangements The idea of inevitability that is central to the neighbourhood life-cycle theory may be flawed, but there is clearly a kind of inevitability sometimes associated with abandonment, in the sense that neighbourhoods are often buffeted by economic forces operating on a larger scale. So while it would be bizarre to ascribe, for ex- ample, the massive abandonment experienced by inner cities in the Rust Belt to socio-demographic changes, it would be equally bizarre to deny the presence of large-scale economic forces that powerfully influence the local operation of the housing system. `Neighbourhood decline' explanations for abandonment generally consider it satisfactory to appeal to the inevitability of such'market forces' (perhaps in combination with the socio -demographic angle that is typical of the life-cycle theory). But there is another loosely connected body of literature that seeks to denaturalize the so-called 'market forces, and to probe the political context through which they operate. Speculative abandonment A common strand that runs through much of this scholarship is an emphasis on the role of speculation in produc- ing abandonment. A well known articulation of this idea comes from David Harvey (1985, 1983, 1982), who probed the relationship between real-estate investment and large-scale processes of production and consumption. He described three 'circuits of capital' along which investment flows: the first into manufacturing, the second into the built environment, and the third into research and development. Harvey argued that the systemic tendency of capitalist economies toward overproduction leads, during times of economic downturn, to diversions of investment From abandonment to affordable housing 51 260 from the primary circuit (manufacturing) to the secondary one (the built environment). Certain real estate markets are flooded with investment while others see investment withdraw, and property values rise and fall accordingly. The consequences for inner-city neighbourhoods can be dire, as capital leaves but the immobile physical infrastruc- ture remains: In areas experiencing prolonged economic decline,'capital flight' and massive property devaluation are likely, with property abandonment both as a result of a collapse of values and as a deliberate strategy to sustain value in at least parts of the built fabric in an area. (Healey, 1991: 100-101) The strength of this political-economy approach is that it denaturalizes the market forces and demographic change that are usually cited as the proximate cause of abandonment. Neighbourhood decline, in this view, is not a failure of the market per se, but of the institutions that govern it (Shlay and Whitman, 2006), and this failure is actively (and sometimes intentionally) created by certain social actors in the course of profit-seeking speculation. The banks that redline certain neighbourhoods, the real estate developers who pull investment out of the inner city in favour of the suburbs, and the landlords who decided to `milk' their properties rather than maintain them "are not merely automata of the price mechanism that steer the natural operation of the market, but should be taken seriously for the power they command in the initiation or structuration of neighbourhood decline" (Aalbers, 2006: 1081, em- phasic in original). Abandonment and gentrification Harvey's work on circuits of capital is oriented towards large-scale crises in systems of accumulation. Neil Smith (1996), one of the most influential scholars of gentrification, makes an argument about speculation that is more relevant to the Toronto case. According to Smith, the prospects of downtown revitalization can lead to a `rent gap' The attractive features of the central city (proximity to employment, public transit, etc.) create a willingness among the affluent to pay relatively high rents, but the neighbourhood's deteriorated housing and low-income population maintain a lower-rent equilibrium. The difference between current rents and the rents that could be charged if the neighbourhood in question were renovated is called the'rent gap, and if it is perceived to be high enough, specula- tors will begin to buy property in anticipation of profit-making possibilities. They may have little or no interest in maintaining existing rental properties, and the property decays while the new owners wait for the opportunity to redevelop, or sell at higher land values. Disinvestment, in this case, is a prelude to reinvestment rather than a sign of economic distress. From abandonment to affordable housing 52 261 Government-created abandonment cated in its occurrence. large-scale housing abandonmenr. From explaining the problem to addressing the problem From abandonment to affordable housing 53 262 AppendixV. List of abbreviations ACORN Canada: Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now Canada CMHC: Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation EDO: Empty Dwelling Management Order HOT: Housing Opportunities Toronto MPAC: Municipal Property Assessment Corporation OCAP: Ontario Coalition Against Poverty PARC: Parkdale Activicy-Recreation Centre RERC: Real Estate Research Corporation RRAP- Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program TC C: Toronto Community Housing Corporation From abandonment to affordable housing 54 263 References Aalbers, M. 2006. When the Banks Withdraw, Slum Landlords Take Over': The srructuration of neighbourhood decline through redlining, drug dealing, speculation and immigrant exploitation. Urban Studies 43 (7): 1061- 1086. Accordino, J., and G. T. Johnson. 2000. Addressing the Vacant and Abandoned Property Problem. Journal of Ur- ban Affairs 22 (3): 301-315. ACORN Canada. 2007. Landlord Licensing. Fair Housing in Toronto Now. Position paper. AssessmentAct. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 30. Bell, M. 1996. The Causes of Abandonment and Vacancy in Private Sector Dwellings and Some Suggested Solu- tions. Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University of York. Bowman, A. O. M., and M. A. Pagano. 2000. Transforming America's Cities: Policies and Conditions of Vacant Land. UrbanAjairs Review 35 (4): 559. Bozinovic, A. 2007. Safe as Houses? Maybe Next Year. GlobeandMad, October 7:M3. Bradshaw, J. 2007. Fifty City-Owned Homes Sit Vacant. GlobeandMail, December 18:A1. Brady, J. 1983. Arson, Urban Economy, and Organized Crime: The Case of Boston. Social Problems 31 (1): 1-27. Brigham, J., and D. R. Gordon. 1996. Law in Politics: Struggles over Property and Public Space on New York City's Lower Last Side. Law & Social Inquiry 21 (2): 265-283. Burchell, R. W., and D. Listoken. 1981. The Adaptive Reuse Handbook: Procedures to Inventory, Control, Man- age, and Reemploy Surplus Municipal Properties. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rut- gers University. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. 2007. Canadian Housing Observer: Rental Vacancy Rate, Canada, Provinces and Metropolitan Areas, 1992-2006 (per cent). Carter, T., and C. Polevychok. 2003. Comprehensive Neighbourhood Studies: Characterizing Decline. Winnipeg: Institute of Urban Studies, University of Winnipeg. City of Raleigh. 2005. Frequently Asked Questions about the Probationary Rental Occupancy Permit (PROP) Ordinance. Available ac http://www raleighnc.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2-99542-0_0_18/ FAQ-PROP.doc. Accessed on March 30, 2008. City of Toronto. 2007a. Housing Opportunities Toronto: An Affordable Housing Framework, 2008-2018, for Public Review and Engagement. From abandonment to affordable housing 55 264 ---.2007b. Implementing By-law for s. 111 of City of Toronto Act -Rental Housing Protection. City Planning Division. 2007c. Municipal Code, Chapter 667. 20074. Public Consultation: Multi-residential Apartment Buildings Regulatory Strategy. Municipal Li- tensing and Standards. -//www.toronto.ca/involvcd/statutorynocices/ Public Notice -Heritage Land. Available from http://www.toronto.ca/involved/statutorynocices/ archive2007/dec/id-hl 120707 1.hrm. Accessed December 28. 2007f. Staff Report: Enhanced Property Standards for Designated Heritage Buildings. Municipal Licens- ing and Standards. 20078. Staff Report: Multi-Residential Apartment Buildings Regulatory Strategy. Municipal Licensing and Standards. 2007h. 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 Glen Road - Intention to Designate, Part IV, Ontario Heritage Act. City Planning Division. 2006x. Minutes of a Special Meeting of the Council of the City of Toronto: February 14. 2006b. Notice of Motion: 1011 Lansdowne Ave - Use of Section 433 of the Municipal Act, 2001. 2006c. Profile Toronto: September 2006. City Planning Division. 2005a. Community Services Committee Agenda, Meeting 3. 2005b. From the Streets into Homes: A Strategy to Assist Homeless Persons Find Permanent Housing. City Clerk's Office. 2004a. A Framework Strategy to Ensure that Privately-Owned, Multi-Unit Residential Buildings are Maintained in Accordance with the Provisions of the Toronto Municipal Code. City Clerk's Office. 2004b. North St. James Town (74): Social Profile #3 - Neighbourhoods Households & Income. Commu- nity and Neighbourhood Services. City of Toronto Act. S.O.2006, Chapter 11. City of Winnipeg. 2004. Vacant and Derelict Buildings By-law. No. 35/2004. City of Winnipeg CharterAct. S.M. 2002, c. 39. Cohen, J. R. 2001. Abandoned Housing: Exploring Lessons from Baltimore. Housing Policy Debate 12 (3):415-448. Community University Research Alliance, 2007, Policy Options for Maintaining Good-Quality, Socially Mixed, Inclusive Neighbourhoods. Draft for discussion: June 26. From abandonment to affordable housing 56 265 Dear, M. 1976. Abandoned Housing. In Urban Policy-making and Metropolitan Dynamics: A Comparative Geo- graphical Analysis, ed. J. S. Adams. Cambridge: Ballinger. Department for Communities and Local Goverment. 2006. Empty Dwelling Management Orders: Guidance for Residential Property Owners. Pamphlet: September. Department of the Environment. 1993. English House Conditions Survey 1991. London: HMSO. Edson, C. L. 1972. Housing Abandonment: The Problem and a Proposed Solution. Real Property, Probate and Trust, journal7: 382-390. FxpropriationsAct. R.S.O. 1990, c. E.26. Federation of Metro Tenants' Associations. 2007. A Regulatory Strategy for Multi-Residential Rental Properties. Blight. Fordham Urban Law,ourna131 (2): 305-338. Harvey, D. 1982. The Limits to Capital. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1983. Class-monopoly Rent, Finance Capital and the Urban Revolution. In Readings in Urban Analysis: Perspectives on Urban Form and Structure, ed. R. W. Lake, 250-277. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University. -1985.7he Urbanization of Capital. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Healey, P. 1991. Urban Regeneration and the Development Industry. Regional Studies: The journal of the Regional Studies Association 25 (2): 97-110. Heiman, C. 2007. Owners of Derelict Buildings Could Face Fines of $10,000. Draft Bylaw Would Allow Heritage Designation Without Owners' Consent. Times-Colonist, October 5: Al. Hillier, A. E., D. P. Culhane, T. E. Smith, and C. D. Tomlin. 2003. Predicting Housing Abandonment with the Philadelphia Ncighborhood Information System journalof UrbanAfairs 25 (1):91-106. Howard, B. 2008. Cash Boost Call For Empty Homes. Radio program on BBC Radio 4's Money Box: March 22. Available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/programmes/moneybox/7305792.sun. Accessed on March 25, 2008. Hozer, P. 2006. The Winds of Change. Poices from the Street, November. From abandonment to affordable housing 57 266 Hulchanksi, J. D. 2007. The Three Cities within Toronto: Income Polarization among Toronto's Neighbourhoods, 1970-2000. Toronto: Centre for Urban and Community Studies. Hulchanksi, J. D., and M. Shapcott. 2004. Introduction: Finding Room in Canadas Housing System for All Ca- nadians. In Finding Room: Policy Options for a Canadian Rental Housing Strategy, eds. J. D. Hulchanski and M. Shapcott, 3-12. Toronto: CUCS Press. Islington Council. 2007. Empty Property Strategy, 2007 - 2010. Islington, United Kingdom. Keenan, P., S. Lowe, and S. Spencer. 1999. Housing Abandonment in Inner Cities-The Politics of Low Demand for Housing. Housing Studies 14 (5): 703-716. Mallach, A. 2006. BringingBuildings Back: From Abandoned Properties to Community Assets. New Brunswick, New Jersey: National Housing Institute. Meles, J. 2006. T.O.s Worst Landlords. NOWMagazine, March 23. Metzger, J. T. 2000. Planned Abandonment: The Neighborhood Life-Cycle Theory and National Urban Policy. Housing Policy Debate 11 (1): 740. Monsebraaten, L. 2007. Tenant's Case 17 Years in the Making; `Deplorable Conditions' in Public Housing Unit Bring Class-action Suit. Toronto Star, September 18: A10. Municipal Act. R.S.O. 1990, c. M.45. Northam, R. M. 1971. Vacant Urban Land in the American City. LandEconomics47 (4): 345-355. O'Flaherty, B. 1996. Making Room: Be Economics ofHomelessness. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, Eng- land: Harvard University Press. Ontario Coalition Against Poverty. 2002. Model Resolution for a `Use It or Lose It' Bylaw for Empty Buildings 2002. Available from hrtp://wwwainfos.ca/02/oct/ainfos00294.html. Accessed January 2, 2008. Ontario Heritage Act. R.S.O.1990, c. 0.18. Pagano, M. A., and A. O. M. Bowman. 2000. Vacant Land in Cities: An Urban Resource: Brookings Institution, Center on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. Power, A., and K. Mumford. 1999. The Slow Death of Great Cities? Urban Abandonment or Urban Renaissance. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Toronto Network of Non-Profit Housing Providers. 2007. Multi-Residential Apartment Building (MRAB) Regu- latory Strategy. Briefing note: February 26. Shlay, A. B., and G. Whitman. 2006. Research for Democracy: Linking Community Organizing and Research to Leverage Blight Policy. City & Community 5 (2): 153-171. From abandonment to affordable housing 58 267 Smith, N. 1996.7he New Urban Frontier: Gentrification and the Reuanehist City. New York: Routledge. Sternlieb, G., R. W. Burchell, J. W. Hughes, and R J. James. 1974. Housing Abandonmen t in the Urban Core jour- nal of the American Institute of Planners 40 (5): 321-332. Szep, J. 2008. Cities Grapple with Surge in Abandoned Homes. Reuters: March 25. Available from http:// . reutcrs.com/article/inDepthNews/idUSNI 162941020080325. Accessed March 26, 2008. Wachsmuth, and S. Pasternak. 2008. Use It or Lose It: Toronto's `Abandonment Issues' Campaign for Afford- land experience. Housing Studies 9 (4): 493-510. From abandonment to affordable housing 59 268 M&C #2408 November 10, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council Your Worship and Members of Council: SUBJECT: THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE I.ANTIG SUGAR SITE The City of Saint John On August 18, 2008, Common Council adopted a series of resolutions paving the way for Irving Oil Ltd. and the Saint John Port Authority to explore the possibility of entering into a business transaction resulting .in the Pork Authority gaining title to the Lantic Sugar site and Irving Oil Ltd. securing title and lease of a significant portion of the Long Wharf property. At the moment, title to the Lantic Sugar site (4 separate parcels of land divided by lands owned by CN) rests with the City of Saint John, hence the need for Council's approval. {Council had previously indicated to the other two parties that the City was prepared to sell the four parcels of land to Irving Oil Limited for the sole purpose of Irving Oil immediately transferring title of the same lands to the Port Authority on the following terms and conditions. 1. The price to be paid is the current fair market value of the property as determined by a qualified independent professional. appraiser, provided the fair market value does not exceed $1 Million. 2. Given that the City is to understand that all three parties mentioned in this report have commissioned Appraisal Reports, the parties agree to simply take the average of the Fair Market Value contained in each of those reports and agree that this average shall be the Fair Market Value of the lands for purposes of this transaction. However, the parties also agree that in the event that the City's Appraisal is the highest of the three yet less than a million dollars, the City's Appraisal shall repress the Fair Market Value of the property for purposes of this transaction It must be noted that condition #1 was not a condition requested by the City of Saint John. This was a condition agreed to by the Port and Irving as part of the negotiations in finalizing their Memorandum of Understanding. It was included in the Memorandum of Understanding in order to allow Irving Oil Limited to re-assess the project if the Fair Market Value of the Lantic Sugar site prevented the proposal from being financially viable. It should be noted that the $1 Million figure came from a preliminary estimate of the appraised value carried out more than three years ago. 269 Report to Common Council Subject: Fair Market Value of Lactic Sugar Site Page 2 All three parties commissioned appraisal reports of the lands in question. Initially, the appraisal prepared on behalf of the City indicated an appraised value of $709,000, significantly less than the appraised values as determined by professional appraisers representing IOL and the Port Authority. The primary reason for this discrepancy is that the City's appraiser took the position and quite rightly so, that PID was landlocked as a result of the CN lands. However, the work done on behalf of I.O.L. and the Port was based on the assumption that given the intended use of the property, i.e. Port purposes, CN will have a vested interest in extending to the Port Authority a right-of-way over lands, something the City at one time had requested and was given but only for the time required to demolish the structures on the site. In any event, City staff instructed the City's Appraiser to update this estimate based on the assumption that the Port will succeed in obtaining the necessary ROW. In other words, all three appraisals have been prepared using the exact same assumptions. The results of the appraisals are as follows. Fredericton Appraisal Associates Ltd. (City) $1,244,000 Appraisals (Fundy) Ltd. (Irving Oil) $1,2$$,000 deStecher Appraisals Ltd. (Port Authority) $1,100,000 Applying condition two as per Council's resolution (i.e. the average of the three) results in the Fair Market Value of the lands being $1,210,667 for purposes of this transaction. The fallout from this process is that the fair market value is $210,667 more than that which was agreed to by Irving Oil Limited and the Saint John Port Authority. More specifically, Irving Oil Limited, should it choose to do so, could decide not to proceed. After speaking with Irving Oil about this new average, the company has indicated that they are willing to invest the additional $210,667 if it can be demonstrated that this additional investment will serve as a direct contribution to a deserving community project. The company's intention would be to make this additional investment to offset some of the City's planned contributions to a deserving community project that may otherwise not be possible. The company has indicated its commitment to work with the City Manager in an effort to identify the appropriate Community project in which both the City and the company could support or partner. RECOMMENDATION: Given the results of the Appraisal Reports and Irving Oil limited's indication that the company is prepared to take the next step with the Saint John Port Authority, which is to seek Federal Government approval for this land transaction, then Common Council should advise both parties that the City is prepared to accept $ 1,210,667 as the purchase price and further, Common Council advise Irving Oil Limited that it very much appreciates the company's additional investment of $210,667,and accepts and agrees with the notion that this additional amount will be specifically earmarked for a community project that both the City and the company agree enhances our community. 270 Report to Common Council Subject..' Fair nl`arket Value of Lactic Sugar Site CITY MANAGER Page 3 271 Terrence L. Totten, FCA M&C-2008 June 9, 2008 & His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council: SUBJECT: West Side Wellness Centre - Carleton Community Centre In September 2008 Saint John community partners came together to embark on establishing the West Side Wellness Centre in the basement of the Carleton Community Centre. These partners included the St. Joseph's Community Health Centre, Saint John Regional Hospital/ RHAB, West Side P.A.C.T., Community Living and the Carleton Community Centre Advisory Board. The purpose of creating a wellness centre in the lower west side of Saint John is to improve access to primary health care and promote overall health and wellness throughout the west side priority neighbourhoods. On November 14, 2008 the West Side Wellness Centre steering committee held an orientation meeting with the Minister of Health - Michael Murphy: M.L.A.s - Ed Doherty, Abel LeBlanc, Roly McIntyre, Stuart Jamieson and Jack Keir, and the Mayor Ivan Court to unveil the vision for a wellness centre at the Carleton Community Centre. All dignitaries in attendance expressed a willingness to support this project and commit to the wellness centre location at the Carleton Community Centre. The West Side Wellness Centre steering committee is requesting financial support from the Province of New Brunswick to renovate the basement of the Carleton Community Centre at a projected cost of $325,000. The West Side Wellness Centre steering committee has requested up to $200,000 fiinding from the Regional Development Corporation through the Honourable Stuart Jamieson and has submitted a proposal to the Honourable Michael Murphy, Department of Health requesting capital cost in the amount of $125,000. The Westside Wellness Centre steering committee is requesting financial support from the City of Saint John to complete the design work and plans for the renovation project, as well as providing "in kind" services. Generally design plans for capital this type of project is typically calculated at between 10% and 15% of the overall project cost, depending upon The C,ft , ' Safit Ohm, 272 the complexity of the project. In this case, not knowing the exact detail it is suggested that 15% would be an appropriate estimate. The City's contribution is estimated at ($325,000 x 15%) or $48,750. It is anticipated this number will be lower. The funds for this are available in the Leisure Services 2008 Capital Budget. Plans are to begin the project immediately and to have it completed by end of March 2009. The committee request of the City of Saint John for "in kind" services support of the Wellness Centre will include use of Carleton Community Centre basement, heat, lights, and custodial services free of charge for the period of time the Westside Wellness Centre resides at the Carleton Community Centre. The Province will provide professional staffing. An agreement will need to be in place to clarify responsibilities and liabilities. Recommendation: It is recommended that: 1) Common Council approve the Carleton Community Centre (basement) as the location for the West Side Wellness Centre, and that 2) Financial support up to $48,750 be provided to complete the design work, administration and supervision for the renovation project, and that 3) Approval be given for "in kind" support as stated in this report, and that 4) The City Solicitor be directed to prepare all necessary documents required to enter into this partnership, and that 5) The Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign these documents, and that 6) This funding will be available provided funding from the Province of New Brunswick is approved and secured by the West Side Wellness Centre steering committee. Respectfully submitted, Bernie Morrison Commissioner of Leisure Services Terrence L. Totten, C.A. City Manager KW 273 M&C-2008 November 23, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court And Members of Common Council: SUBJECT: Citv Community Centre Enhancement Report BACKGROUND: 11""'mommmr, At the meeting of Common Council on September 27, 2008, Council requested "a document outlining the needs and subsequent financial support required to enhance our community centres." The Leisure Services Department is responsible for six community centres in the City of Saint John. The Carleton Community Centre (CCC) opened inl971, Somerset Community Centre (SCC) opened in 1975 and moved to its present day location at St. Pius / Crescent Valley School in 1992, South End Community Centre (SECC) opened in 1978, North End Community Centre (NECC) opened in1979, Forest Glen Community Centre (FGCC) opened inl982 and the Millidgeville Community Centre (MCC) opened in 1993. The Leisure Services Department at one time operated and managed these six community centres. Today, the Carleton Community Centre, Somerset Community Centre and North End Community Centre are directly operated and managed by Leisure Services. The Forest Glen Community Centre and Millidgeville Community Centre are operated by the YMCA, while the South End Community Centre is operated by the Saint John Boys & Girls Club. The City of Saint John provides each of these organizations with an annual grant to operate these community centres. The City of Saint John also supports other non-city owned community centres such as the Latimore Lake Community Centre, Milford Community Centre, Dennis Morris Community Centre, KBM (hetepec-Belmont- Morna), Lorneville Community Centre and Loch Lomond Community Centre. These community centres are owned and operated by community groups and boards. The City of Saint John provides an annual operating grant to these groups for a total of $18,000. Leisure Services staff provides further support to these community centres by assisting in strategic planning, grant application processes, playground and recreational program development. 274 1 Em 11 Community centres have represented an important recreational, cultural, academic and social support system to thousands of children in Saint John over the years. Several thousand of our children live in poverty and are faced with many challenges on a day-to-day basis. An investment into our community centres is an investment in our future - that being our children and teens. The community centre program was one of the programs that suffered significant cuts over the past decade and this is evident in the appearance of the buildings, staffing levels, and program decline. Each centre has approximately 250 children that actively participate in their programs from September to May each year. During the summer months there are approximately 35 children at each location that participate in the summer program from June to August. That is an estimated total of 1,710 children that take advantage of the city's programs each year. There are a number of adult programs but the numbers are not available. ANALYSIS Even though this report will deal mainly with City owned and operated community centres, there are a number of privately owned and operated community centres in the city which provide a valuable service to the City's neighbourhoods. At present the City provides funding at $18,000 by means of the Community Development Grant. These funds are used for capital improvements of these centres as well as community development initiatives and neighbourhood projects including outdoor rinks, neighbourhood skate parks, and community garden initiatives, etc...in other words, provide leverage funds to keep these facilities viable and to encourage community involvement. There will be an official grant application process for accessing this grant including a terms of reference specifying matching funds criteria for capital requests. This fund will foster opportunity and incentive for community / neighbourhood development initiatives and support neighbourhood priorities established by Common Council. Staff is proposing that this fund be increased by $72,000 to better reflect the need of these centres. A request for these funds is included in the 2009 Budget requests. The scope of this report will primarily focus on the six community centres (CCC, SCC, NECC, SECC, FGCC, and MCC). This report will focus on program considerations including staffing levels, existing partnerships, equipment and transportation. Physical deficiency audit will have to be conducted by staff or others with more knowledge in these areas. The City's Facility Management Department will be providing Council with a detailed list at a later date and will be requesting funding in the 2009 Capital Budget to address some of the concerns. Further action and study will be required to be able to provide Council with detailed information for future consideration in all areas. Facilitv Deficiencies Complexities arise when dealing with the physical aspect of the buildings. The six facilities that the City has some direct responsibility over have differing ownerships. The Carleton Community and North End Community Centre (except the gymnasium) belong to the City of Saint John, the South End Community Centre, Millidgeville Community Centre and the Forest Glenn Community Centre belong to School District # 8, the Somerset Community Centre belongs to the Province of New Brunswick Department of Supply and Services. Each facility will require a physical audit. A financial analysis on facility deficiencies is not available at the time of this report, however, identified deficiencies will be submitted to each 275 facility owner with a request to consider repair and upgrades of these facilities with a cost analysis provided. The City's Facilities Management Department has included funding requests to upgrade North End Community Centre in 2009, Carleton Community Centre has received a number of upgrades and these will continue, and audits/ inspections of all the other facilities will be carried out in 2009 for further consideration. Facilitv Accessibilitv Community centres must be brought up to accessibility standards to service all Saint John citizens. Issues such as accessibility to upper floors, widening of doors and washrooms need to be a priority. Other accessibility issues such as fire alarms for the deaf and stair markings for the visually impaired require attention. A complete facility audit will be requested for all community centres taking into account exterior and interior structural, cosmetic and accessibility conditions and issues. Custodial Care The custodial care responsibility differs for each community centre. Custodial care for the SECC, MCC and FGCC is the responsibility of School District 8. The SCC custodial care is the responsibility of Supply and Services of the Province of New Brunswick. The Leisure Services Parks Division of the City of Saint John is responsible for the custodial care at the NECC and CCC with the exception of the NECC gym (Lorne School) whereby custodial care is the responsibility of the School District 8. During the staff walls through process a `moment in time snapshot' of how clean each facility was taken. The degree of cleanliness from centre to centre, as well as from room to room within each centre varied. Community centres with custodial care under the responsibility of School District 8 were adequately clean in all areas of each facility, community centres under the custodial care of Province of New Brunswick, Department of Supply & Services had varying degrees of cleanliness from room to room, and community centres under the custodial care of Leisure Services had varying degrees of cleanliness from room to room. There is no scheduled custodial care during weekend operations at the community centres. The responsibility of cleaning during not normal hours has fallen on the shoulders of part- time staff at the community centres. Custodial services at the two city owned facilities is dependant on the availability of staff not being utilized in other programs. This often changes from season to season and full week coverage is rarely available. Dedicated custodial staff would be preferable. Leisure Services staff will explore custodial care options and report back to Council with recommendations as to the most economical and cost effective means of delivering this service to meet the needs of these centres. Recreation Division Staffinu Levels The Recreation Division of Leisure Services presently has a compliment of eight permanent staff, and 2 casual Leisure Services Coordinators positions (8 month term October - May). 276 Staffing levels may need to be adjusted in order to meet the needs of the community and achieve Council's priorities to enhance community centres, to effectively work with neighbourhoods and communities, to develop and nourish partnerships and community relations, and explore opportunities to enhance overall programs and services for the citizens of Saint John. Community expectations and demand for recreational services is high and may only be met with adequate staffing levels. Leisure Services staff will explore and design a model to reflect adequate staffing levels needed to meet the recreational needs, demands and expectations of the citizens and will report back to Council in 2009 to present the model and associated costs. A community and neighbourhood needs assessment survey is an integral component to validate the staff model. An evaluation process is needed to ascertain whether the needs of the community are being met and to ascertain how programs and services can be improved. Leisure Services has requested fiinding in the 2009 capital budget to conduct a program and facilities master plan, which will include the community and neighbourhood needs assessment survey. Phase 1 of this plan will ascertain the recreational needs for all of Saint John including community centres. Phase 2 will suggest the recreation facilities and services needed to meet the community needs discovered in Phase 1. PartnershiUs The City of Saint John currently programs three community centres and has formed partnerships with the YMCA and the Saint John Boys & Girls Club to program three community centres. Program delivery varies at each community centre based on the current provider of services. The YMCA and Boys & Girls Club provide child care services whereas the City of Saint John operated facilities do not offer this service. The SCC is an exception to this as a non- profit daycare operates at this community centre. All community centres provide after school, evening and weekend programs. The Community Centres operated by the City of Saint John and Boys & Girls Club provide these programs to the community free of charge, whereas, community centres operated by the YMCA charge a fee to participate in programs. All six community centres provide a facility rental program (gym and room rentals). Eauipment Deficiencies Equipment in the community centres is categorized as either expendable equipment or major equipment. Expendable Equipment (soccer balls, basketball, etc.) has a lifespan between 1-5 years. Major equipment (pool tables, ping pong tables, refrigerators, stoves etc.) has a lifespan of a minimum of 10 years. Historically, each community centre had an `in stock' inventory of expendable equipment valued at $10,000 by today's dollar value. On review of the present `in stock' inventory it is estimated there is on average a $7,000 equipment deficit for each centre. Expendable equipment supplies should be restored to an appropriate level whereby games and activities can be played to acceptable levels by the youth attending the community 277 centres. In order to replenish current equipment stock an initial re- investment of $42,000 is required. Also, an annual budget of $10,000 / centre towards replenishing expendable and major equipment is needed for a total of $60,000 / year. Staff feels it is appropriate to provide assistance at all six community centres to ensure good quality service. Transportation Historically, transportation was an integral part to the success of community centres. Each community centre had a fifteen passenger van at their disposal to transport youth from centre to centre to participate in inter-centre competitions and social programs, and for out of town excursions to places such as Moncton, Prince Edward Island, Montreal and Boston. The benefits of having vans (a transportation means), enhanced program opportunities for our youth beyond the walls of the community centre, beyond the boundaries of the neighbourhood streets, and occasionally beyond the boundaries of the city. A few years back the City of Saint John took the position that city owned vans to transport youth was too much of a liability risk. Furthermore, in lieu of budgetary reduction vans were considered expendable items during the budget reduction process. Leisure Services staff believes that a return to providing transportation as previously stated will give our youth many more opportunities than presently exists. This is especially true in our most vulnerable neighbourhoods. Realizing that the days of city owned fifteen passenger vans are apt not to return, a cost analysis of $58,800 / year to utilize outside companies to provide transportation to accommodate programs beyond the walls of the community centres is forecasted. FINANCIAL: A summary of additional financial needs proposed to be considered during the 2009 Budget deliberations is as follows: Item Capital Budget I Operating Budget 1. Community Needs Assessment and $110,0000 Inventory 2. Program Considerations and Deficiencies To Be Determined 3. Equipment Deficiencies $42,000 $60,000 4. Facility Deficiencies To be determined 5. Custodial Care $100,000 6. Transportation $58,000 7. Community Development Program $72,000 278 SUMMARY: To summarize the needs to enhance the community centres and programs: 1. Leisure Services needs to conduct a community / neighbourhood needs assessment survey in 2009 as part of a program and facilities master plan. This community / neighbourhood evaluation of existing recreation programs and services will be the guiding instrument for recreation programming and service delivery, as well as evaluating existing and identifying other potential partnerships. From this Leisure Services will design a model with cost analysis to reflect adequate staffing levels to meet the recreational needs, demands and expectations of the citizens of Saint John and present to Council for consideration in 2009. Funding for this is requested in the 2009 Capital Budget. 2. City of Saint John Facility Management Department will conduct and complete facility audits/ inspections for all six community centres; and provide a remodeling / renovation plan including a cost analysis to enhance the appearance of the centres. The North End Community Centre will receive upgrades if supported in 2009 budget requests. Funds are also requested for the continual upgrades needed for Carleton Community Centre. 3. Leisure Services staff will explore custodial care options and report back to Council with recommendations as to the most efficient and effective means of delivering this service to meet the needs of the community centres. 4. Leisure Services is requesting funding to upgrade and replace community centre expendable and major equipment by initially reinvesting $42,000 to replace old and worn out expendable equipment, and implement a major equipment replacement program by allocating an annual budget of $60,000. 5. Leisure Services is requesting that consideration be given to increasing the community centres transportation budget by $58,800 to enhance program opportunities outside the community centres. 6. Leisure Services is requesting an increase in the existing Community Enhancement Program by an additional $72,000 to assist other recreation and community program providers with needed funding to continue offering services in areas of the city deficient in direct City programming. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that this report be received and filed. Respectfully submitted, Bernie Morrison Commissioner of Leisure Services Terrence L. Totten, C.A. City Manager KW 279 M & C - 2008-349 November 21, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Upper Floors Program BACKGROUND: Common Council approved the recommended program design for the Upper Floors Program at the 18 August, 2008 meeting. Common Council also authorized the ad-hoc committee to seek expressions of interest from property owners who wish to access finds to assist them in finding and demonstrating creative alternative solutions to National Buildinu Code requirements which conserve the heritage character defining elements of their building in a manner consistent with the national Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places In Canada as a means of developing underutilized spaces in older buildings in Saint John. An advertisement was placed in the local newspaper and two information sessions were held. As a result eleven applications for design funding were received. ANALYSIS: The goals of the Upper Floors Program are to find creative development solutions that: 1. retain the heritage character of the buildings-both interior and exterior, 2. achieve fire and life safety for the occupants as well as the building, and 3. determine how redevelopment of underutilized spaces can be achieved cost effectively. 280 Report to Common Council Page 2 November 21, 2(_)(_)8 The ad-hoc committee consisting of representatives from Planning & Development and Buildings & Technical Services reviewed and reached consensus on the eleven applications received. Six projects were determined to meet the program criteria and are recommended to receive up to $5,000 at 50% of costs, to find alternative means through the 2005 National Building Code to meet fire and life safety requirements in a manner that retains the heritage character elements of the building. The remaining five applications either provided insufficient information to properly evaluate the application (three) or were for projects which had already started (two) and as such have their Building Code issues resolved. These projects were found to not meet the established criteria for the program. RECOMMENDATION: That Common Council approve a grant of up to $5,000 for each of the following six projects for Design Funding from the Upper Floors Program upon submission of acceptable conceptual design drawings demonstrating creative development solutions that use alternative measures available through the use of the 2005 version of the National Building Code: I ) Kurt Peacock for 56 Canterbury Street, 2) O'Leary's Entertainment Ltd. For 46-54 Princess Street, 3 ) Historica Court Inc. for 112 - 114 Prince William Street, 4) Historica Court Inc. for 78 - 82 King Street, 5) Historica Court Inc. for 55 Canterbury Street, and 6) Zathan Holdings Inc. for 12 - 18 Germain Street. Respectfully submitted, hen Forrest, MCIP, RPP Commissioner Planning and Development Terrence Totten, F.C.A. City Manager 281 xrr~~~ I Re My at Sam JM November 21, 2008 Common Council of The City of Saint John Your Worship and Councillors: City Solicitor's Office Bureau de l'avocat municipal Re: City of Saint John v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of New Brunswick and Keith Rowe Cause No. 44-08-+CA This is to advise that the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick has issued its decision in the above-captioned matter, a copy of which is attached. You will see that the City of Saint John was unsuccessful in this decision in which the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick applied a particularly stringent standard of appellate review - that of palpable and overriding error. Indeed, the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick found as follows at paragraph 17 of its decision: 17. Had I been a member of the Appeals Tribunal called on to decide the case, I might have adjourned the hearing of the appeal in order to enable the claimant to summon his co- worker who would either confirm or deny the former's• recitation of the relevant facts. But I am not a member of the Appeals Tribunal. Similarly, I might have weighed the evidence differently. But that is not my function as an appellate judge... [emphasis added] The Court of Appeal of New Brunswick awarded costs in favour of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of New Brunswick in the amount of $2,500.00. /2 SAINT JOHN PC). Box 1971 Saint John, NB Canada E2L 4L1 I www.saintjohn.ca I C.P. 1971 Saint John, N.-B. Canada E2L 4L1 282 Common Council November 21, 2008 Re: Keitb Rowe City Solicitor Page 2 If Common Council wishes to discuss the labour relations dimensions of this decision, which discussion would necessarily include the identification of personal information and advice from the City Solicitor, it would be appropriate for such discussion to occur with the public excluded pursuant to subsections 10.2(4)(b) (t), (g) and 0) of the Municipalities Act, which state as follows: 10.2(4) If it is necessary at a meeting of a council or a committee of council to discuss any of die following matters, the public may be excluded from the meeting for the duration of the discussion: (b) personal information; 69 information concerning legal opinions or advice provided to the municipality by a municipal solicitor, or privileged communications as between solicitor and client in a matter of municipal business; (g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the municipality or any of its agencies, boards or commissions, including a matter before an administrative tribunal; 0) labour and employment matters, including the negotiation of collective agreements. Respectfully Submitted, -Al Jo Nug nt City Solicitor Attachment 283 COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW BRUNSWICK COUR D'APPEL DU NOUVEAU-BRUNSWICK 44-08-CA THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN. a body corporate bv- Roval Charter -and- APPELLANT THE WORKPLACE HEALTH. SAFETY AND COMPENSATION COMMISSION OF NEW BRUNSWICK and KEITH ROWE RESPONDENTS The City of Saint John v. The Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission of New Brunswick and Rowe, 2008 NBCA 83 CORAM: The Honourable Justice Turnbull The Honourable Justice Robertson The Honourable Justice Quigg Appeal from a decision of the Appeals Tribunal of the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission: February 7, 2008 History of case: Decision under appeal: Unreported Preliminary or incidental proceedings: N/A Appeal heard: October 23, 2008 Judgment rendered: November 20, 2008 CITY OF SAINT JOHN. corps constitue nar charte rovale APPELANTE LA COMMISSION DE LA SANTE. DE LA SECURITE ET DE L'INDEMNISATION DES ACCIDENTS AU TRAVAIL DU NOUVEAU-BRUNSWICK et KEITH ROWE INTIMES City of Saint John c. Commission de la sante, de la securite et de l'indemnisation des accidents au travail du Nouveau-Brunswick et Rowe, 2008 NBCA 83 CORAM : L'honorable juge Turnbull L'honorable juge Robertson L'honorable juge Quigg Appel d'une decision du Tribunal d'appel de la Commission de la sante, de la securite et de Findemnisation des accidents au travail : Le 7 fevrier 2008 Historique de la cause : Decision frappee d'appel Inedite Procedures preliminaires ou accessoires S.O. Appel entendu : Le 23 octobre 2008 Judement rendu : Le 20 novembre 2008 284 -2- Reasons for judgment by: The Honourable Justice Robertson Motifs de jugement : L'honorable juge Robertson Concurred in by: The Honourable Justice Turnbull The Honourable Justice Quigg Counsel at hearing: For the appellant: Scott A. Brittain For the respondents:. Matthew R. Letson for the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission Keith Rowe appeared in person THE COURT The appeal is dismissed. The respondent Commission is entitled to costs of $2,500. As the respondent, Mr. Rowe, did not participate in the proceedings, he is not entitled to costs. Souscrivent aux motifs : L'honorable juge Turnbull L'honorable juge Quigg Avocats a Faudience : Pour 1'appelante Scott A. Brttain Pour les intimes : Matthew R. Letson pour la Commission de la sante, de la securite et de Findemnisation des accidents au travail Keith Rowe a comparu en personne LA LOUR L'appel est rejete.. La Commission intimee a droit aux depens fixes a 2500 M. Rowe, intime, n'a droit a aucuns depens etant donne qu'il n'a pas participd a l'instance. 285 The judgment of the Court was delivered by ROBERTSON J.A. [1] In April of 2005, the respondent, Keith Rowe, had his claim for compensation benefits accepted by the respondent Workplace Health Safety and Compensation Commission. A year later, the Commission received "new information„ from Mr. Rowe's former employer, the appellant, the City of Saint John. The information supported the City's contention that Mr. Rowe had not been working on the day on which he suffered the back injury for which benefits had been paid. Mr. Rowe had indicated that the injury was suffered on January 21, 2005, at 4:00 pm. The employer's records confirmed that he was not working at 4:00 p.m. However, those records also confirmed that he had been working the 3:00 a. m. to 10:00 a.m. shift on January 21, 2005. In response, 1V&. Rowe stated he had erred in stating the time; the "accident" occurred at 4:00 a.m., and not 4:00 p.m., as initially reported. However, the Commission did not accept Mr. Rowe's explanation and overturned its initial decision to award compensation benefits and demanded repayment of monies paid ($10,125.69). [2] Mr. Rowe (hereafter "the claimant") appealed the Commission's decision to the Appeals Tribunal under the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Coininzssaon Act, S.N.B. 1994, c. W-14. The majority accepted the claimant's testimony that he suffered a work-related injury during the 3:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. shift on January 21, 2005, and allowed the appeal. The majority offered brief reasons for its decision. The dissent offered none. [3] The employer appeals to this Court on two grounds: (1) the Appeals Tribunal breached the fairness duty when it failed to consider certain documentation that the employer had submitted to the Tribunal, documentation which the Tribunal accepted as relevant; and (2) the Appeal Tribunal's reasons are sufficiently deficient so as to prevent meaningful appellate review. In my respectful view, both grounds of appeal fail and, hence, the appeal must be dismissed for the following reasons. 286 -2- [4] 1 begin my analysis with a brief discussion of the relevant principles surrounding the standard of review to be applied to decisions of the Appeals Tribunal. For purposes of deciding this appeal, the significance of the Supreme Court's recent decision in Dunsrnuir v. New Brunswick, [2008] S.C.J. No. 9 (QL), 2008 SCC 9, may be restricted to the reality that there are only two review standards: correctness and reasonableness. The third review standard of patent unreasonableness has been eliminated and, hence, in cases where deference is owed, the review standard must be reasonableness. Applying Dunsmuir, the jurisprudence of this Court is consistent with the following general framework. With respect to pure questions of law or jurisdiction, decisions of the Appeals Tribunals are owed no deference and, hence, correctness is the applicable review standard. When it comes to allegations of breaches of the fairness duty, the general rule is that no deference is owed the tribunal's ruling. The standard of review with respect to questions of fact remains "palpable and overriding". This applies equally to findings of credibility. Questions of mixed fact and law are owed deference on the review standard of reasonableness. In my opinion, the Appeals Tribunal did not breach the fairness duty, nor did it commit a palpable and overriding error in deciding as it did. With respect to the relevant jurisprudence: see Gallant v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (N.B.) (2000), 228 N.B.R. (2d) 98 (C.A.); Keddy v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (N.B.) et al. (2002), 247 N.B.R. (2d) 284, [2002] N.B.J. No. 91 (QL), 2002 NBCA 24, D. W. v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (N.B.) et al. (2005), 288 N.B.R. (2d) 26, [2005] N.B.J. No. 282 (QL), 2005 .NBCA 70, Fortis Properties Corp. et al. v. United Steelworkers of America, Local 1-306 et al. (2007), 312 N.B.R. (2d) 224, [2007] N.B.J. No. 68 (QL), 2007 NBCA 16 at para. 6, Housen v. Nikolaisen, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235, [2002] S.C.J. No. 31 (QL), 2002 SCC 33, H.L. v. Canada (Attorney General), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 401, [2005] S.C.J. No. 24 (QL), 2005 SCC 25. [5] The essential facts of this case are as follows. On January 28, 2005, the claimant submitted a "Form 67" report to the Commission indicating that he had suffered a work-related "back" injury on January 20. 2005, at 4:00 p.m. The "accident" occurred when the claimant and a co-worker were changing a 150 to 200 pound "blade" on a 287 -3- snowplow. On March 23, 2005, the claimant submitted a second Form 67. This time he indicated that the injury occurred on January 21. 2005 at 4:00 p.m. On April 5, 2005, the Commission accepted the claimant's claim for compensation benefits. Nearly a year later, on March 16, 2006, the employer wrote the Commission requesting it reopen the claim on the basis of "new information" that had recently come to the employer's attention during disciplinary hearings involving the claimant. The employer alleged that, as a matter of fact, the claimant had not been working at the time stated. This new information confirmed that the claimant had worked between the hours of 3:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. and, therefore, the claimant could not have been working at 4:00 p.m. as stated in his Form 67. The Commission wrote to the claimant advising him that his claim had been reopened on the basis of this information. The claimant did not respond to the Commission's letter and on October 17, 2006, the Commission advised the claimant that the decision to accept his claim had been overturned based on the employer's information. The Commission found the evidence that the claimant was not working at the time reported on his Form 67 to be "very compelling" The claimant was also advised that he would have to repay benefits received. In response to that letter, the claimant wrote back indicating that he had erred in stating 4:00 p.m. as the time of the accident and that his Form 67 should have read "a.m." rather than "p.m." In that letter, the claimant indicated that a co-worker, Kevin Gilliland, would confirm the fact that the claimant was working on January 21, 2005, at 4:00 a.m. The claimant had Mr. Gilliland sign the handwritten letter drafted by the claimant, but the letter does not go so far as to indicate that Mr. Gilliland witnessed the accident. On November 21, 2006, the Commission advised that the information the claimant provided was "not substantial enough" for the Commission to reconsider its October 17, 2006 decision to overturn the claim. [6] On January 25, 2007, the claimant advised the Appeals Tribunal of his intention to appeal the Commission's decision of October 17, 2006. On September 27, 2007, the Appeals Tribunal issued a notice of hearing to be held on October 31, 2007. Prior to the hearing, the employer filed additional documents with the Appeals Tribunal. At the hearing, counsel for the employer (not counsel on the present appeal) provided the 288 -4- Tribunal with copies of the additional documents. The Tribunal recessed to consider whether the documents would be admitted. On return, the Tribunal said this: "We have decided that this is not new evidence being brought forward. So we will accept it. It's probably going to help clarify some of the information that is in the record." The Tribunal then handed back the documents to counsel. Towards the end of the hearing, counsel for the employer offered to provide the Tribunal with copies of what are labeled "The [employer's]' Oral Presentation Notes'". The Tribunal accepted the document without first reading it. [7] At the hearing of the present appeal, the employer brought a motion to introduce the affidavit of counsel for the employer at the hearing before the Appeals Tribunal. That affidavit is directed at the events surrounding the Tribunal's receipt of the so-called additional materials. In brief, the affidavit states that counsel misunderstood the Tribunal's ruling with respect to the additional material submitted at the opening of the Tribunal hearing. Counsel thought that the Tribunal had rejected the material. As a result of that misunderstanding, counsel stated that he did not address the relevance of the materials submitted. As is evident, the issue of "misunderstanding" is different than the one outlined in the Notice of Appeal: to wit, the Tribunal failed to consider all relevant documentation. [8] On the hearing of the present appeal, we accepted the affidavit of counsel for the employer without objection from the Commission, together with copies of the additional materials. We did so because a new hearing cannot be ordered simply because counsel misunderstood the Appeals Tribunal's ruling. In point of law, two questions must be addressed. The first is whether the "confusion" was attributable in whole or in part to the Tribunal. The second is whether the additional materials are relevant to the disposition of one or more of the salient issues (see 3Com Corp. et al. v. Zorin International Corp. el al. (2006), 211 O.A.C. 222, [2006] O.J. No. 2184 (QL) and Waxmanet al. v. Waxman et al. (2004), 186 O.A.C. 201, [2004] O.J. No. 1765 (QL). 289 -5- [9] In the present case, I confess that the Tribunal's ruling with respect to the additional documentation does generate an element of confusion for this reason. The information provided to the Tribunal was not before the Commission when it rendered its October 17, 2005 decision. I say this because, the information was not included in the "Statement of Facts" which is provided to this Court and contains all of the documentation that was presented to both the Commission and the Tribunal. That being the case, it should follow that the documentation in question qualified as new evidence in the sense that it was not information that was before the Commission when it rendered its decision. Yet, the Appeals Tribunal ruled otherwise. In any event, it is my understanding that a hearing before the Appeals Tribunal is a de noro proceeding and that the Tribunal is entitled to make independent findings of fact based on fresh evidence (see s. 21 of the WHSCC,4ct, "The Appeals Tribunal Guidelines" and D. W. v. Workplace Health, Safety and Coinpensation Commission (N.B.) et al., at para. 4). [10] fortunately, we do not have to decide whether the alleged confusion is more apparent than real or to attribute fault. I say this because the additional documentation does not qualify as "relevant evidence". Some of the documents merely confirm what is already known. Other documents would have to be excluded because they are being used to attack the claimant's "character" and would have been inadmissible under the rules of evidence. Let me explain. [11] Some of the documents provided to this Court merely confirm an uncontested fact, namely that the claimant was not working at 4:00 p.m, on the day in question but rather at 4:00 a.m. Fence, those documents are of no moment. Other documents are copies of cheques drawn on the Commission and payable jointly to the claimant and his employer. It just happens that one of those cheques was cashed by the claimant without obtaining the endorsement of the claimant's employer. Although the claimant confessed to his wrongdoing and promised to repay the monies, disciplinary hearings were instigated and eventually the claimant lost his job for this reason, and perhaps others. These facts (allegations) are found in counsel's "Presentation Notes" that were offered to the Appeals Tribunal near the close of the hearing. Collectively, the 290 -6- materials review much of the claimant's wrongdoing during his time as employee with the City and leading up to his dismissal. The so-called Presentation Notes are intended to support the employer's contention that the claimant lacks "personal integrity" and "credibility" generally. Indeed, if one reads them carefully, it becomes evident that the employer does not even accept that the claimant was ever injured. [121 In my view, the majority of the Appeals Tribunal cannot be faulted for ignoring "additional information" that was merely confirmatory of the fact that the claimant had been working at 4:00 a.m. and not 4:00 p.m. Nothing turns on this evidence. However, most of the additional information was being introduced to attack the claimant's "character". As the claimant's character was not in issue, the Appeals Tribunal would have had to reject the additional documentation. The law is as follows.. [13] There is a general exclusionary rule of evidence that prohibits a party from adducing evidence of the other's "bad character" for the purpose of proving or disproving a fact in issue when that person's character is not in issue in the proceedings. The exception to the general rule is the "similar fact rule". Evidence demonstrating the bad character of a party that is presented as circumstantial proof of what happened must satisfy this exception to be admissible. However, the similar fact rule does not apply if the relevance of the evidence is aimed at simply showing that the party is a "bad person": see John Sopinka, Sidney N. Lederman and Alan W. Bryant, The Law of Evidence in Canada, 2nd ed. (Toronto: Butterworths, 1999), at 431 and 477 and David M. Paciocco and Lee Stuesser, The Lary of Evidence, 2nd ed. (Toronto: Irwin Law, 1999) at 131-32 and at 90f£ [141 In the present case, the remaining additional information submitted to the Appeals Tribunal was provided solely for the purpose of impugning the claimant's character. The employer was attempting to revisit the claimant's work history and dealings with his employer that led to his ultimate dismissal. All of this transpired well over a year after the Commission had accepted the claimant's claim for compensation benefits. This additional evidence was not being used to attack the claimant's credibility 291 -7- with respect to a narrow issue. It was being used to attack his character. Hence, the general exclusionary rule of evidence applied. Moreover, the factual record would not support the argument that the additional information fell within the "similar fact" exception. For these reasons, the employer's first ground of appeal (as modified by counsel's affidavit) must fail. [15] With respect to the second ground of appeal, this Court has recently affirmed that the reasons for decision offered by the Appeals Tribunal must be sufficient for purposes of enabling this Court to discharge its appellate function (see Bosse v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (N.B.) (2008), 330 N.B.R. (2d) 192, [2008] N.B.J. No. 170 (QL), 2008 NBCA 35, .Boyle v. Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission (N.B.) (1996), 179 N.B.R, (2d) 43, [1996] N.B.J. No. 291 (QL) and Savoie v. Workers' Compensation Board (N.B.) (1993), 139 NBR 2d 372, [1993] N.B.J. No. 466 (QL)). [16] 1 agree that the Appeals Tribunal's reasons for decision are not as robust as one might expect of an expert tribunal. However, brevity is not of itself a sufficient ground of complaint so long as the reasons provide the reader with an appreciation of the underlying facts and issue at hand and permit meaningful appellate review when measured against the record presented to the tribunal. In my view, the majority decision meets this expectation. Although the opinion is only two pages in length, the reasons outline the essential facts leading up to the appeal hearing and the underlying issue: whether the claimant was actually working at the time of the injury. On the record before it, the Appeals Tribunal had to make a finding with respect to the claimant's credibility. The majority decided in his favour as reflected in the last two paragraphs of its decision. Those paragraphs read as follows: The Appeals Panel, in reviewing the information provided, noted how thorough the employer had been in tracking the appellant's work schedule. The Panel discussed the point about no witnesses and the explanation provided by the appellant. In weighing the evidence, the Panel placed great weight on the fact that the representatives of the employer 292 _8- admitted one individual could not change the blade on a snowplow alone. No incident reports were provided to show if the incident did or did not occur. The employer did not deny that the appellant may have been called in due to a storm to work the overnight shift. The Panel also recognizes that the appellant's witness did sign the appellant's correspondence of October 23, 2006, although he did not mention the changing of a plow, mention was made of being called in on the day and time in question which is contrary to the information provided by the employer that resulted in the WHSCC overturning its earlier decision. Based on this information or the lack thereof, the Appeals Panel rules that subsections 7(1) and 7(2.1) of the Act, as they relate to the preponderance of evidence, support the appellant's claim and determines that this claim should be accepted. [17] Had I been a member of the Appeals Tribunal called on to decide the case, I might have adjourned the hearing of the appeal in order to enable the claimant to summon his co-worker who would either confirm or deny the former's recitation of the relevant facts. But I am not a member of the Appeals Tribunal. Similarly, I might have weighed the evidence differently. But that is not my function as an appellate judge. Above all else, I cannot say that the Appeals Tribunal's credibility finding was infused with palpable and overriding error. For these reasons, I must reject the employer's second ground of appeal. [18] For the above reasons, I would dismiss the appeal. The respondent Commission is entitled to costs of $2,500. The respondent claimant is not entitled to 293 -9- costs. He exercised his right not to participate in these proceedings even though made a party respondent. 294 November 15, 2008 His Worship Mayor Ivan Court and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors: SUBJECT: Saint John Industrial Parks Update BACKGROUND: In October of 2004 Common Council resolved to initiate a review of Saint John Industrial Parks Limited ( SJIPL In the fall of 2006, the Mayor's Task Force on Industrial Parks called for public submissions, which SJIPL responded to on November 8, 2006. In May of 2007, the Mayor's Task Force presented its findings and recommendations to Common Council, who subsequently directed the City Manager and SJIPL to report back with their response to the report. The SJIPL GM and President met with the City Manager to review the Report and discuss a go forward plan. The City Manager and SJIPL were in agreement with respect to how it would respond to the Report and what the action steps would be. SJIPL committed to present this response to Council. Common Council received the City Manager/SJIPL response to the Task Force recommendations and adopted a resolution to provide the SJIPL with increased resources in an effort to enable SJIPL to meet the expectations placed upon it. It has been more than a year since the SJIPL last corresponded with Common Council. Much has occurred in that term, as such it would seem important to update Council of its achievements and ongoing initiatives. The first item to address is an update on the Mayor's Task Force recommendations and the corresponding actions to date. The Task Force created a series of recommendations which covered a range of issues from governance to signage. On all points the SJIPL GM and Board agreed. Recommendation #1 Update governance model and inodifi board corlipasitioil. Agree • The Municipality is currently contemplating a new governance structure. • The SJIPL Board composition has been altered to add new skill sets and new members. 295 Report to Common Council November 21, 2008 Page 2 Recommendation #2 Fall tirrre twinagerrrent with ao'equcite support. Agree • The City has created and filled another established position in the Real Estate Department in July of 2008 which has and will continue to allow the GM to increase focus on the industrial parks. Recommendation #3 Relocation to 40 King Street. Agree • To spirit of recommendation Disagree • On physical relocation • SJIPL has a preference for "store fi°w»t" visibility within City Hall which has been largely completed. Signage is in place and the new SJIPL office on the 10th floor has been built out. • SJIPL continues to enjoy support from Dept. of Planning and Development, Planning support, GIS data and administration. • SJIPL continues to enjoy support from our corporate partners, Municipal Operations, Water and Sewer, Financial Services etc. • The SJIPL continues to work to improve the communication, rapport and profile with ESJ. SJIPL and ESJ are currently working together to revitalize the Barge terminal project. Recommendation #4 Evaluate public private sector industrial parks rrroclels for hest practices. Agree • Excellent recommendation, minimal progress to date. Recommendation #5 Build relationships with other like-rrrinded economic development agencies. Agree • The SJIPL is pleased to participate in a proactive manner. • It is envisioned the SJIPL may be operating under a new governance model for the City, likely within an Economic Development portfolio. 296 Report to Common Council November 21, 2008 Page Recommendation #6 Market and capitalise on strengths unique to area. Agree • Many of the marketing opportunities have been addressed. • Established www.SaintJohnIndustrial.ca (website). • Established "Experience Energy" brand. • Refreshed the Company logo to involve the Explorer. • Recreated the SJIPL park brochures. • With support from the Wright Agency, the Company has created a cohesive marketing program which includes quarterly newsletters to stakeholders and targeted local/regional media buys. Recommendation #7 Establish and enf n-ce coveiiciiits for park sel-i,ices and bealitification. Agree • The required covenants are in place and form part of the deed in any transfer. • We must remember these parks are working heal, industrial parks. • There are a limited number of offenders to address. • Additional staffing support will now allow attention to these issues. • Improvements can and will be made as funding for green initiatives are investigated i.e. tree planting program. Recommendation #8 Estahlish streamlined land transaction process with Province. Agree • The current timelines required to finalize transfers of land are unacceptable. • The SJIPL has continued to work with the Province in an effort to address the concern. • The SJIPL is pleased to report that BNB is currently preparing to seek Cabinet's support to transfer 600 acres of industrial land to the Company. The lands are located within the Spruce Lake and McAllister Parks. Recommendation #9 Improved access to McAllister and Grandview parks. Agree • Support of the I Mile House initiative is a priority. • The project is underway. 297 Report to Common Council November 21, 2008 Page 4 Recommendation #10 bnproved,signage f )r ino'mm-ial parks. Agree • A three phase signage program has been initiated, directional, site opportunity and electronic mapping. • Site development opportunity signage initiatives are under development, to be installed in 2009. • Google mapping has been imbedded in the website for all three parks. • SJIPL is currently seeking DOT approval/support for a highway signage proposal. Significant work has been accomplished with respect to the Task Force Report recommendations in 2008. SJIPL has also embarked on a series of key capital and operational initiatives over the past year which has or will create an improved and expanded inventory of lands. This initiative is in response to the impending industrial boom which might generate unseen demand for industrial offerings. In 2007-08 SJIPL completed the first phase of a two phase capital project to link Alloy Drive to Stinson Drive. This first phase of White Rocks Road has opened up 15acres of serviced land in Spruce Lake and will facilitate the creation of an additional 20-25 acres in a subsequent phase. A tree removal program deployed in 2008 stimulated significant activity in the Spruce Lake Industrial Park. A record volume of unserviced land has been sold or is under a purchase and sale agreement in the past 10 months. The majority of this sales activity occurred after the Company initiated the removal of 15-20 acres of trees in key locations throughout the park including the Paddy's Hill Drive area. This program created the perception of activity as well as opened up the land, bringing the development potential one step closer. SJIPL has recently awarded a contract to complete a 1,000,000 cubic foot+/- cut and fill project to improve the readiness of industrial lands off the McIlveen Drive extension. This initiative ensures maximum density is created along this recently developed (2004) right of way and water/sewer infrastructure, maximizing return on the investment. This project is estimated to be in the order of $600,000. SJIPL and Terrain are in the final stages of the design of an underground hydro infrastructure system to facilitate quicker servicing of new lots along McIlveen Drive. This project will be a key element of the Company's 2009 capital program. Again land readiness is imperative to meet potential demand. 298 Report to Common Council Page 5 November 21, 2008 The SJIPL in concert with BNB, ESJ, several private sector stakeholders and governmental agencies have begun the process of revitalizing the Barge Terminal project planned for the Lorneville Industrial Site. Stakeholder meetings have occurred effective October 24th, 2008. The scope of the project will be revisited to ensure maximum benefit can be derived from such an initiative. Other items under review are, funding models/partners, potential uses/users and operating models. In conjunction with these planned projects, there are multitudes of planning initiatives which directly or indirectly impact the Company. The Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. has taken an involved and aggressive approach to prepare for the potential industrial opportunities which might present themselves over the next 10 years. A fine line has been established, prepare for the potential boom without having millions of dollars in the ground prior to the anticipated mega projects becoming a reality. An immediate effort has also been made to determine expansion opportunities for both east and west Saint John. The expansion challenges are distinct for each offering. The Saint John Industrial Parks with support from the Terrain Group have identified several SJIPL expansion possibilities, three options east and one option west. The east expansion options are complicated with land ownership issues. Any expansion of the McAllister Park will require lands owned by others who will not necessarily participate or partner in park growth. A third offering contemplated for east is a new site entirely, however land ownership and cost of development must be considered. The SJIPL is exhausting the expansion opportunities adjacent to McAllister Park with a desire to leverage existing infrastructure rather than create new. The outcome of these activities will dictate where the east expansion must occur. SJIPL has recently engaged Terrain to perform a Limitations Study on the Lorneville Industrial Site. This study will give the Company an indication of how the 4,000 acre site might be developed, at what cost and with what uses. This master planning initiative will also provide the Company with decision making tools with respect to the possible acquisition of the Lorneville Industrial Site lands from the Province of BNB as a second phase of the impending land transfer. These Lorneville lands do come with a significant tax component however the opportunities for growth may be significant. The Company is also contemplating the creation of a new five year strategy. The current strategy has lapsed and certainly the environment the SJIPL competes in has changed significantly over the past couple of years in particular. A new strategy is required and will most likely be developed over the next 6 months to a year. 299 Report to Common Council Page 6 November 21, 2008 The SJIPL also is involved in municipal land planning discussions as well as in the Eider Rock EIA in an effort to understand the land use planning initiatives and to ensure the SJIPL is represented or involved where appropriate. These items will tie into the Company's 5 year plan. Sales and Develonment Activitv 2008 has been a record setting year. In the period of 1995-2007 the SJIPL had sold approximately 120 acres of industrial lands both serviced and unserviced. In 2008 alone the SJIPL has entered into agreements for the sale and transfer of 138 acres of land. Several new buildings will be constructed over the next 12 months as a result of these sales. The tax base generated on the land sales alone represents an additional $1,000,000 in assessments while improvements to these lands are expected to generate an additional $1,500,000 within 12 months. This activity alone represents approximately $75,000 in tax revenue for the City annually. Sales projections remain bullish for the next several years. The SJIPL has also witnessed significant expansion of existing properties, or planning efforts to do so. By example, companies such as Atlantic Industrial Cleaners and First Choice Ventilation have completed or are planning significant expansions of their facilities. These initiatives generate additional jobs and tax base without the creation of additional municipal infrastructure. In every instance the Company attempts to aid in these initiatives to further strengthen these relations and expansions. Strong secondary market activity has seen the entry of new and specialized operators into the parks. Companies such as Lenron and Shawmut have set up New Brunswick headquarters in Spruce Lake. Bretech and Technico are companies who have recently relocated to McAllister, one via development of an SJIPL site and the other via the acquisition of an existing property. Other recent offerings added in the parks include Sancton Scaffolding and Hertz Equipment Rentals in McAllister. Store it Systems and Day and Ross have built new facilities on Galbraith Place extension and Alloy Drive respectively, on lands owned by SJIPL development partners. Activity in both parks has been unprecedented. Demand for existing built out industrial space has outstripped supply. Demand for land has been exceptional over the past year. Summarv • The City of Saint John may be on the cusp of an economic boom driven predominantly by industrial projects. • Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. recognizes these projects will increase the demand for industrial land. • The challenge is to continue to be prepared to capitalize on these opportunities in a cost effective maonner. 30 Report to Common Council November 21, 2008 Page 7 • SJIPL thanks Common Council, senior Staff and our Provincial counterparts as they have provided support and direction to SJIPL as the Company grows and prepares for the potentially unprecedented growth. Respectfully submitted, J. Claude MacKinnon, P. Eng President Saint John Industrial Parks Ltd. 301