2006-04-24_Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jour
City of Saint John
Common Council Meeting
Monday, April 24, 2006
Common Council Chamber
Committee of the Whole
1. Call to Order – 5:00 pm
1.1 Personnel Matter 10.2(4)(b)
1.2 Position Evaluation - Management/Professional Staff 10.2(4)(b)
1.3 Revisiting the 2002 Organizational Renewal Strategy 10.2(4)(b)
1.4 Staffing Processes - Spring 2006 10.2(4)(b)
1.5 Commissioner of Finance Vacancy 10.2(4)(b)
1.6 Lease Negotiations City Hall 10.2(4)(c)
1.7 Legal Session - Human Rights Complaints Tentative Resolution 10.2(4)(f,g)
1.8 Legal Session - Ratification of Settlement 10.2(4)(f,g)
Regular Meeting
1. Call to Order – Prayer,
7:00 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes
2.1 April 10, 2006 Minutes
3. Adoption of Agenda
4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest
5. Adoption of Consent Agenda
5.1 Rebecca Bourdage Letter and Petition St Peters Court Traffic Concerns (Refer
to City Manager)
5.2 Saint John West Business Assoc Request for Business Improvement By-law
(Refer City Manager, City Solicitor)
5.3 Amending Resolution for Sale of 14 Castle Street (Recommendation)
5.4 Public Hearing Date - 725 Westmorland Road (Recommendation)
6. Members Comments
7. Proclamation
7.1 Proclamation - Rick Hansen Wheels in Motion
8. Delegations / Presentations
8.1 7:30 p.m. Downtown Ministers' Association
8.2 7:45 p.m. Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation
9. Public Hearings
9.1(a)(b) 7:00 p.m. Public Hearing - Municipal Plan - Zoning By-law Amend 14
Castle St
9.1(c) Planning Advisory Committee Recommending Proposed Municipal Plan
and Rezoning Amendments
14 Castle Street (& 25-39 Golding Street)
9.2(a)(c) 7:00 p.m. Public Hearing - Zoning By-law Amend - 125 Daniel Ave &
Letters of Support
9.2(b) Planning Advisory Committee Recommending Proposed Rezoning - 125
Daniel Avenue
10. Consideration of By-laws
11. Submissions by Council Members
11.1 Municipal Magazine (Councillor Chase)(Tabled April 10, 2006)
12. Business Matters – Municipal Officers
12.1(a)(b) City Solicitor's Report - Noise By-Law
12.2 Fire Apparatus Replacement Program
12.3 Replacement Fire Apparatus
12.4 Tender - Traffic Paint
12.5 McAllister Wastewater Pumping Station - Electrical Service Repairs
12.6 Engagement of Engineering Consultant - 2006 Rural Roads Upgrade Project
12.7 Contract 2006-14: Old Black River Road Sanitary & Storm Sewer
Installation & Road Reconstruction
12.8 Contract 2006-2: Sydney Street - Water & Sewer Renewal
12.9 Tender - Carleton Accessible Playground Equipment and Safety Surface
12.10 St. Pius X Church Traffic Lights at Crosswalk
12.11 Annual Sidewalk Vendor Auction
12.12 Bill 34 - Substandard Housing
12.13 Saint John Water - Review of Rates and Rates Structure Options
12.14 Sale of City Land Corner of Millidge Avenue and Somerset Street
13. Committee Reports
13.1 Planning Advisory Committee Recommending Proposed Palmer Subdivision
14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda
15. General Correspondence
15.1 Latimore Lake Community Association Request for LPP Funding
15.2 Friends of Rockwood Park re Maritmes Northeast Pipeline and Horticultural
Assoc
16. Adjournment
City of Saint John
Séance du conseil communal
Le lundi 24 avril 2006
Salle du conseil communal
Comité plénier
1. Ouverture de la séance : 17 h
1.1 Question relative au personnel 10.2(4)b)
1.2 Évaluation des postes – Personnel gestionnaire et professionnel 10.2(4)b)
1.3 Réexamen de la stratégie de renouvellement organisationnel de 2002
10.2(4)b)
1.4 Processus de dotation en personnel – Printemps 2006 10.2(4)b)
1.5 Poste du commissaire aux finances à pourvoir 10.2(4)b)
1.6 Négociations relatives au bail conclu avec l'hôtel de ville - 10.2(4)c)
1.7 Séance juridique – Résolution provisoire relative aux plaintes liées aux droits
de la personne, alinéa 10.2(4)f), g)
1.8 Séance juridique – Ratification du règlement 10.2(4)f), g)
Séance ordinaire
1. Ouverture de la réunion, suivie de la prière.
19 h.
2. Approbation du procès-verbal
2.1 Procès-verbal de la séance tenue le 10 avril 2006
3. Adoption de l'ordre du jour
4. Divulgations de conflits d'intérêts
5. Adoption de l'ordre du jour relatif aux questions soumises à l'approbation du
conseil
5.1 Lettre et pétition reçues de Rebecca Bourdage relatives à ses préoccupations
visant l'impasse St. Peters (transmettre au directeur général)
5.2 Demande de la Saint John West Business Association relative à l'arrêté
concernant la taxe d'amélioration des affaires (transmettre au directeur général et à
l'avocat municipal)
5.3 Résolution modificative visant la vente du bien-fonds situé au 14, rue Castle
(recommandation)
5.4 Date de la tenue d'une audience publique relativement au 725, chemin
Westmorland (recommandation)
6. Commentaires présentés par les membres
7. Proclamation
7.1 Proclamation de la Journée Rick Hansen, Rouler vers demain
8. Délégations et présentations
8.1 19 h 30 Downtown Ministers' Association
8.2 19 h 45 Corporation des sciences de la santé de l'Atlantique
9. Audiences publiques
9.1a)b) 19 h Audience publique relative aux modifications du plan municipal et
de l'arrêté sur le zonage visant le 14, rue Castle
9.1c) Comité consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le projet de modification du
plan municipal et du rezonage proposé
14, Rue Castle (et 25-39, rue Golding)
9.2a)c) 19 h Audience publique relative à la modification de l'arrêté sur le zonage
visant le 125, avenue Daniel et lettres à l'appui
9.2b) Comité consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le rezonage proposé du bien-
fonds situé au 125, avenue Daniel
10. Étude des arrêtés municipaux
11. Intervention des membres du conseil
11.1 Revue municipale (conseiller Chase – proposition présentée le 10 avril 2006)
12. Affaires municipales évoquées par les fonctionnaires municipaux
12.1a)b) Rapport de l'avocat municipal sur l'arrêté concernant la prévention du
bruit excessif
12.2 Programme de renouvellement de l'engin d'incendie
12.3 Renouvellement de l'engin d'incendie
12.4 Soumission relative à la peinture de signalisation routière
12.5 Réparations effectuées au service électrique du poste de pompage des eaux
usées de la promenade McAllister
12.6 Nomination d'un ingénieur-conseils relativement au projet d'amélioration des
routes rurales 2006
12.7 Soumission pour le contrat 2006-14 : Installation d'un réseau d'égouts
pluvieux et sanitaires et travaux de réfection sur le chemin Old Black River
12.8 Soumission pour le contrat 2006-2 : Modernisation des canalisations d'eau et
d'égout sur la rue Sydney
12.9 Soumission relative au matériel de terrains de jeux et à une surface
sécuritaire pour le terrain de jeu de Carleton
12.10 Feux de circulation au passage pour piétons près de l'église St. Pius X
12.11 Vente aux enchères annuelle des vendeurs sur le trottoir
12.12 Projet de loi 34 relatif à l'habitat défectueux
12.13 Réseau d'aqueduc et d'égouts de Saint John – Évaluation des tarifs et
options relatives à la grille tarifaire
12.14 Vente d'un bien-fonds municipal situé à l'intersection de l'avenue Millidge
et de la rue Somerset
13. Rapports de comités
13.1 Comité consultatif d'urbanisme recommandant le projet de lotissement
Palmer
14. Étude des sujets écartés des questions soumises à l'approbation du conseil
15. Correspondance générale
15.1 Demande de financement de l'Association de la collectivité de la région du
lac Latimore pour une parcelle de terrain
15.2 Friends of Rockwood Park relativement à la Maritmes & Northeast Pipeline
et à l'Association d'horticulture
16. Clôture de la réunion
92-129
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
COMMON COUNCIL MEETING – THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
CITY HALL – APRIL 10, 2006, 7:10 P.M.
present
Norman McFarlane, Mayor
Councillors Chang, Chase, Court, Farren, Ferguson, McGuire,
Tait, Titus and White
- and -
T. Totten, City Manager; J. Nugent, City Solicitor; A. Beckett,
Deputy City Manager of Programs and Priorities and Acting
Treasurer; P. Groody, Commissioner of Municipal Operations; J.
Baird, Commissioner of Planning and Development; W. Edwards,
Commissioner of Buildings and Inspection Services; A.
Bodechon, Chief of Police; E. Gormley, Assistant Common Clerk
and J. Ferrar, Administrative Assistant
RÉUNION DU CONSEIL COMMUNAL DE THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
À L'HÔTEL DE VILLE, LE 10 avril 2006 à 19 h 10
Sont présents:
Norman McFarlane, maire
Les conseillers Chang, Chase, Court, Farren, Ferguson,
McGuire, Tait, Titus et White
et
T. Totten, directeur général; J. Nugent, avocat municipal; A.
Beckett, directeur général adjoint, programmes et priorités et
trésorier par intérim; P. Groody, commissaire aux opérations
municipales; J. Baird, commissaire à l'urbanisme et au
développement; W. Edwards, commissaire aux services
d'inspection et des bâtiments; A. Bodechon, chef de police; ainsi
que E. Gormley, greffière communale adjointe et J. Ferrar,
adjointe administrative.
1. Call To Order – Prayer
Mayor McFarlane called the meeting to order and Rev. Roger Graham of
Forest Hill Baptist Church offered the opening prayer.
(Councillor Titus entered the meeting.)
1. Ouverture de la réunion, suivie de la prière
La séance est ouverte par le maire McFarlane. Le révérend Roger
Graham, pasteur de l'Église baptiste Forest Hills, récite la prière d’ouverture.
(Le conseiller Titus se joint à la réunion.)
2 Approval of Minutes
2.1 Council Minutes March 27, 2006
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of
Common Council, held on March 27, 2006, be approved.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
92-130
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
2 Approbation du procès-verbal de la dernière réunion
2.1 Procès-verbal du conseil du 27 mars 2006
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que le procès-verbal de la réunion du
conseil communal tenue le 27 mars 2006 soit approuvé.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
3 Approval of Agenda
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that the agenda of this meeting be
approved with the addition of 3.1 Council Priorities, 3.2 Change Leadership Executive
Briefing Session, 10.5(c) Development Proposal - 336 Westmorland Road, 13.2
Nominating Committee report, and the removal of items 5.4 and 5.6 from the Consent
Agenda for consideration after approval of the agenda.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that items 5.4, Ian Benjamin regarding
336 Westmorland Road and 5.6, letter from Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited re 336
Westmorland Road development be removed from the Consent Agenda and that the
contents of these items will not be considered later with regard to the proposed re-
zoning of 336 Westmorland Road.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
3 Adoption de l'ordre du jour
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que l'ordre du jour de la réunion soit
approuvé, moyennant l'ajout des points 3.1, Priorités du conseil, 3.2, Séance
d'information portant sur le leadership en matière de changement à l'intention des
cadres supérieurs, 10.5c), Proposition d'aménagement relative au terrain situé au 336,
chemin Westmorland, 13.2, Rapport du comité des candidatures, et le retrait des points
5.4 et 5.6 de l'ordre du jour des questions soumises à l'approbation du conseil aux fins
d'examen à la suite de l'approbation de l'ordre du jour.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU que les points 5.4, Ian Benjamin
concernant le 336, chemin Westmorland et 5.6, Lettre reçue de Cadillac Fairview
Corporation Limited concernant l'aménagement du 336, chemin Westmorland, soient
retirés de l'ordre du jour des questions soumises à l'approbation du conseil, et que le
contenu de ces points ne soit pas pris en considération ultérieurement en ce qui a trait
au projet de rezonage du 336, chemin Westmorland.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
3.1 Council Priorities
On motion of Mayor McFarlane
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that the City Manager and Deputy City
Manager, Andrew Beckett, be directed to set a priority session for Common Council in
either late May or early June and that staff be urged to engage the community in further
consultation and that the information collected be used during our priority setting
session.
92-131
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
3.1 Priorités du conseil
Proposition du maire McFarlane
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que le directeur général et le directeur
général adjoint, Andrew Beckett, soient chargés d'organiser une réunion prioritaire du
conseil communal à la fin de mai ou au début de juin, que le personnel encourage la
collectivité à des consultations ultérieures et que les renseignements recueillis soient
utilisés au cours de la réunion visant l'établissement de nos priorités.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
3.2 Change Leadership Executive Briefing Session
On motion of Councillor Ferguson
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that The City of Saint John reimburse
the employers of Councillors that are unable to take paid leave from their jobs to attend
any specific conference or meeting of Council during their regular working hours.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Chase
voting “nay”.
3.2 Séance d'information portant sur le leadership en matière de changement à
l'intention des cadres supérieurs
Proposition du conseiller Ferguson
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que The City of Saint John rembourse les
employeurs des conseillers qui sont incapables de prendre des congés payés pour
assister à une conférence ou à une réunion particulière du conseil pendant leurs heures
normales de travail.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée. Le conseiller Chase a voté
contre la proposition.
4. Disclosures of Conflict of Interest
4. Divulgations de conflits d'intérêts
5. Adoption of Consent Agenda
5.1 Fundy Region Solid Waste Commission - Financial Statements Ending
December 31, 2005 (Receive for information)
5.2 Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment - Cambridge Drive (Refer to PAC)
5.3 Loch Lomond Villa Foundation Request to Present (Refer to Clerk to schedule)
5.4 Ian Benjamin Regarding 336 Westmorland Road (Receive for information)
5.5 Canadian Cancer Society - Pesticide Free Bylaw (Refer to Environment
Committee)
5.6 Cadillac Fairview Corporation Regarding 336 Westmorland Road Development
(Receive for information)
5.7 Philip Croft and Greg Belyea Regarding Plumbing Bill (Refer to City Manager)
5.8 Queens County Fair Inc. Request for Financial Assistance (Receive for
information)
5.9 Canterbury Tales Literary Festival Request for Sponsorship (Receive for
information)
92-132
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
5.10 Request for Financial Support - Jacob Kilpatrick, Reds Juvenile Boys Volleyball
Team (Receive for information)
5.11 CFMH Fund Drive 2006 Request for Contribution (Receive for information)
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that the Consent Agenda be approved
with the exception of items 5.4 and 5.6; and item 5.10 be considered separately as item
14.1.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
5. Adoption de l'ordre du jour relatif aux questions soumises à l'approbation
du conseil
5.1 Commission de gestion de déchets solides de la région de Fundy - états
financiers de l'exercice terminé le 31 décembre 2005 (accepter à titre informatif).
5.2 Modification proposée du plan municipal visant la promenade Cambridge
(transmettre au Comité consultatif d'urbanisme).
5.3 Demande de Loch Lomond Villa Foundation de se présenter devant le conseil
(transmettre au greffier pour qu'une date de présentation soit fixée).
5.4 Ian Benjamin concernant le 336, chemin Westmorland (accepter à titre
informatif).
5.5 Société canadienne du cancer - Arrêté pour interdire les pesticides (transmettre
au Comité sur l'environnement).
5.6 Lettre reçue de Cadillac Fairview Corporation Limited concernant l'aménagement
du 336, chemin Westmorland (accepter à titre informatif).
5.7 Lettre reçue de Philip Croft et Greg Belyea concernant une facture de plomberie
(transmettre au directeur général).
5.8 Demande d'aide financière de Queens County Fair Inc. (accepter à titre
informatif).
5.9 Canterbury Tales Literary Festival (festival littéraire des légendes de Canterbury)
- Demande de commandite (accepter à titre informatif).
5.10 Demande de soutien financier - Jacob Kilpatrick, équipe de volley-ball junior
Reds (accepter à titre informatif).
5.11 Demande pour obtenir une contribution dans le cadre de la campagne de
financement CFMH 2006 (accepter à titre informatif).
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que l'ordre du jour des questions
soumises à l'approbation du conseil soit adopté, à l'exception des points 5.4 et 5.6,
moyennant une étude particulière accordée au point 5.10 en tant que point 14.1
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
6. Members Comments
Council members commented on various community events.
6. Commentaires présentés par les membres
Les membres du conseil s'expriment sur diverses activités communautaires.
92-133
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
7. Proclamation
7. Proclamation
8. Delegations/Presentations
8.1 Atlantic Health Sciences PET/CT Scan
Referring to the submitted presentation document Dr. John Whelan, Head of Diagnostic
Imaging at the Saint John Regional Hospital, provided Council with an overview of the
PET/CT Challenge - Positron Emission Tomography with Computed Tomography.
Dr. Whelan stated that PET/CT will benefit AHSC patients with cancer, cardiac and
neurological conditions of which 40% will have their treatment altered. Commenting with
regard to patient impact, Dr. Whelan explained how PET/CT will save lives and alter
treatment in 4 out of 10 patients; and pointed out that PET/CT will stimulate medical
research and will attract and retain medical specialists. Mr. Kit Payn, Chairman of the
Hospital Foundation presented the business case for this technology and expressed
thanks to Council for the $50,000. contribution and inquired if Council would be
interested in participating in a multi year commitment over a three to five year period.
A brief discussion followed with Mr. Payn responding to questions and Mayor McFarlane
offering a letter of support.
8. Délégations et présentations
8.1 Sciences de la santé de l'Atlantique – Scanner TEP/CT
Se reportant au document de présentation soumis, Dr John Whelan, chef en imagerie
diagnostique de l'hôpital régional de Saint John, présente au conseil un aperçu des
objectifs liés au scanner TEP/CT - tomographie par émission de positions assistée par
ordinateur. Dr Wheelan affirme que le scanner TEP/CT sera bénéfique pour les patients
de la Corporation des sciences de la santé de l'Atlantique (CSSA) atteints de cancer, de
problèmes cardiaques et d'affections neurologiques, car 40 % de ces derniers verront
leurs traitements modifiés. Examinant l'incidence du scanner TEP/CT sur les patients, Dr
Wheelan explique comment ce dernier sauvera des vies et modifiera les traitements de
4 patients sur 10 et souligne qu'il stimulera la recherche médicale et attirera et retiendra
les médecins spécialistes. M. Kit Payn, président de la fondation de l'hôpital, présente
l'analyse de rentabilisation de cette technologie et remercie le conseil pour sa
contribution de 50 000 $. Il se demande si le conseil est intéressé à participer à un
engagement pluriannuel (sur une période de trois à cinq ans).
Une brève discussion s'ensuit, et M. Payn répond aux questions soulevées. Le maire
McFarlane présente une lettre d'appui.
9. Public Hearings 7:30 P.M.
9.1(a) Dangerous and Unsightly Condition of Vacant Building Located at 247-249
Rockland Road
9.1(b) Letter from Johnson Engineered Solutions re 247-249 Rockland Road
Referring to the submitted report, William Edwards provided Council with an overview of
the present condition of the building located at 247-249 Rockland Road expressing
concern that it is open to the public and noted that it has been vacant since 2002 as a
result of water and electrical problems. He explained that the building was subsequently
sold by the mortgage holder to Philip Huggard and in October 2002 he recommended to
Council that he be directed to issue an Order to go to Court of Queen’s Bench for an
Order and subsequently cause the demolition. Mr. Edwards noted that Mr. Huggard then
made representations to Council at which time it was agreed to give him some time to
make repairs. He related background information on the City’s involvement with the
property, expressing the opinion that the building is not economically repairable and
requested that Council adopt the submitted resolution. A brief discussion followed with
Mr. Edwards responding to questions.
Mr. Philip Huggard addressed Council commenting regarding the condition of the
property, repairs which he has completed; and the impact of vandalism. He expressed
the view that the building is not extremely dangerous because it has been used by the
Police Force on several occasions for special forces training and referenced a report
92-134
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
from Johnson Engineered Solutions Limited which proposed a three foot wide footing,
and expressed the opinion that the structure has proven that it can withstand large
differential settlements. Mr. Huggard expressed concern regarding the condition of the
fence in front of the property, which he stated is owned by the City, and asked Council to
have it repaired as soon as possible. He concluded his presentation requesting that
Council either give him six months to make repairs or he will give the building to the City.
Discussion continued with Mr. Huggard responding to questions.
Responding to a question raised, Mr. Nugent advised that Council must now decide after
hearing from Mr. Edwards and Mr. Huggard whether or not this property is unsightly
and/or a hazard to the safety of the public.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, Common Council adopt the submitted resolutions.
WHEREAS a Certificate of Registered Ownership (Form 47) issued by the Registrar of
Land Titles for the District of New Brunswick on March 27, 2006, was submitted and
certified that Philip Huggard Properties Ltd. (herein referred to as “Huggard”) is the
registered owner in fee simple of the title to the parcel of land (herein called “the
Huggard property”) that has parcel identifier number 25932. The said parcel is located at
247-249 Rockland Road, Saint John, N.B. The Huggard property is shown on the portion
of the PLANET map that was submitted. A PLANET parcel information report and a
PLANET PAN assessment report were submitted and each showed Huggard to be the
owner of the Huggard property.
AND WHEREAS the Huggard property is located in an area mentioned in the by-law
entitled “A By-Law Respecting Dangerous Or Unsightly Premises In The City of Saint
John”. The said by-law provides, in part, that sections 190.01 to 190.07 of the
Municipalities Act (Chapter M-22) apply to the entire area comprising The City of Saint
John. Section 190.01 provides that no person shall permit a building or structure owned
or occupied by him to be unsightly or to become a hazard to the safety of the public by
reason of dilapidation or unsoundness of structural strength.
AND WHEREAS a dilapidated three storey wood frame building (herein called “the
Huggard building”) is located on the Huggard property. The Huggard building is, contrary
to the by-law, in an unsightly condition and is a hazard to the safety of the public by
reason of deterioration and unsoundness of structural strength, presenting a risk of injury
or death to persons entering upon or into the building, including trespassers and
children, as well as firemen, policemen and emergency services persons who may have
to enter for emergency purposes. The Huggard building is shown in the photographs that
were submitted. An inspection report, dated March 17, 2006, by David G. M. Crawford,
P. Eng., Deputy Building Inspector for The City of Saint John, was submitted with
respect to his inspection of the Huggard building on March 15th and March 16th, 2006. He
described the following exterior hazardous and unsightly conditions that he observed:
· The decks at the front or southeasterly side of the building are deteriorated with
loose railings and rusted supports
· The exterior wall on the right or northeasterly side of the building is buckled and
bowed indicating a severe structural issue
· The exterior wall at the rear or northwesterly side of the building is buckled
indicating structural problems
· The foundation wall at the rear or northwesterly side has cracked and is shifting
· The stairs and walkways at various levels at the rear or northwesterly side of the
building are rotted and deteriorated
· Most of the windows are boarded up but there is broken glass remaining in some
of the windows
· Not all of the doors appear to be adequately secured
· There is inadequate interior lighting
Mr. Crawford said that he did not enter the building because of safety concerns. An
inspection report made by Amy Poffenroth, P. Eng., and dated June 13, 2002, was
submitted wherein she described the interior hazards of the building as including:
· Floors throughout the building are sloped and twisted in various directions,
indicating structural problems
· There is no interior lighting
92-135
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
· The interior had suffered extensive damage as a result of vandalism
· The floors and stairs were littered with such things as glass, furniture, nails,
appliances and other debris
· Portions of the ceilings had either fallen down or were in danger of falling down
· The interior fire escape was dangerous as it was rotted and steep as well as
covered in animal feces
AND WHEREAS, after having considered (a) the aforesaid inspection report by David
Crawford, (b) the aforesaid inspection report by Amy Poffenroth, (c) the report by the
City Manager and others that was dated April 4, 2006, (d) a report from Chief Simonds,
of the Saint John Fire Department, wherein he stated that the Fire Department
responded to seven incidents of arson at the property between August 25, 2002, and
March 12, 2006, and (e) a report from Inspector Bill Hanley of the Saint John Police
Force, dated March 27, 2006, wherein he advised that the Police Force responded to
nine calls to the property during the years 2004 to 2006, and (e) the oral report of Mr.
William Edwards, P.Eng., who is the Building Inspector for The City of Saint John, we
find that the Huggard building is unsightly and a hazard to the safety of the public.
BE IT RESOLVED that Philip Huggard Properties Ltd is hereby required to, within 15
days after a notice from the Building Inspector is served on it in accordance with section
190.01(3) of the Municipalities Act, remedy the hazardous and unsightly condition of the
Huggard building by either demolishing the Huggard building and removing all of the
debris and other unsightly items from the Huggard property or by carrying out the
following work after having received a building permit from the Saint John Building
Inspector to do so:
(1) Determine the cause of any structural problems and carry out such work as is
needed to make the building structurally sound so that the building is capable of
sustaining safely its own weight and any additional weight that may be put on them
by normal use, and
(2) Repair the foundation, and
(3) Remove the litter from the stairs and floors, and
(4) Repair the ceilings, and
(5) Replace the fire escape stairs or repair them so that they are capable of sustaining
safely their own weight and any additional weight that may be put on it by normal
use are, and
(6) Remove the broken glass from the windows and around the building, and repair or
replace the windows or cover them with materials that present a uniform
appearance, and
(7) Repair or replace the stairways and walkways, and any loose handrails, and
(8) Replace or repair the decks and their handrails and railings, as well as the steel
beam under the walkway to the front door, and
(9) Secure the doors and any other possible openings from unauthorized entry with
materials that present a uniform appearance, and
(10)Carry out such work as is needed to remedy the unsightly condition of the property
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Building Inspector, Mr. William Edwards, is
hereby appointed and authorized to serve upon Huggard, in accordance with section
190.01(3) of the Municipalities Act, a notice that requires Huggard to, within 15 days of
being served, remedy the hazardous and unsightly conditions of the Huggard building
and the Huggard property by either demolishing the Huggard building and removing all
of the debris and other unsightly items from the Huggard property or by carrying out the
aforesaid work.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in the event that the Philip Huggard Properties Ltd
does not comply with the notice, Mr. William Edwards is hereby authorized to apply to
the Court of Queen’s Bench for an order that will (a) require Huggard to, within 15 days
or such other time as a judge may consider appropriate, remedy the hazardous and
unsightly condition of the Huggard building by either demolishing it and removing the
debris or by carrying out the aforesaid work, and will (b) authorize The City of Saint John
to cause the Huggard building to be demolished and the debris removed at the expense
of Huggard in the event that Huggard does not comply with the order. Mr. Edwards is
further authorized to issue a certificate in accordance with the Municipalities Act with
respect to the City’s demolition and clean up costs.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Solicitor and his designate are hereby
authorized to cause Mr. Edwards’ certificate to be filed in the Court of Queen’s Bench of
92-136
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
New Brunswick and registered in the Saint John County Registry Office, and to pursue
enforcement of that certificate as a judgment.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that item 12.7(a), (b) and (c) be
brought forward for consideration.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
9. Audiences publiques à 19 h 30
9.1a) Conditions dangereuses et inesthétiques du bâtiment inoccupé situé au
247-249, chemin Rockland
9.1b) Lettre reçue de Johnson Engineered Solutions concernant le bâtiment
situé au 247-249, chemin Rockland
Se reportant au rapport présenté, William Edwards donne au conseil un aperçu de l'état
actuel du bâtiment situé au 247-249, chemin Rockland et se dit préoccupé du fait que
ledit bâtiment est accessible au public. Il mentionne que le bâtiment est inoccupé depuis
2002 en raison de problèmes d'eau et d'électricité. Il explique que le bâtiment a été
vendu subséquemment par le titulaire de l'hypothèque à Philip Huggard et qu'en octobre
2002, il recommandait au conseil de le charger de rendre une ordonnance, puis de se
présenter à la Cour du Banc de la Reine pour une ordonnance, pour ensuite procéder à
la démolition du bâtiment en question. M. Edwards indique que M. Huggard a alors
défendu son point de vue devant le conseil qui a alors convenu de lui accorder un
certain temps pour effectuer les réparations. Il présente des renseignements généraux
sur l'intervention de la ville afférente au bâtiment, affirme que le bâtiment est irréparable
sur le plan économique et demande au conseil d'adopter la résolution soumise. Une
brève discussion s'ensuit, et M. Edwards répond aux questions soulevées.
M. Philip Huggard s'adresse au conseil en faisant des remarques sur l'état de la
propriété, sur les réparations qu'il a effectuées et sur l'incidence du vandalisme. Il estime
que le bâtiment n'est pas extrêmement dangereux, puisqu'il a déjà été utilisé à plusieurs
reprises par le corps de police pour la formation des forces spéciales. Il fait également
référence à un rapport de Johnson Engineered Solutions Limited qui proposait une
semelle d'une largeur de trois pieds et considère que la structure a démontré qu'elle
pouvait résister à de grands tassements différentiels. M. Huggard exprime son
inquiétude concernant l'état de la clôture située devant la propriété, laquelle, fait-il
remarquer, appartient à la ville, et demande au conseil de la réparer dès que possible. Il
conclut sa présentation en demandant au conseil de lui accorder six mois pour faire les
réparations, sinon il donnera le bâtiment à la ville.
Une discussion s'ensuit, et M. Huggard répond aux questions soulevées.
En réponse à une question soulevée, M. Nugent indique que le conseil doit maintenant
décider si, après avoir entendu M. Edwards et M. Huggard, la propriété est inesthétique
et représente un danger pour la sécurité du public.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, le conseil communal adopte les résolutions présentées.
ATTENDU qu'un certificat de propriété enregistrée (formulaire 47) a été émis le 27 mars
2006 par le bureau du conservateur des titres pour le district du Nouveau-Brunswick et
certifie que Philip Huggard Properties Ltd. (ci-après désigné sous le nom de «
Huggard ») est le propriétaire inscrit, en fief simple, de la parcelle de terrain (ci-après
désignée sous le nom de « propriété Huggard»), dont le numéro d'identification est
25932. Ladite parcelle est située au 247-249, chemin Rockland, à Saint John, au
Nouveau-Brunswick. La propriété Huggard est indiquée sur la partie de la carte
SYSCAN soumise. Un rapport d'information SYSCAN sur la parcelle et un rapport
d'information SYSCAN sur l'évaluation foncière ont été présentés, et ils mentionnent
tous deux que Huggard est le propriétaire de la propriété Huggard.
92-137
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
ET ATTENDU que la propriété Huggard est située dans une région mentionnée dans
l'«Arrêté concernant les bâtiments inesthétiques ou dangereux dans The City of Saint
John».
Ledit arrêté prévoit, en partie, que les articles 190.01 à 190.07 de la Loi sur les
municipalités (chapitre M-22) s'appliquent à l'ensemble de la région de The City of Saint
John.
L'article 190.01 prévoit que nul ne doit tolérer qu'un bâtiment ou une construction qu'il
possède ou occupe soient inesthétiques ou deviennent dangereux pour la sécurité du
public du fait de leur délabrement ou de leur manque de solidité.
ET ATTENDU qu'un bâtiment délabré comportant trois étages à ossature de bois (ci-
après appelé «le bâtiment Huggard ») est sis sur la propriété Huggard.
Le bâtiment Huggard va à l'encontre des dispositions de l'arrêté, car il est inesthétique et
représente un danger pour la sécurité du public du fait de son délabrement et de
son manque de solidité; il présente également un risque de blessures ou de
décès pour les personnes entrant dans le bâtiment, y compris les intrus et les
enfants, ainsi que les pompiers, les policiers et les personnes des services
d'urgence qui auront peut-être à y entrer en cas d'urgence.
Le bâtiment Huggard est indiqué sur les photographies qui ont été présentées.
Un rapport d'inspection, daté du 17 mars 2006 et rédigé par David G. M. Crawford, Ing.,
inspecteur adjoint des bâtiments de The City of Saint John, a été présenté
relativement à son inspection du bâtiment Huggard les 15 et 16 mars 2006.
Voici une description des conditions dangereuses et inesthétiques extérieures qu'il a
observées :
· Les terrasses situées devant ou sur le côté sud-est du bâtiment sont
détériorées : les balustrades sont mal fixées et les appuis sont rouillés.
· Le mur extérieur du côté droit ou nord-est du bâtiment est bombé et arqué,
indiquant un grave problème structural.
· Le mur extérieur situé à l'arrière ou sur le côté nord-ouest du bâtiment est
bombé, indiquant des problèmes structuraux.
· Le mur de fondation, situé à l'arrière ou sur le côté nord-ouest du bâtiment, s'est
lézardé et est mouvant.
· Les escaliers et les allées situés à divers niveaux à l'arrière ou sur le côté nord-
ouest du bâtiment, sont pourris et détériorés.
· La plupart des fenêtres sont couvertes de planches, mais il y en a certaines qui
contiennent encore des morceaux de vitre.
· Toutes les portes ne semblent pas être bien barricadées.
· L'éclairage intérieur est inadéquat.
M. Crawford déclare qu'il n'est pas entré dans le bâtiment en raison de préoccupations
liées à la sécurité.
Un rapport d'inspection présenté par Amy Poffenroth, Ing., et daté du 13 juin 2002,
renferme la description des dangers intérieurs du bâtiment, notamment:
· les planchers sont inclinés et déformés partout dans le bâtiment, indiquant ainsi
des problèmes structuraux;
· il n'existe aucun éclairage intérieur;
· l'intérieur du bâtiment a subi des dommages considérables par suite de
vandalisme;
· les planchers et les escaliers étaient jonchés de morceaux de vitre, de meubles,
de clous, d'appareils électriques et d'autres débris;
· des parties de plafonds se sont effondrées ou risquent de s'effondrer;
· la sortie de secours intérieure était dangereuse, car elle était pourrie et raide, et
elle était couverte d'excréments d'animaux.
ET ATTENDU qu'après avoir procédé à l'étude a) du rapport d'inspection susmentionné
rédigé par David Crawford, b) du rapport d'inspection susmentionné rédigé par Amy
Poffenroth, c) du rapport rédigé par le directeur général et autres en date du 4 avril
2006, d) du rapport rédigé par le chef Robert Simonds, du Service d'incendie de Saint
John, dans lequel il déclare que le Service d'incendie a dû répondre à sept appels pour
des incendies criminels de la propriété entre le 25 août 2002 et le 12 mars 2006, e) du
rapport rédigé par l'inspecteur Bill Hanley, du corps de police de Saint John, dans lequel
il indique que le corps de police a répondu à neuf appels relativement à cette propriété
entre les années 2004 et 2006 e) du rapport oral présenté par M. William Edwards, Ing.,
inspecteur des bâtiments de The City of Saint John, nous concluons que le bâtiment
Huggard est inesthétique et dangereux pour la sécurité publique.
92-138
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
IL EST RÉSOLU que, par la présente, Philip Huggard Properties Ltd est sommé, dans
les 15 jours de la signification de cet avis provenant de l'inspecteur des bâtiments et ce,
conformément à l'article 190.01(1) de la Loi sur les municipalités, de remédier aux
conditions dangereuses et inesthétiques du bâtiment Huggard, soit en démolissant le
bâtiment Huggard et en enlevant tous les débris et autres articles inesthétiques de la
propriété Huggard, soit en effectuant les travaux suivants, après avoir obtenu, au
préalable, un permis de construire qui l'y autorise auprès de l'inspecteur des bâtiments
de Saint John:
1) Déterminer la cause de tout problème structural et effectuer les travaux nécessaires
pour que le bâtiment soit dans un état structural sûr de façon à pouvoir supporter en
toute sécurité son propre poids ainsi que tout poids susceptible de s'y ajouter dans
le cadre d'une utilisation normale.
2) Effectuer les travaux de réparation de la fondation.
3) Enlever les détritus des escaliers et des planchers.
4) Réparer les plafonds.
5) Remplacer les escaliers de la sortie de secours ou les réparer de façon à ce qu'ils
puissent supporter en toute sécurité leur propre poids ainsi que tout poids
susceptible de s'y ajouter dans le cadre d'une utilisation normale.
6) Enlever les morceaux de vitre des fenêtres et autour du bâtiment et réparer les
fenêtres ou les couvrir de matériaux qui ont une apparence uniforme.
7) Réparer ou remplacer les escaliers et allées ainsi que toute main courante mal
fixée.
8) Remplacer ou réparer les terrasses et leurs mains courantes et balustrades ainsi
que la poutre en acier sous l'allée menant à la porte de la façade.
9) Barricader les portes et toute autre entrée possible avec des matériaux qui ont une
apparence uniforme pour empêcher toute entrée non autorisée.
10) Effectuer les travaux nécessaires pour remédier aux conditions inesthétiques de la
propriété.
IL EST DE PLUS RÉSOLU que M. William Edwards, inspecteur des bâtiments, soit, par
la présente, nommé et autorisé à signifier à Huggard, conformément à l'article 190.01(3)
de la Loi sur les municipalités, un avis le sommant, dans les 15 jours de la signification
de cet avis, de remédier aux conditions dangereuses et inesthétiques du bâtiment
Huggard, soit en démolissant le bâtiment Huggard et en enlevant tous les débris et
autres articles inesthétiques de la propriété Huggard, soit en effectuant les travaux
susmentionnés.
IL EST DE PLUS RÉSOLU qu'advenant le cas où Philip Huggard Properties Ltd. refuse
de se conformer audit avis, M. William Edwards soit, par la présente, autorisé à
présenter une demande d'ordonnance devant la Cour du Banc de la Reine du Nouveau-
Brunswick qui a) sommerait Huggard de remédier aux conditions dangereuses et
inesthétiques du bâtiment Huggard, soit en effectuant les travaux susmentionnés, soit
en le démolissant et en enlevant les débris dans les 15 jours, ou selon le délai estimé
adéquat par le juge, et qui b) autoriserait The City of Saint John à faire démolir le
bâtiment Huggard et à faire enlever les débris de la propriété aux frais de Huggard dans
l'éventualité où ce dernier ne se conformerait pas à l'ordonnance de la cour. De plus,
M. Edwards est également autorisé à délivrer un certificat en vertu de la Loi sur les
municipalités relatif aux frais de démolition et de nettoyage engagés par la ville.
IL EST DE PLUS RÉSOLU QUE l'avocat municipal ou son représentant est par les
présentes autorisé à déposer le certificat délivré par M. Edwards à la Cour du Banc de la
Reine pour la province du Nouveau-Brunswick, à l'enregistrer au bureau de
l'enregistrement pour le comté de Saint John et à procéder à l'exécution dudit certificat
comme jugement obtenu de la Cour.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que les points 12.7a), b) et c) soient
examinés dès maintenant.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
92-139
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
12.7 (a) Blasting in Saint John
12.7 (b) Concerned Citizens for Bald Hill
12.7 (c) Gulf Operators Ltd. - Bald Hill Quarry Newsletter
On motion of Councillor Court
Seconded by Councillor Ferguson
RESOLVED that the representative for the citizens
in the Bald Hill area be permitted to ask Mr. Mouland questions after his presentation.
Mayor McFarlane noted that these questions were submitted to Council and are on the
agenda as item 12.7(b). Councillor Titus expressed the opinion that from a procedural
point-of-view any questions should be coming from the Council members. On a point of
order Councillor Court stated that whenever someone is present and has requested to
speak before Council a vote can be taken. Mayor McFarlane requested Mr. Nugent’s
view on this matter to which he advised that when an individual wants to address
Council and he/she is not on the agenda, there is a provision in the Procedural By-law
that upon a 2/3 majority vote, that person can address Council. In this case the Bald Hill
representative could address Council advising that he has questions for Mr. Mouland on
behalf of the group or Council can chose if they want to ask the questions themselves.
Councillor Tait suggested that Mr. Mouland meet with the residents to address their
concerns and issues. Mayor McFarlane questioned Mr. Mouland if he could meet with
the residents and the Building Inspector to which he agreed. It was noted that if the
residents want to address Council after this meeting, they should contact the Common
Clerk to arrange for a presentation. Following a brief discussion Councillor Court
withdrew his motion with the consent of the seconder.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor Tait
RESOLVED that City staff and Gordon Mouland of
Fundy Engineering meet with the Concerned Citizens for the Preservation of Bald Hill
group to respond to any questions or concerns they have regarding blasting; and report
back to Council.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Mr. Gordon Mouland of Fundy Engineering delivered a presentation with the aid of
electronic slides regarding blasting procedures and practices. Mr. Mouland commented
regarding the role of the blaster, engineer and contractor, pointing out that all projects
have a licensed blaster. He explained risk assessment, pre blast surveys, blast design
and monitoring. Mr. Mouland advised that by using a combination of precision controlled
rock blasting techniques, drilling, and blasting design, they are able to carry out blasting
safely in urban areas or near privately owned homes or businesses.
Discussion followed with Mr. Mouland and Mr. Edwards responding to questions.
Commenting with regard to blasting regulations Mr. Edwards stated that the City could
adopt a by-law adopting the Code as recommended by the Province of N.B. but
questioned how effective this would be.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, the report on blasting in the City of Saint John be received for information.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Court voting
“nay”.
Motion to Extend Meeting until 11:00 p.m.
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that the Council meeting proceed
beyond the designated adjournment time of 10:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m., as provided for in
the Procedural By-law.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Titus voting
“nay”.
92-140
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
(The Mayor announced a ten minute recess after which Council reconvened at 10:18
p.m.)
12.7a) Dynamitage à Saint John
12.7b) Citoyens préoccupés par la préservation de Bald Hill
12.7c) Gulf Operators Ltd. – Bulletin de la carrière Bald Hill
Proposition du conseiller Court
Appuyée par le conseiller Ferguson
RÉSOLU que le représentant des citoyens
demeurant dans la région de Bald Hill ait la permission de poser des questions à M.
Mouland après sa présentation.
Le maire McFarlane mentionne que ces questions ont été présentées au conseil et
figurent à l'ordre du jour en tant que point 12.7b). Le conseiller Titus est d'avis que, du
point de vue procédural, seuls les membres du conseil devraient poser des questions.
Par voie de rappel aux procédures, le conseiller Court affirme que lorsqu'une personne
est présente et a demandé de comparaître devant le conseil, on peut procéder au vote.
Le maire McFarlane demande l'opinion de M. Nugent sur cette question qui répond que
lorsqu'une personne désire s'adresser au conseil et qu'elle ne figure pas à l'ordre du
jour, il existe une disposition dans l'arrêté procédural stipulant qu'un vote majoritaire des
deux tiers des membres du conseil lui permet de le faire. Dans le cas présent, le
représentant de Bald Hill pourrait s'adresser au conseil en indiquant qu'il a des
questions à poser à M. Mouland de la part du groupe, ou les membres du conseil
pourraient, s'ils le désiraient, poser eux-mêmes les questions.
Le conseiller Tait suggère que M. Mouland rencontre les résidents afin que ces derniers
lui fassent part de leurs préoccupations et questions. Le maire McFarlane demande à M.
Mouland si ce dernier pourrait rencontrer les résidents et l'inspecteur des bâtiments. M.
Mouland a dit être d'accord. Il a été souligné que si les résidents désirent s'adresser au
conseil après cette rencontre, ils doivent communiquer avec le greffier communal pour
que celui-ci prenne les dispositions nécessaires à une présentation. À la suite d'une
brève discussion sur le sujet, le conseiller Court retire sa proposition avec l'accord du
second motionnaire.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller Tait
RÉSOLU que le personnel de la ville et Gordon
Mouland de Fundy Engineering rencontrent le groupe de citoyens préoccupés par la
préservation de Bald Hill afin de répondre à toutes leurs questions ou préoccupations
concernant le dynamitage, et qu'ils présentent un rapport au conseil.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
M. Gordon Mouland de Fundy Engineering donne une présentation à l'aide de
diapositives électroniques concernant les procédures et les pratiques liées au
dynamitage.
M. Mouland fait des remarques concernant le rôle du boutefeu, de l'ingénieur et de
l'entrepreneur, soulignant que tous les projets sont sous la supervision d'un boutefeu
titulaire d'un permis. Il explique l'évaluation des risques, les sondages préalables au
dynamitage et le plan et la surveillance du dynamitage. M. Mouland affirme qu'en
utilisant une combinaison de techniques de dynamitage contrôlé avec précision, le
forage et le plan du dynamitage, ils peuvent procéder à des travaux de dynamitage
sécuritaires dans les régions urbaines ou près des maisons ou des entreprises privées.
Une discussion s'ensuit, et M. Mouland et M. Edwards répondent aux questions
soulevées. Évoquant les règlements en matière de dynamitage, M. Edwards affirme que
la ville pourrait adopter un arrêté approuvant le Code, comme le recommande la
province du Nouveau-Brunswick, mais s'interroge sur son efficacité.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, le rapport concernant le dynamitage dans The City of Saint John, soit accepté à
titre informatif.
92-141
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée. Le conseiller Court vote
contre la proposition.
Proposition visant à prolonger la réunion jusqu'à 23 h
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que l'heure de clôture de la séance du
conseil soit prolongée de 22 h à 23 h, en vertu de l'arrêté procédural.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est acceptée. Le conseiller Titus a voté
contre la proposition.
(Le maire annonce une pause de dix minutes, après quoi la réunion du conseil reprend à
22 h 18).
8.2 Environment Committee - FCM Partners for Climate Protection Program
Peter McKelvey, Chairman, of the City of Saint John Environment Committee referring to
the submitted report with regard to FCM - Partners for Climate Protection Program,
reviewed the advantages for Saint John being a member, and commented concerning
Phase 1 to 3 of this 5 step program. Mr. McKelvey spoke regarding the strategy for
reducing greenhouse gas emissions noting that there are currently 12 other cities/towns
and one village which are participants in this program in New Brunswick. The
presentation concluded with Mr. McKelvey advising that the Environment Committee
recommends that Common Council adopt a resolution to engage in the Partners for
Climate Protection Program sponsored by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities;
and that Phases 1 to 3 of this 5 step program be initiated in the 2006 budget year with
initial funding of $50,000.
On motion of Councillor Ferguson
Seconded by Councillor Court
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City of
Saint John Environment Committee, Common Council engage in the Partners for
Climate Protection Program sponsored by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and
initiate Phases 1 to 3 of the Partners for Climate Protection 5 step program in the 2006
budget year with initial funding of $50,000.
Councillor Tait expressed the opinion that this matter should be referred to the City
Manager to ensure the funds are available. Responding, Mr. Totten explained that the
expenditure can be accommodated within the capital budget and stressed the
importance of this program.
On motion of Councillor Tait
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that the recommendation from the City
of Saint John Environment Committee requesting that Common Council engage in the
Partners for Climate Protection program sponsored by the Federation of Canadian
Municipalities and initiate Phases 1 to 3 of the Partners for Climate Protection 5 step
program in the 2006 budget year with initial funding of $50,000, be referred to the City
Manager for a report back to Council.
Question being taken, the motion was lost with Councillors Chang,
Chase, Court, Ferguson, Farren and Titus voting “nay”.
Question being taken, the original motion was carried.
8.2 Comité sur l'environnement relativement au programme des Partenaires
dans la protection du climat de la Fédération canadienne des municipalités
(FCM)
Se reportant au rapport présenté antérieurement concernant le programme des
Partenaires dans la protection du climat de la Fédération canadienne des municipalités
(FCM), Peter McKelvey, président du comité sur l'environnement de The City of Saint
John, souligne les avantages pour Saint John à en être membre et présente des
commentaires sur les phases 1 à 3 de ce programme comportant cinq étapes.
M. McKelvey traite de la stratégie visant à réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre,
92-142
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
indiquant qu'il y a présentement 12 autres villes/municipalités et un village qui participent
à ce programme au Nouveau-Brunswick. M. McKelvey termine sa présentation en
mentionnant que le comité sur l'environnement recommande que le conseil communal
adopte une résolution visant à prendre part au programme des Partenaires dans la
protection du climat commandité par la Fédération canadienne des municipalités, et que
les phases 1 à 3 de ce programme comportant cinq étapes soient amorcées au cours de
l'année budgétaire 2006 avec un financement initial de 50 000 $.
Proposition du conseiller Ferguson
Appuyée par le conseiller Court
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le comité
sur l'environnement de The City of Saint John, le conseil communal prenne part au
programme des Partenaires dans la protection du climat commandité par la Fédération
canadienne des municipalités et amorce les phases 1 à 3 de ce programme comportant
cinq étapes au cours de l'année budgétaire 2006 avec un financement initial de
50 000 $.
Le conseiller Tait est d'avis que cette question devrait être soumise au directeur général
pour s'assurer de la disponibilité des fonds. M. Totten lui explique alors que les
dépenses peuvent être contenues dans le budget d'immobilisations et souligne
l'importance de ce programme.
Proposition du conseiller Tait
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que la recommandation du comité sur
l'environnement de The City of Saint John, demandant que le conseil communal prenne
part au programme des Partenaires dans la protection du climat commandité par la
Fédération canadienne des municipalités et amorce les phases 1 à 3 de ce programme
comportant cinq étapes au cours de l'année budgétaire 2006 avec un financement initial
de 50 000 $, soit soumise au directeur général aux fins de présentation d'un rapport au
conseil.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est rejetée, les conseillers Chang, Chase,
Court, Ferguson, Farren et Titus ayant voté contre la proposition.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition initiale est adoptée.
10. Consideration of By-laws
10.1 Market By-law re Stall B
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “By-law
Number C-1 A By-law Relating to the Market in The City of Saint John” enacted on the
18th day of May, 2005 is amended by adding, following subsection 5(2)(f), 5(2)(g) Stall B,
be read.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
The by-law entitled, “By-law Number C-1 A By-law Relating to the Market in The City of
Saint John” was read in its entirety.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “By-law
Number C-1 A By-law Relating to the Market in The City of Saint John” enacted on the
18th day of May, 2005 is amended by adding, following subsection 5(2)(f), 5(2)(g) Stall B,
be read a third time, enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillor Court voting
“nay”.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, “By-law Number C-1 A By-law Relating to
the Market in The City of Saint John”.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
92-143
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
10. Étude des arrêtés municipaux
10.1 Marché municipal relativement à l'étal B
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C-1, Arrêté
concernant le marché de The City of Saint John », édicté le 18 mai 2005, soit modifié
par l'ajout de l'alinéa 5(2)g) relatif à l'étal B à l'alinéa 5(2)f, et fasse l'objet d'une lecture.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
L'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C-1A, Arrêté concernant le marché de The City of Saint
John » est lu intégralement.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C-1, Arrêté
concernant le marché de The City of Saint John », édicté le 18 mai 2005, soit modifié
par l'ajout de l'alinéa 5(2)g) relatif à l'étal B à l'alinéa 5(2)f, et fasse l'objet d'une
troisième lecture, que ledit arrêté soit édicté et que le sceau communal y soit apposé.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée. Le conseiller Court vote
contre la proposition.
Troisième lecture par titre de l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C-1 A concernant le marché de
The City of Saint John ».
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
10.2 Market By-law re Stall C
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “By-law
Number C-1 A By-law Relating to the Market in The City of Saint John” enacted on the
18th day of May, 2005 is amended by adding, following subsection 5(2)(g), 5(2)(h) Stall
C, be read.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
The by-law entitled, “By-law Number C-1 A By-law Relating to the Market in The City of
Saint John” was read in its entirety.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “By-law
Number C-1 A By-law Relating to the Market in The City of Saint John” enacted on the
18th day of May, 2005 is amended by adding, following subsection 5(2)(g), 5(2)(h) Stall
B, be read a third time, enacted and the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, “By-law Number C-1 A By-law Relating to
the Market in The City of Saint John”.
10.2 Marché municipal relativement à l'étal C
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C-1, Arrêté
concernant le marché de The City of Saint John », édicté le 18 mai 2005, soit modifié
par l'ajout de l'alinéa 5(2)h) relatif à l'étal B à l'alinéa 5(2)g, et fasse l'objet d'une lecture.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
L'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C-1A, Arrêté concernant le marché de The City of Saint
92-144
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
John » est lu intégralement.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C-1, Arrêté
concernant le marché de The City of Saint John », édicté le 18 mai 2005, soit modifié
par l'ajout de l'alinéa 5(2)h) relatif à l'étal B à l'alinéa 5(2)g, et fasse l'objet d'une
troisième lecture, que ledit arrêté soit édicté et que le sceau communal y soit apposé.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
Troisième lecture par titre de l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C-1 A concernant le marché de
The City of Saint John ».
10.3 Street Closing By-law Amendment - Derby Street
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “By-law
Number M-23 a By-law to Amend a By-law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of
Highways in The City of Saint John”, with regard to stopping up and closing permanently
a portion of Derby Street, be read.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
The by-law entitled, “By-law Number M-23 a By-law to Amend a By-law Respecting the
Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John” was read in its entirety.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “By-law
Number M-23 a By-law to Amend a By-law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of
Highways in The City of Saint John”, with regard to stopping up and closing permanently
a portion of Derby Street, be read a third time, enacted and the Corporate Common Seal
affixed thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, “By-law Number M-23 a By-law to Amend a
By-law Respecting the Stopping Up and Closing of Highways in The City of Saint John”.
10.3 Modification de l'arrêté sur la fermeture de rue - rue Derby
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no M-23
modifiant l'arrêté concernant la fermeture et le barrage de routes dans The City of Saint
John », relativement à la fermeture et au barrage de façon permanente d'une partie de
la rue Derby, fasse l'objet d'une lecture.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
L'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no M-23, modifiant l'arrêté concernant la fermeture et le barrage
de routes dans The City of Saint John » est lu intégralement.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no M-23
modifiant l'arrêté concernant la fermeture et le barrage de routes dans The City of Saint
John », relativement à la fermeture et au barrage de façon permanente d'une partie de
la rue Derby, fasse l'objet d'une troisième lecture, que ledit arrêté soit édicté et que le
sceau communal y soit apposé.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
92-145
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
Troisième lecture par titre de l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no M-23 modifiant l'arrêté
concernant la fermeture et le barrage de routes dans The City of Saint John ».
10.4(a) Zoning By-law Amendment 2 St. Paul Street
On motion of Councillor Ferguson
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, “By-law
Number C.P. 110-10, a Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of The City of Saint John”,
re-zoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 5940 square metres, located
at 2 St. Paul Street, also identified as being PID Numbers 00022103, 00023846,
00023853, 00023861 and 00022624, from “IL-1” Neighbourhood Institutional to “B-2”
General Business classification, be read.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
The by-law entitled, “By-law Number C.P. 110-10 a Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of
The City of Saint John” was read in its entirety.
10.4(b) Section 39 Conditions
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that pursuant to the provisions of
Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, this same parcel of land located at 2 St. Paul
Street, having an area of approximately 5940 square metres, also identified as being
PID Numbers 00022103, 00023846, 00023853, 00023861, and 00022624, be subject to
the following conditions:
(a) That the property be limited to the following uses: bank or financial institution,
business office, church, dwelling unit (apartments), personal service shop, retail
store, and/or school; and
(b) That the above uses be restricted to the existing buildings on the property, and
that no additions be allowed to these buildings, nor the landscaping and parking
facilities be substantially altered.
Further that upon re-zoning the subject area, the land and any building or structure
thereon must be developed and used in conformity with the proposal and conditions
identified herein.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled, “By-law
Number C.P. 110-10, a Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of The City of Saint John”, re-
zoning a parcel of land having an area of approximately 5940 square metres, located at
2 St. Paul Street, also identified as being PID Numbers 00022103, 00023846,
00023853, 00023861 and 00022624, from “IL-1” Neighbourhood Institutional to “B-2”
General Business classification, be read a third time, enacted and the Corporate
Common Seal affixed thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, “By-law Number C.P. 110-10, a Law to
Amend the Zoning By-law of The City of Saint John”.
10.4a) Modification de l'arrêté sur le zonage visant le 2, rue St. Paul
Proposition du conseiller Ferguson
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 110-
10, modifiant l'arrêté sur le zonage de The City of Saint John », relativement au
rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 5 940 mètres
carrés, située au 2, rue St. Paul, portant les NID 00022103, 00023846, 00023853,
00023861 et 00022624, en vue de faire passer la désignation s'y rapportant de quartier
à vocation collective « IL-1 » à zone commerciale générale « B-2 », fasse l'objet d'une
lecture.
92-146
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
L'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 110-10 modifiant l'arrêté sur le zonage de The City of
Saint John » est lu intégralement.
10.4b) Conditions imposées par l'article 39
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU qu'en vertu des dispositions prévues à
l'article 39 de la Loi sur l'urbanisme, ladite parcelle de terrain située au 2, rue St. Paul,
d'une superficie d'environ 5 940 mètres carrés et faisant partie du terrain portant les
NID 00022103, 00023846, 00023853, 00023861 et 00022624, soit assujettie aux
conditions suivantes :
(c) que l'utilisation de la propriété soit restreinte aux institutions bancaires ou
financières, aux bureaux d'affaires, aux églises, aux logements
(appartements), aux établissements de soins personnels, aux magasins de
vente au détail et/ou aux écoles;
(d) que les utilisations susmentionnées soient limitées aux bâtiments existants
sur la propriété, qu'aucune annexe ne puisse être ajoutée à ces bâtiments et
que l'aménagement paysager et les parcs de stationnement ne soient
modifiés de façon considérable.
En outre, qu'à la suite du rezonage dudit secteur, que le terrain et les bâtiments et
constructions qui s'y trouvent soient aménagés et utilisés conformément à la proposition
et aux conditions précisées par les présentes.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 110-
10, modifiant l'arrêté sur le zonage de The City of Saint John », relativement au
rezonage d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 5 940 mètres
carrés, située au 2, rue St. Paul, portant les NID 00022103, 00023846, 00023853,
00023861 et 00022624, en vue de faire passer la désignation s'y rapportant de quartier
à vocation collective « IL-1 » à zone commerciale générale « B-2 », fasse l'objet d'une
troisième lecture, que ledit arrêté soit édicté et que le sceau communal y soit apposé.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
Troisième lecture par titre de l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 110-10 modifiant l'arrêté sur
le zonage de The City of Saint John ».
10.5(a) Municipal Plan Amendment - 336 Westmorland Road
10.5(c) Development Proposal - 336 Westmorland Road
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor Chase
RESOLVED that Common Council give third
reading this evening to the proposed Municipal Development Plan Amendment and
Zoning By-law Amendment for the development proposal on Westmorland Road by
Horizon Management Limited; and the City and the Developer negotiate a Developer’s
Agreement based on the following conditions:
(a) The City of Saint John makes a contribution of $2,850,000. toward the
combined piping materials and road construction costs. This contribution will
be toward the total road costs on both Westmorland Road and Retail Drive.
(b) Of the total contribution of $2,850,000, 35% of this amount or $997,000 is to
be advanced in 2006, so as to ensure that the upgrades to Westmorland
Road are completed in 2006 as well as the first phase of Retail Drive.
(c) The $997,000 will be disbursed in one payment, when in the opinion of the
City’s Chief Engineer, the upgrades to Westmorland Drive and the first phase
of Retail Drive have been completed to his satisfaction in accordance with
pre-approved plans.
92-147
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
(d) The remaining amount of $1,853,000 will be disbursed in one payment when,
in the opinion of the City’s Chief Engineer, Retail Drive is 100% complete in
accordance with the pre-approved plan.
(e) In addition to the $2,850,000, the City will advance a “repayable contribution”
of $650,000 only when the Developer is ready to begin Phase II of Retail
Drive. Of this $650,000, $350,000 will be earmarked specifically for the
construction of the road base for Retail Drive. This work is scheduled for the
winter of 2006/2007 so as to demonstrate to the public and to possible
tenants that a commitment has been made to complete Retail Drive. It also
would serve as a hedge against rising road construction cost.
(f) The City’s temporary investment of $650,000 will be refunded by Horizon
Management Limited to the City, based on a rate of $2.03 per square foot,
based on the planned “build out” of the additional 320,000 square feet of
retail space (proposed 500,000 sq. ft minus 180,000 square feet in Phase I).
The Developer has further agreed that once the total “build out” has reached
$400,000 sq. ft., the balance of the City’s temporary investment will be
refunded in total.
Councillor Court requested Mr. Totten to review his report, which was added to the
agenda this evening as item 10.5(c), to which Councillor Titus raised a point of order that
the motion he proposed was for third reading of the Municipal Plan. Mayor McFarlane
requested the City Solicitor’s opinion on the matter and he advised that the Municipal
Plan would be pointless unless Council is also prepared to move ahead with the re-
zoning. Councillor Titus expressed his disagreement with Mr. Nugent’s opinion.
Mr. Nugent continued advising that the Zoning By-law must conform to the Municipal
Plan and explained that any questions with regard to the re-zoning are appropriate for
discussion at this time.
Mr. Totten reviewed the details of his report with regard to the Municipal Plan
amendment and re-zoning for the property at 336 Westmorland Road. A lengthy
discussion followed with Mr. Totten advising that Horizon Management Limited’s last
proposal indicates that they are prepared to commit to constructing Retail Drive prior to
December 31, 2008 under conditions as outlined in his report. The City’s contribution
would be $2,850,000. toward the combined piping materials and road construction costs
of which 35% of this amount or $997,000. is to be advanced in 2006 in order to ensure
that the upgrades to Westmorland Road are completed in 2006 as well as the first phase
of Retail Drive. The remaining amount of $1,853,000. will be disbursed in one payment
when, in the opinion of the City’s Chief Engineer, Retail Drive is 100% complete. Mr.
Totten noted that in addition to the $2,850,000., the City will advance a “repayable
contribution” of $650,000. only when the Developer is ready to begin Phase II of Retail
Drive. The City’s temporary investment of $650,000. will be refunded by Horizon
Management Limited to the City based on a rate of $2.03 per square foot and based on
the planned “build out” of the additional 320,000 square feet of retail space.
Mr. Baird reviewed changes which were incorporated into the Section 39 Conditions, as
submitted.
Discussion followed with Mr. Totten responding to questions from Council regarding the
proposed development, noting that if third reading is given without a developer’s
agreement with the City contributing $997,000., there would be no development.
Councillor Court expressed concern regarding the cost sharing and stated that in his
opinion the report does not reflect the impact on the quality of life for citizens living in the
area.
Councillor Ferguson advised that he could not support the motion and suggested that
the City guarantee a loan to Horizon Management to build Retail Drive and when the
developer is able to meet the “build outs” and is generating a tax return to the City, then
forgive that portion of the loan. He added that the loan could be created over the life
cycle of the road perhaps over a 15 year period. The numerous concerns of the citizens
in the area were acknowledged.
Commenting with regard to the proposed cost sharing, Councillor Farren expressed
concerns pointing out that he is in support of development, but not at any cost, and
suggested that a public bidding process should have been followed for building the road.
92-148
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
Mr. Nugent suggested that the Developer’s Agreement, as submitted by the City
Manager, be finalized before the Municipal Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment become effective, to which Council expressed agreement.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Court,
Farren and Ferguson voting “nay”.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “ By-law
Number C.P. 105-3 a Law to Amend the Municipal Plan By-law” by redesignating on
Schedule 2-A of the Plan a parcel of land located at 336 Westmorland Road, having an
area of approximately 21 hectares, also identified as being PID Numbers 00303487,
00304535, 00306894, 00308619, 00324657, 00415281, 00415299, 00415307,
00415315, 00415323, 00415331, 00415349, 00415356, 00415364, 00415372,
00415380, 00415398, 00416172, 55039499, 55039507, 55039515, 55039523,
55039531, 55039549, 55039556, 55039564, 55039572, 55039580, 55039598,
55039606, 55039614, 55039622, 55039630, 55039648, 55039655, 55039663,
55039671, 55039689, 55039697, 55039705, 55039713, 55039721, 55039739,
55039747, 55039754, 55039762, 55039770, 55039788, 55055834, 55055859,
55055867, 55055875, 55055883, 55055891, 55055909, 55055917, 55055925,
55055933, 55055941, 55055958, 55055966, 55055974, 55055982, 55055990,
55056006, 55056014, 55056022, 55056030, 55056048, 55056055, 55056063,
55056071, 55056089, 55056097, 55056105, 55056113, 55056121, 55056139,
55056147, 55056154, 55056162, 55056170, 55056188, 55056196, 55056204,
55168959, a portion of 00306431, as well as the former Amherst Street, Ashland
Avenue, Eastmount Crescent, Elmwood Avenue, Poplar Street, Walnut Street, Windsor
Street, Woodland Street and a portion of the former Rockwood Avenue, from Low
Density Residential to Regional Centre classification, be read.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
The by-law entitled “By-law Number C.P. 105-3 a Law to Amend the Municipal Plan By-
law” was ready in its entirety.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “ By-law
Number C.P. 105-3 a Law to Amend the Municipal Plan By-law” by redesignating on
Schedule 2-A of the Plan a parcel of land located at 336 Westmorland Road, having an
area of approximately 21 hectares, also identified as being PID Numbers 00303487,
00304535, 00306894, 00308619, 00324657, 00415281, 00415299, 00415307,
00415315, 00415323, 00415331, 00415349, 00415356, 00415364, 00415372,
00415380, 00415398, 00416172, 55039499, 55039507, 55039515, 55039523,
55039531, 55039549, 55039556, 55039564, 55039572, 55039580, 55039598,
55039606, 55039614, 55039622, 55039630, 55039648, 55039655, 55039663,
55039671, 55039689, 55039697, 55039705, 55039713, 55039721, 55039739,
55039747, 55039754, 55039762, 55039770, 55039788, 55055834, 55055859,
55055867, 55055875, 55055883, 55055891, 55055909, 55055917, 55055925,
55055933, 55055941, 55055958, 55055966, 55055974, 55055982, 55055990,
55056006, 55056014, 55056022, 55056030, 55056048, 55056055, 55056063,
55056071, 55056089, 55056097, 55056105, 55056113, 55056121, 55056139,
55056147, 55056154, 55056162, 55056170, 55056188, 55056196, 55056204,
55168959, a portion of 00306431, as well as the former Amherst Street, Ashland
Avenue, Eastmount Crescent, Elmwood Avenue, Poplar Street, Walnut Street, Windsor
Street, Woodland Street and a portion of the former Rockwood Avenue, from Low
Density Residential to Regional Centre classification, be read a third time, enacted and
the Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Court,
Farren and Ferguson voting “nay”.
Read a third time by title the by-law entitled, “By-law Number C.P. 105-3 a Law to
Amend the Municipal Plan By-law”.
92-149
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
10.5(b) Zoning By-Law Amendment and Section 39 Conditions
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “ By-law
Number C.P. 110-11 a Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of The City of Saint John”
re-zoning a parcel of land located at 336 Westmorland Road, having an area of
approximately 21 hectares, also identified as being PID Numbers 00303487, 00304535,
00306894, 00308619, 00324657, 00415281, 00415299, 00415307, 00415315,
00415323, 00415331, 00415349, 00415356, 00415364, 00415372, 00415380,
00415398, 00416172, 55039499, 55039507, 55039515, 55039523, 55039531,
55039549, 55039556, 55039564, 55039572, 55039580, 55039598, 55039606,
55039614, 55039622, 55039630, 55039648, 55039655, 55039663, 55039671,
55039689, 55039697, 55039705, 55039713, 55039721, 55039739, 55039747,
55039754, 55039762, 55039770, 55039788, 55055834, 55055859, 55055867,
55055875, 55055883, 55055891, 55055909, 55055917, 55055925, 55055933,
55055941, 55055958, 55055966, 55055974, 55055982, 55055990, 55056006,
55056014, 55056022, 55056030, 55056048, 55056055, 55056063, 55056071,
55056089, 55056097, 55056105, 55056113, 55056121, 55056139, 55056147,
55056154, 55056162, 55056170, 55056188, 55056196, 55056204, 55168959, a portion
of 00306431, as well as the former Amherst Street, Ashland Avenue, Eastmount
Crescent, Elmwood Avenue, Poplar Street, Walnut Street, Windsor Street, Woodland
Street and a portion of the former Rockwood Avenue, from “R-2” One and Two Family
Residential, “RS-2” One and Two Family Suburban Residential and unzoned street
areas to “SC” Shopping Centre classification be read.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Court and
Farren voting “nay”.
The by-law entitled, “By-law Number C.P. 110-11, a Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of
The City of Saint John” was read in its entirety.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that , pursuant to the provisions of
Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the proposed development of a shopping
centre on the subject parcel of land be subject to an agreement containing the
following conditions:
a) The development of the site is limited to a shopping centre with a maximum floor
area of 55,740 square metres (600,000 square feet) in one or more buildings on
one or more separate lots;
b) No lot in the shopping centre shall be developed, and no site excavation shall be
undertaken, except in accordance with a detailed site grading and drainage plan,
prepared by the proponent and subject to the approval of the Chief City Engineer
or his designate;
c) No lot in the shopping centre shall be developed, except in accordance with a
detailed site plan and detailed building elevation plans, prepared by the
proponent 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 and other site
features, and such site plan must be attached to any building permit for the
development, other than site preparation;
d) All work shown on the approved site plan and building elevation plans for each
lot, except for landscaping, must be completed prior to the opening of the facility
for business, and landscaping must be completed within one year of building
permit approval;
e) The proponent 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 facilitate proper drainage;
f) Exact driveway locations for each lot are subject to the approval of the Chief City
Engineer or his designate;
92-150
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
g) The proponent must provide all utilities underground, including power and
telephone from the street to any building on any lot;
h) The proponent must landscape all disturbed areas of the site not occupied by
buildings, driveways, walkways, parking or loading areas, including a minimum of
6 metres (20 feet) inside the front property line of each lot, and the required
landscaping must extend onto the City street right-of-way to the edge of the City
curb/sidewalk;
i) Prior to any business on the subject site commencing operation, the proponent
must widen Westmorland Road to four lanes from the end of the existing four-
lane section to the intersection of the proposed Retail Drive, including curb and
sidewalk installation, storm sewer extension, any necessary relocation of utility
lines and traffic light standards, and provision of a dedicated left-turn lane for
eastbound traffic on Westmorland Road at Retail Drive, all in accordance with
detailed engineering plans to be prepared by the proponent and subject to the
approval of the Chief City Engineer or his designate. The proponent shall provide
to the City, with respect to such work, such insurance as the City’s insurance
officer may require, and shall promptly reimburse the City for any expense that
the City may incur in having vacated any mechanics’ lien that may be filed or
registered with respect to the work;
j) The proponent must install traffic signals at the intersection of Westmorland
Road and the proposed Retail Drive in accordance with City of Saint John
specifications;
k) The development of the site is limited to development sites 2 and 3 with a
maximum of 16,700 square metres (180,000 square feet) of commercial space
until such time as the proposed Retail Drive is constructed by the proponent to
connect with Marlborough Avenue and Marlborough Avenue is reconstructed by
the proponent as a four-lane street, including the provision of a school bus stop
clear of the travel lanes of Marlborough Avenue, all in accordance with City of
Saint John specifications;
l) There shall be no vehicular access permitted to any part of the site from Oakland
Street, Rockwood Avenue or Highland Street, either as a formal access or during
site preparation and construction;
m) If Marlborough Avenue is used for access to the site during site preparation and
construction, the school bus stop mentioned in condition k) must be constructed
by the proponent prior to the use of Marlborough Avenue for site preparation and
construction traffic;
n) The following additional requirements apply to the proposed excavation and site
preparation:
(i) No explosives shall be stored on the site;
(ii) Prior to any blasting operations being undertaken, the proponent shall
provide proof of a general liability insurance policy or rider satisfactory to
the City covering all aspects of the intended blasting activities;
(iii) The proponent shall be solely responsible for any damage or accident to
utilities, properties, structures, wells and persons as a result of blasting
operations;
(iv) Areas to be blasted shall have the surface stripped of grubbing prior to
blasting;
(v) Prior to any blasting operations being undertaken, the proponent shall
provide a plan of blasting operations and sequences to the Building
Inspector for review. The plan of blasting operations and sequences shall
provide for the following:
92-151
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
1 Preblast Surveys
1.1 The proponent’s blasting consultant will conduct preblast
surveys for all properties within the radius specified by the
proponent’s blaster and blasting consultant. The preblast
survey radius will be defined by the proponent’s blasting
consultant based on the proponent’s contractor’s blasting
design in conjunction with the Building Inspector.
1.2 Within the radius mentioned in 1.1 above, the proponent’s
blasting consultant will distribute a copy of the preblast
survey to the owner of each property covered by the
survey.
1.3 The proponent’s contractor will respond to all valid
concerns of the neighbouring property owners during
construction operations.
1.4 The proponent’s blasting consultant will perform post blast
surveys as requested by the proponent’s contractor or the
neighbouring property owners.
1.5 In the event that damage is suffered to a property as a
result of blasting operations the proponent’s contractor will
resolve any claims diligently.
2 Blast Design
2.1 Any blast plan proposed by the proponent’s contractor will
not be implemented until it has been reviewed and
approved by the proponent’s independent blasting
consultant, with a copy of that approval and plan being
provided to the City prior to blasting under such plan
occurring.
2.2 Rock composition, proximity to structures and the potential
risk associated with damage to those structures will be
considered by the proponent’s blasting consultant in
reviewing the proponent’s contractor’s blast plan.
2.3 Any areas requiring blasting mats will be defined in the
blast plan. The Building Inspector, at his discretion, may
require that blasting mats be used in some or all locations.
2.4 Before every blast the maximum explosive per delay shall
be communicated to the proponent’s blasting consultant
for review before the drill holes are loaded.
2.5 The recommendations of the U.S. Bureau of Mines for
blasting limits will be used for this project.
3 Monitoring
3.1 Each blast performed on the site will be monitored by the
proponent’s blasting consultant;
3.2 The proponent’s blasting consultant will place
seismographs at locations around the construction site.
Each seismograph will measure peak particle velocity and
over pressure.
3.3 Three seismographs will be placed by the proponent’s
blasting consultant.
4. Community Relations and Site Control
92-152
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
4.1 The proponent’s contractor will make every effort to
communicate the blasting plan to all property owners in the
area surrounding the construction site;
4.2 A community orientation session will be chaired by the
proponent prior to commencement of blasting operations.
The purpose of the meeting will be to inform the public of
potential hazards as well as the protocol associated with
blasting operations.
4.3 The proponent’s contractor will communicate the proposed
weekly blasting schedule to all property owners in the
surrounding communities. The method of communication
will be voicemail.
4.4 The proponent’s contractor will communicate the daily
blasting schedule to all property owners by voicemail.
4.5 Blast sirens will be positioned on both the Westmorland
Road and the Rothesay Avenue side of the construction
site to warn the public and all workers that a blast is to be
set off, and to indicate the ‘All Clear’ after the blast has
taken place. Four (4) short soundings of the siren two (2)
minutes before detonation of a blast shall be used for
warning and protection, and one (1) long seven (7) second
sounding of the siren shall be used to give the ‘All Clear’
signal.
4.6 The handling and use of explosives shall be carried out by
a person who holds a valid certificate of qualification in the
blaster occupation or powderman trade issued under the
Apprenticeship and Occupational Certification, and shall
be in compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety
Act and regulations under that Act.
4.7 The control, general safety, handling, record keeping and
conducting of blasting operations shall be carried out in
accordance with the latest edition of New Brunswick
Regulations 91-191 under the Occupational Health and
Safety Act.
4.8 Immediately prior to a blast, the proponent’s contractor
shall clear the blasting area of all persons, vehicular and
pedestrian traffic and shall post flagmen at each road
entering the blasting area who shall stop all traffic and
shall prevent such traffic from entering the area until the
blast has taken place.
o) The proponent shall provide a sloped landscaped area along the full width of the
northwesterly side of the site, having a minimum dimension of 49 metres (160
feet) from the rear property lines of the lots fronting on the southeast side of
Oakland Street, in accordance with a detailed landscaping plan, prepared by the
proponent and subject to the approval of the Development Officer;
p) No buildings, structures, driveways or parking areas are permitted within the
landscaped area mentioned in condition o);
q) The proponent shall not commence any site preparation work on any portion of
development sites 4, 5 and 6 that are within 60 metres (200 feet) of the rear
property lines of the lots fronting on Oakland Street prior to the Development
Officer’s approval of the detailed landscaping plan mentioned in condition o), and
the proponent has provided security in the form of cash, certified cheque or a
letter of credit, in an amount to be determined by the Development Officer, to
ensure completion of the landscaping work shown on the detailed landscaping
plan mentioned in condition o) within one year of the commencement of the site
preparation work;
92-153
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
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 with Councillors Court and
Farren voting “nay’.
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that the by-law entitled “ By-law
Number C.P. 110-11 a Law to Amend the Zoning By-law of The City of Saint John” re-
zoning a parcel of land located at 336 Westmorland Road, having an area of
approximately 21 hectares, also identified as being PID Numbers 00303487, 00304535,
00306894, 00308619, 00324657, 00415281, 00415299, 00415307, 00415315,
00415323, 00415331, 00415349, 00415356, 00415364, 00415372, 00415380,
00415398, 00416172, 55039499, 55039507, 55039515, 55039523, 55039531,
55039549, 55039556, 55039564, 55039572, 55039580, 55039598, 55039606,
55039614, 55039622, 55039630, 55039648, 55039655, 55039663, 55039671,
55039689, 55039697, 55039705, 55039713, 55039721, 55039739, 55039747,
55039754, 55039762, 55039770, 55039788, 55055834, 55055859, 55055867,
55055875, 55055883, 55055891, 55055909, 55055917, 55055925, 55055933,
55055941, 55055958, 55055966, 55055974, 55055982, 55055990, 55056006,
55056014, 55056022, 55056030, 55056048, 55056055, 55056063, 55056071,
55056089, 55056097, 55056105, 55056113, 55056121, 55056139, 55056147,
55056154, 55056162, 55056170, 55056188, 55056196, 55056204, 55168959, a portion
of 00306431, as well as the former Amherst Street, Ashland Avenue, Eastmount
Crescent, Elmwood Avenue, Poplar Street, Walnut Street, Windsor Street, Woodland
Street and a portion of the former Rockwood Avenue, from “R-2” One and Two Family
Residential, “RS-2” One and Two Family Suburban Residential and unzoned street
areas to “SC” Shopping Centre classification be read a third time, enacted and the
Corporate Common Seal affixed thereto.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Councillors Court and
Farren voting “nay”.
Read a third time by title, the by-law entitled, “By-law Number C.P. 110-11, a law to
Amend the Zoning By-law of The City of Saint John”.
10.5a) Modification du plan municipal concernant le terrain situé au 336, chemin
Westmorland
10.5c) Proposition d'aménagement relative au terrain situé au 336, chemin
Westmorland
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller Chase
RÉSOLU que le conseil communal procède, ce
soir, à la troisième lecture des modifications proposées au plan d'aménagement
municipal et du projet de modification de l'arrêté sur le zonage visant la proposition
d'aménagement du terrain situé sur le chemin Westmorland soumise par Horizon
Management Limited, et que la ville et le promoteur négocient une convention fondée
sur les conditions suivantes :
a) que The City of Saint John fournisse une contribution de l'ordre de
2 850 000 $ qui servira à défrayer les coûts totaux liés aux matériaux de
tuyauterie et à la construction des routes; que cette contribution serve à
défrayer les coûts totaux de construction des routes suivantes : chemin
Westmorland et promenade Retail;
b) que 35 % (997 000 $) de la contribution totale s'élevant à 2 850 000 $ soit
versé en 2006, pour s'assurer que les améliorations apportées au chemin
Westmorland soient terminées en 2006 ainsi que la première phase afférente
à la promenade Retail;
c) que la somme de 997 000 $ soit versée en un seul paiement lorsque
l'ingénieur municipal en chef estimera que les améliorations apportées au
chemin Westmorland et la première phase afférente à la promenade Retail
ont été terminées à sa satisfaction, conformément aux plans préautorisés;
92-154
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
d) que le reste du montant, c'est-à-dire 1 853 000 $, soit versé en un paiement
lorsque l'ingénieur municipal en chef estimera que la promenade Retail est
complètement terminée, conformément aux plans préautorisés;
e) en plus de la somme de 2 850 000 $, la ville versera une « contribution
remboursable » de 650 000 $ lorsque le promoteur sera prêt à commencer la
phase ll afférente à la promenade Retail. Que la somme de 350 000 $
(provenant du 650 000 $) soit affectée précisément à la construction de
l'infrastructure (couche de base) de la promenade Retail. Ces travaux doivent
être effectués au cours de l'hiver 2006/2007 pour démontrer au public et à
des locataires potentiels qu'un engagement a été pris en ce qui concerne
l'achèvement de la promenade Retail. Ils serviraient également de
sauvegarde contre l'augmentation des coûts de construction routière;
f) Horizon Management Limited remboursera à la ville son investissement
temporaire, soit la somme de 650 000 $, au taux de 2,03 $ le pied carré,
selon la planification de la « mise en œuvre » de 320 000 pieds carrés
d'espace supplémentaire destiné à la vente au détail (proposition de
500 000 pieds carrés moins les 180 000 pieds carrés de la phase l). Le
promoteur a également convenu qu'une fois que la « mise en œuvre » totale
aura atteint 400 000 pieds carrés, le reste de l'investissement temporaire de
la ville sera remboursé en entier.
Le conseiller Court demande à M. Totten d'examiner son rapport, qui a été ajouté à
l'ordre du jour de la soirée sous le point 10.5c), ce à quoi le conseiller Titus objecte que
sa proposition devait être lue en troisième lecture du plan municipal. Le maire
McFarlane demande l'avis de l'avocat municipal sur la question, et ce dernier indique
que le plan d'aménagement serait inutile si le conseil ne va pas de l'avant avec le
rezonage. Le conseiller Titus exprime son désaccord avec l'opinion de M. Nugent.
M. Nugent poursuit en mentionnant que l'arrêté sur le zonage doit se conformer au plan
d'aménagement et explique que c'est le bon moment de discuter de toute question
concernant le rezonage.
M. Totten passe en revue les détails de son rapport concernant la modification du plan
d'aménagement et le rezonage du terrain sis au 336, chemin Westmorland. Une longue
discussion s'ensuit au cours de laquelle M. Totten mentionne que la dernière proposition
de Horizon Management Limited indique que l'entreprise est prête à s'engager à la
construction de la promenade Retail avant le 31 décembre 2008, aux termes des
conditions soulignées dans son rapport. La contribution de la ville s'élèverait à la somme
de 2 850 000 $ et servirait à défrayer les coûts totaux liés aux matériaux de tuyauterie et
à la construction des routes; 35 % (997 000 $) de cette contribution devra être versée en
2006, pour s'assurer que les améliorations apportées au chemin Westmorland seront
terminées en 2006 ainsi que la première phase afférente à la construction de la
promenade Retail. Le reste du montant, soit 1 853 000 $, sera versé en un paiement
lorsque l'ingénieur municipal en chef estimera que la construction de la promenade
Retail est complètement terminée. M. Totten fait remarquer qu'en plus de la somme de
2 850 000 $, la ville versera une « contribution remboursable » de 650 000 $ lorsque le
promoteur sera prêt à commencer la phase ll afférente à la promenade Retail. Horizon
Management Limited remboursera à la ville son investissement temporaire, soit la
somme de 650 000 $, au taux de 2,03 $ le pied carré, selon la planification de la « mise
en œuvre » de 320 000 pieds carrés d'espace supplémentaire destiné à la vente au
détail.
M. Baird passe en revue les modifications qui ont été apportées aux conditions de
l'article 39, telles qu'elles ont été présentées.
Au cours de la discussion qui a suivi, M. Totten répond aux questions du conseil
concernant le projet d'aménagement, indiquant que si la troisième lecture est faite sans
que le promoteur et la ville se soient entendus sur la contribution de 997 000 $ de la
ville, il n'y aurait aucun aménagement. Le conseiller Court exprime son inquiétude quant
au partage des coûts et affirme que, selon lui, le rapport ne reflète pas l'incidence du
projet sur la qualité de vie des citoyens demeurant dans la région.
Le conseiller Ferguson déclare qu'il ne peut soutenir la proposition et suggère que la
ville garantisse un prêt à Horizon Management pour construire la promenade Retail et
que la ville dispense le promoteur du remboursement de cette portion du prêt lorsque ce
dernier pourra répondre aux « mises en œuvre » et produira une déclaration de revenus
92-155
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
pour la ville. Il ajoute que le prêt pourrait être créé au cours du cycle de vie de la route,
peut-être même pour une période supérieure à 15 ans. On a reconnu le bien-fondé des
nombreuses préoccupations des citoyens de la région.
Le conseiller Farren exprime son inquiétude au sujet du partage des coûts proposé et
souligne qu'il soutient la proposition d'aménagement, mais pas à n'importe quel prix, et
suggère qu'un processus d'adjudication publique aurait dû être suivi pour la construction
routière.
M. Nugent suggère que la convention du promoteur, telle qu'elle a été présentée par le
directeur général, soit conclue avant que la modification du plan d'aménagement et la
modification de l'arrêté sur le zonage prennent effet, ce à quoi le conseil s'est dit en
faveur.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée. Les conseillers Court, Farren
et Ferguson votent contre la proposition.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 105-3
modifiant l'arrêté relatif au plan municipal » en modifiant, à l'annexe 2-A du plan, la
désignation d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ 21 hectares, située au
336, chemin Westmorland, portant les NID 00303487, 00304535, 00306894, 00308619,
00324657, 00415281, 00415299, 00415307, 00415315, 00415323, 00415331,
00415349, 00415356, 00415364, 00415372, 00415380, 00415398, 00416172,
55039499, 55039507, 55039515, 55039523, 55039531, 55039549, 55039556,
55039564, 55039572, 55039580, 55039598, 55039606, 55039614, 55039622,
55039630, 55039648, 55039655, 55039663, 55039671, 55039689, 55039697,
55039705, 55039713, 55039721, 55039739, 55039747, 55039754, 55039762,
55039770, 55039788, 55055834, 55055859, 55055867, 55055875, 55055883,
55055891, 55055909, 55055917, 55055925, 55055933, 55055941, 55055958,
55055966, 55055974, 55055982, 55055990, 55056006, 55056014, 55056022,
55056030, 55056048, 55056055, 55056063, 55056071, 55056089, 55056097,
55056105, 55056113, 55056121, 55056139, 55056147, 55056154, 55056162,
55056170, 55056188, 55056196, 55056204, 55168959, et une partie du NID 00306431,
ainsi que les anciennes rues, avenues et anciens croissants suivants : rue Amherst,
avenue Ahsland, croissant Eastmount, avenue Elmwood, rue Poplar, rue Walnut, rue
Windsor, rue Woodland et une partie de l'ancienne avenue Rockwood, afin de la faire
passer de zone résidentielle de faible densité à zone de centre régional, fasse l'objet
d'une lecture.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
L’arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 105-3 modifiant l’arrêté relatif au plan municipal » est lu
intégralement.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 105-3
modifiant l'arrêté relatif au plan municipal » en modifiant, à l'annexe 2-A du plan
d'aménagement, la désignation d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie d'environ
21 hectares, située au 336, chemin Westmorland, portant les NID 00303487, 00304535,
00306894, 00308619, 00324657, 00415281, 00415299, 00415307, 00415315,
00415323, 00415331, 00415349, 00415356, 00415364, 00415372, 00415380,
00415398, 00416172, 55039499, 55039507, 55039515, 55039523, 55039531,
55039549, 55039556, 55039564, 55039572, 55039580, 55039598, 55039606,
55039614, 55039622, 55039630, 55039648, 55039655, 55039663, 55039671,
55039689, 55039697, 55039705, 55039713, 55039721, 55039739, 55039747,
55039754, 55039762, 55039770, 55039788, 55055834, 55055859, 55055867,
55055875, 55055883, 55055891, 55055909, 55055917, 55055925, 55055933,
55055941, 55055958, 55055966, 55055974, 55055982, 55055990, 55056006,
55056014, 55056022, 55056030, 55056048, 55056055, 55056063, 55056071,
55056089, 55056097, 55056105, 55056113, 55056121, 55056139, 55056147,
55056154, 55056162, 55056170, 55056188, 55056196, 55056204, 55168959, et une
partie du NID 00306431, ainsi que les anciennes rues, avenues et anciens croissants
suivants : rue Amherst, avenue Ahsland, croissant Eastmount, avenue Elmwood, rue
Poplar, rue Walnut, rue Windsor, rue Woodland et une partie de l'ancienne avenue
92-156
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
Rockwood, afin de la faire passer de zone résidentielle de faible densité à zone de
centre régional, fasse l'objet d'une troisième lecture, que ledit arrêté soit édicté et que le
sceau communal y soit apposé.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée. Les conseillers Court, Farren
et Ferguson votent contre la proposition.
Troisième lecture par titre de l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no CP-105-3, modifiant l'arrêté
relatif au plan municipal ».
10.5b) Modifications à l'arrêté de zonage et conditions de l'article 39
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 110-
11 modifiant l'arrêté sur le zonage de The City of Saint John », relativement au rezonage
d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 21 hectares, située au 336,
chemin Westmorland, portant les NID 00303487, 00304535, 00306894, 00308619,
00324657, 00415281, 00415299, 00415307, 00415315, 00415323, 00415331,
00415349, 00415356, 00415364, 00415372, 00415380, 00415398, 00416172,
55039499, 55039507, 55039515, 55039523, 55039531, 55039549, 55039556,
55039564, 55039572, 55039580, 55039598, 55039606, 55039614, 55039622,
55039630, 55039648, 55039655, 55039663, 55039671, 55039689, 55039697,
55039705, 55039713, 55039721, 55039739, 55039747, 55039754, 55039762,
55039770, 55039788, 55055834, 55055859, 55055867, 55055875, 55055883,
55055891, 55055909, 55055917, 55055925, 55055933, 55055941, 55055958,
55055966, 55055974, 55055982, 55055990, 55056006, 55056014, 55056022,
55056030, 55056048, 55056055, 55056063, 55056071, 55056089, 55056097,
55056105, 55056113, 55056121, 55056139, 55056147, 55056154, 55056162,
55056170, 55056188, 55056196, 55056204, 55168959, et une partie du NID 00306431,
ainsi que les anciennes rues, avenues et anciens croissants suivants : rue Amherst,
avenue Ahsland, croissant Eastmount, avenue Elmwood, rue Poplar, rue Walnut, rue
Windsor, rue Woodland et une partie de l'ancienne avenue Rockwood, en vue de faire
passer la désignation s'y rapportant de zone résidentielle – habitations unifamiliale et
bifamiliales « R-2 », zone résidentielle de banlieue – habitations unifamiliales et
bifamiliales « RS-2 » et rue non zonée à zone de centre commercial « SC », fasse l'objet
d'une lecture.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est acceptée. Les conseillers Court et
Farren votent contre la proposition.
L'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 110-11 modifiant l'arrêté sur le zonage de The City of
Saint John » est lu intégralement.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU qu'en vertu des dispositions de l'article 39
de la Loi sur l'urbanisme, le projet d'aménagement d'un centre commercial sur ladite
parcelle de terrain soit assujetti à une convention stipulant les conditions suivantes :
a) l'aménagement du terrain se limite à un centre commercial qui correspond à une
surface de plancher maximale de 55 740 mètres carrés (600 000 pieds carrés)
situé dans un ou plusieurs immeubles ou sur un ou plusieurs terrains distincts;
b) aucun lot ne doit être aménagé sur le terrain du centre commercial et on ne doit
procéder à aucune excavation du terrain, sauf si elle est conforme au plan
détaillé de drainage et de nivellement du terrain, préparé par le promoteur et
assujetti à l'approbation de l'ingénieur municipal en chef ou de son représentant;
c) aucun lot ne doit être aménagé sur le terrain du centre commercial, sauf s'il est
conforme à un plan de situation détaillé et à des plans d'élévation détaillés,
établis par le promoteur et approuvés par l'agent d'aménagement, indiquant
l'emplacement de tous les bâtiments, les aires de stationnement, les entrées, les
aires de chargement, les affiches, l'éclairage extérieur, les matériaux extérieurs
des bâtiments et la finition, les espaces paysagers et autres caractéristiques de
l'emplacement, et un tel plan d'aménagement doit accompagner tout permis de
92-157
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
construction relatif à l'aménagement, autre que les travaux liés à la préparation du
terrain;
d) tous les travaux indiqués sur le plan de situation et les plans d'élévation
approuvés pour chaque terrain, sauf l'aménagement paysager, doivent être
terminés avant l'ouverture de l'installation aux fins commerciales, et
l'aménagement paysager doit être terminé dans un délai d'un an à compter de la
date d'approbation du permis de construire;
e) le promoteur doit asphalter toutes les aires de stationnement, les aires de
chargement et de manœuvre et toutes les voies d'accès et prévoir des bordures
de béton coulées sur place pour protéger les espaces paysagers et faciliter le
drainage;
f) l'endroit exact des entrées de chaque terrain doit être approuvé par l’ingénieur en
chef municipal ou son représentant;
g) le promoteur doit prévoir des installations d'utilité publique souterraines, y
compris les services d'électricité et de téléphone, à partir de la rue jusqu'à tous
les bâtiments érigés sur les terrains en question;
h) le promoteur doit prévoir l'aménagement paysager des aires perturbées de
l'emplacement où il n'y a pas de bâtiments, de voies d'accès, d'allées
piétonnières, d'aires de stationnement ou de chargement, y compris un espace
minimum de 6 mètres (20 pieds) à l'intérieur de la limite frontale de chaque
terrain, et l'aménagement paysager doit se prolonger sur le droit de passage, à
partir de la rue municipale jusqu'à la bordure ou le trottoir;
i) Avant qu'une entreprise ne puisse commencer ses activités sur l'emplacement
en question, le promoteur doit élargir le chemin Westmorland pour qu'il y ait
désormais quatre voies à partir de l'extrémité de la section à quatre voies
existante jusqu'à l'intersection de la promenade Retail proposée, y compris
l'installation des bordures et des trottoirs, le prolongement du réseau d'égout,
tout déplacement nécessaire des canalisations et des feux de circulation, la
présence d'une voie spéciale pour tourner-à-gauche pour la circulation venant de
l'est entre le chemin Westmorland et la promenade Retail, le tout conformément
aux plans d'ingénierie détaillés préparés par le promoteur et assujettis à
l'approbation de l'ingénieur municipal en chef ou de son représentant. Le
promoteur doit prévoir, concernant ces travaux, une assurance que peut exiger
l'agent d'assurance de la ville, et doit rembourser rapidement la ville pour toute
dépense engagée par la ville pour avoir supprimé tout privilège des techniciens
de service qui peut être classé ou déposé à l'égard des travaux;
j) le promoteur doit installer des feux de circulation à l'intersection du chemin
Westmorland et de la promenade Retail proposée, conformément aux
spécifications émises par The City of Saint John;
k) l'aménagement du terrain se limite aux sites d'aménagement 2 et 3 destinés à
l'espace commercial et dont la surface de plancher maximale correspond à
16 700 mètres carrés (180 000 pieds carrés) jusqu'à ce le promoteur ait construit
la promenade Retail proposée pour qu'elle touche à l'avenue Marlborough et que
l'avenue Marlborough soit reconstruite par le promoteur de façon à avoir quatre
voies, y compris la présence d'un arrêt d'autobus scolaire à l'abri des voies de
circulation de l'avenue Marlborough, le tout conformément aux spécifications
émises par The City of Saint John;
l) aucune voie d'accès à une partie quelconque de l'emplacement ne sera permise
à partir de la rue Oakland, de l'avenue Rockwood ou de la rue Highland, que ce
soit sous forme de demande d'accès officielle ou pendant la préparation et la
construction de l'emplacement;
m) si l'avenue Marlborough est utilisée pour accéder à l'emplacement pendant sa
préparation et sa construction, l'arrêt d'autobus scolaire mentionné au point k doit
être construit par le promoteur avant l'utilisation de l'avenue Marlborough pour la
circulation nécessaire à la préparation et à la construction de l'emplacement;
92-158
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
n) Les exigences supplémentaires suivantes s'appliquent à l'excavation et à la
préparation de l'emplacement proposées :
i) aucun explosif ne doit être entreposé sur l'emplacement;
ii) avant d'entreprendre les opérations de dynamitage, le promoteur doit
fournir à la ville la preuve qu'il détient une police d'assurance de
responsabilité civile générale ou un avenant satisfaisant couvrant tous les
aspects des activités de dynamitage prévues;
iii) le promoteur sera le seul responsable des dommages et accidents
causés aux commodités, aux propriétés, aux structures, aux puits et aux
personnes par suite des opérations de dynamitage;
iv) la surface des zones devant être dynamitées devra être essouchée avant
le dynamitage;
v) avant d'entreprendre les opérations de dynamitage, le promoteur devra
fournir un plan de ces dernières ainsi que de leur ordre à l'inspecteur des
bâtiments aux fins d'examen. Le plan des opérations de dynamitage et de
leur ordre doit stipuler ce qui suit :
1 Sondages préalables au dynamitage
1.1 Le conseiller en dynamitage du promoteur mènera des
sondages préalables au dynamitage en ce qui concerne
toutes les propriétés situées dans le rayon précisé par le
boutefeu et le conseiller en dynamitage du promoteur. Le
rayon relatif à ce sondage sera défini par le conseiller en
dynamitage du promoteur, en fonction du plan de
dynamitage de l'entrepreneur du promoteur, conjointement
avec l'inspecteur des bâtiments.
1.2 Dans le rayon susmentionné (1.1), le conseiller en
dynamitage du promoteur distribuera une copie du
sondage au propriétaire de chaque propriété couverte par
le sondage.
1.3 L'entrepreneur du promoteur répondra à toutes les
préoccupations valides des propriétaires avoisinants
durant les travaux de construction.
1.4 Le conseiller en dynamitage du promoteur effectuera des
sondages postérieurs au dynamitage, tels que l'exigeront
l'entrepreneur du promoteur ou les propriétaires
avoisinants.
1.5 En cas de dommages subis à une propriété par suite des
opérations de dynamitage, l'entrepreneur du promoteur
résoudra les réclamations avec diligence.
2 Plan de dynamitage
2.1 Les plans de dynamitage proposés par l'entrepreneur du
promoteur ne seront pas mis en œuvre jusqu'à ce qu'ils
aient été étudiés et approuvés par le conseiller en
dynamitage indépendant du promoteur; une copie de cette
approbation et du plan étant fournie à la ville avant le
dynamitage effectué conformément à de tels plans.
2.2 La composition lithologique, la proximité des structures et
les risques possibles associés aux dommages causés à
ces structures seront pris en considération par le conseiller
en dynamitage du promoteur lors de l'examen du plan de
dynamitage de l'entrepreneur du promoteur.
92-159
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
2.3 Toute zone nécessitant un paillasson pare-éclats sera
définie dans le plan de dynamitage. L'inspecteur des
bâtiments peut, à sa discrétion, exiger que les paillassons
pare-éclats soient utilisés à certains ou à tous les endroits.
2.4 Avant chaque dynamitage, la charge explosive maximale
différée devra être communiquée au conseiller en
dynamitage du promoteur aux fins d'examen avant le
chargement des trous de mine.
2.5 Les recommandations de l'U.S. Bureau of Mines afférentes
aux limites en matière de dynamitage seront utilisées dans
le cadre de ce projet.
3 Surveillance
3.1 Chaque dynamitage produit sur l'emplacement sera
surveillé par le conseiller en dynamitage du promoteur.
3.2 Le conseiller en dynamitage du promoteur installera des
sismographes à des endroits situés autour du chantier de
construction. Chaque sismographe mesurera la vitesse de
crête d'une particule et la pression excessive.
3.3 Trois sismographes seront installés par le conseiller en
dynamitage du promoteur.
4. Relations avec la collectivité et contrôle du chantier
4.1 L'entrepreneur du promoteur fera tout en son possible pour
communiquer le plan de dynamitage à tous les
propriétaires de la région avoisinant le chantier de
construction.
4.2 Une séance d'orientation communautaire sera présidée
par le promoteur avant le début des opérations de
dynamitage. L'objectif de la séance sera d'informer le
public des dangers potentiels ainsi que du protocole
associé aux opérations de dynamitage.
4.3 L'entrepreneur du promoteur fera part du projet de
calendrier hebdomadaire afférent au dynamitage à tous les
propriétaires des collectivités avoisinantes. Il utilisera la
messagerie vocale comme méthode de communication.
4.4 L'entrepreneur du promoteur communiquera le calendrier
quotidien afférent au dynamitage à tous les propriétaires
au moyen de la messagerie vocale.
4.5 Des sirènes signalant le dynamitage seront installées sur
le côté du chemin Westmorland et de l'avenue Rothesay
attenants au chantier de construction dans le but d'avertir
le public et tous les travailleurs des opérations de
dynamitage et pour indiquer le signal de « fin d'alerte »
après le dynamitage. Quatre (4) courts coups de sirène
déclenchés deux (2) minutes avant la détonation serviront
d'avertissement et de protection et un (1) long coup de
sept (7) secondes servira à indiquer le signal de « fin
d'alerte ».
4.6 La manipulation et l'utilisation d'explosifs ne doivent être
effectuées que par une personne détenant un certificat de
compétence valide à titre de boutefeu ou de métier de
boutefeu émis en vertu de la Loi sur l'apprentissage et la
certification professionnelle et conforme à la Loi sur
l'hygiène et la sécurité au travail et aux règlements
d'application de cette loi.
92-160
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
4.7 Le contrôle, la sécurité générale, la manipulation, la
consignation des données et la conduite relatifs aux
opérations de dynamitage doivent être effectués
conformément à l'édition la plus récente des règlements
91-191 du Nouveau-Brunswick se rapportant à la Loi sur
l'hygiène et la sécurité au travail.
4.8 Immédiatement avant un dynamitage, l'entrepreneur du
promoteur doit s'assurer que les personnes, les véhicules
et les piétons sont à l'écart de l'aire de dynamitage et
placer des signaleurs à chaque route menant à l'aire de
dynamitage qui devront arrêter toute la circulation et
l'empêcher d'entrer dans l'aire de dynamitage jusqu'à ce
que le dynamitage ait lieu.
o) Le promoteur doit prévoir une section paysagée inclinée sur toute la largeur du
côté nord-ouest du chantier, dont la dimension minimale sera de 49 mètres
(160 pieds) à partir des limites des terrains arrière donnant sur le côté sud-est de
la rue Oakland, conformément au plan d'aménagement paysager détaillé,
préparé par le promoteur, et assujetti à l'approbation de l'agent d'aménagement.
p) Les bâtiments, structures, voie d'accès ou aires de stationnement ne sont pas
permis dans la section paysagée mentionnée à la condition o).
q) Le promoteur ne doit pas commencer les travaux de préparation du chantier sur
les portions des sites d'aménagement 4, 5 et 6 situés dans les 60 mètres
(200 pieds) des limites des propriétés arrière des terrains donnant sur la rue
Oakland avant d'avoir reçu l'approbation de l'agent de développement
relativement au plan d'aménagement paysager détaillé mentionné à la condition
0), et le promoteur doit fournir une garantie sous forme de paiement comptant,
de chèque certifié ou de lettre de crédit, qui sera au montant déterminé par
l'agent d'aménagement afin de veiller à l'achèvement des travaux
d'aménagement paysager indiqués sur le plan d'aménagement paysager
mentionné à la condition 0), et ce, au plus tard un an après le début des travaux
de préparation du chantier.
De plus, à la suite du rezonage du secteur, les terrains ainsi que tout bâtiment ou
construction qui s'y trouvent, doivent être aménagés et utilisés conformément à la
proposition et aux conditions qui y sont stipulées.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est acceptée. Les conseillers Court et
Farren votent contre la proposition.
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 110-
11 modifiant l'arrêté sur le zonage de The City of Saint John », relativement au rezonage
d'une parcelle de terrain d'une superficie approximative de 21 hectares, située au 336,
chemin Westmorland, portant les NID 00303487, 00304535, 00306894, 00308619,
00324657, 00415281, 00415299, 00415307, 00415315, 00415323, 00415331,
00415349, 00415356, 00415364, 00415372, 00415380, 00415398, 00416172,
55039499, 55039507, 55039515, 55039523, 55039531, 55039549, 55039556,
55039564, 55039572, 55039580, 55039598, 55039606, 55039614, 55039622,
55039630, 55039648, 55039655, 55039663, 55039671, 55039689, 55039697,
55039705, 55039713, 55039721, 55039739, 55039747, 55039754, 55039762,
55039770, 55039788, 55055834, 55055859, 55055867, 55055875, 55055883,
55055891, 55055909, 55055917, 55055925, 55055933, 55055941, 55055958,
55055966, 55055974, 55055982, 55055990, 55056006, 55056014, 55056022,
55056030, 55056048, 55056055, 55056063, 55056071, 55056089, 55056097,
55056105, 55056113, 55056121, 55056139, 55056147, 55056154, 55056162,
55056170, 55056188, 55056196, 55056204, 55168959, et une partie du NID 00306431,
ainsi que les anciennes rues, avenues et anciens croissants suivants : rue Amherst,
avenue Ahsland, croissant Eastmount, avenue Elmwood, rue Poplar, rue Walnut, rue
Windsor, rue Woodland et une partie de l'ancienne avenue Rockwood, en vue de faire
passer la désignation s'y rapportant de zone résidentielle – habitations unifamiliale et
bifamiliales « R-2 », zone résidentielle de banlieue – habitations unifamiliales et
bifamiliales « RS-2 » et rue non zonée à zone de centre commercial « SC », fasse l'objet
92-161
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
d'une troisième lecture, que ledit arrêté soit édicté et que le sceau communal y soit
apposé.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est acceptée. Les conseillers Court et
Farren votent contre la proposition.
Troisième lecture par titre de l'arrêté intitulé « Arrêté no C.P. 110-11 modifiant l'arrêté sur
le zonage de The City of Saint John ».
11.1 Proposed Terms of Reference - Recreation Interim Committee
(Leisure Arts & Culture Interim Committee)
On motion of Councillor Ferguson
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that Common Council approve the
Recreation & Parks Advisory Board (Leisure Services Advisory Board)Terms of
Reference and the Recreation Interim Committee Terms of Reference as submitted.
Mayor McFarlane suggested the Terms of Reference be reviewed by the Legal
Department and the City Manager but withdrew his comments after a brief discussion.
Question being taken, the motion was carried with Mayor McFarlane and
Councillors Chase and Titus voting “nay”.
11.1 Termes de référence proposés par le comité intérimaire sur les loisirs
(Comité intérimaire sur les loisirs créatifs et la culture)
Proposition du conseiller Ferguson
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que le conseil communal approuve les
termes de référence proposés par le comité consultatif des loisirs et des parcs (Conseil
consultatif des services des loisirs) et le comité intérimaire sur les loisirs.
Le maire McFarlane suggère que les termes de référence soient passés en revue par le
Service juridique et le directeur général, mais retire ses commentaires après une brève
discussion.
À l’issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée. Le maire McFarlane et les
conseillers Chase et Titus ont voté contre la proposition.
11.2 Municipal Magazine
On motion of Councillor Chase
Seconded by Councillor Chang
RESOLVED that the letter from Councillor Chase
regarding the Municipal Magazine be tabled for two weeks.
Question being taken, the tabling motion was carried.
11.2 Revue municipale
Proposition du conseiller Chase
Appuyée par le conseiller Chang
RÉSOLU que la lettre du conseiller Chase au sujet
de la revue municipale soit reportée de deux semaines.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition visant à reporter l'examen de cette
question est adoptée.
12.1 Settlement of Damage to Traffic Signal Lights
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute a Release in favour of
ACE/INA Insurance Company, Marsh Canada, Gulf Operators Limited and all others, in
a form acceptable to the City Solicitor with respect to damage caused to a Traffic Light
92-162
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
Standard on the Courtenay Causeway 2005, in consideration of the receipt of $2,824.96
being the full cost incurred by the City in repairing the damage in question.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
(Councillor Titus withdrew from the meeting.)
12.1 Règlement pour les dommages causés aux feux de circulation
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, le maire et le greffier communal soient autorisés à procéder à la signature d'une
quittance en faveur de la compagnie d'assurances ACE/INA, de Marsh Canada, de Gulf
Operators Limited et tous les autres, sous un format jugé acceptable par l'avocat
municipal, relativement aux dommages causés aux feux de circulation du pont-jetée
Courtenay en 2005, en contrepartie du reçu de 2 824,96 $ représentant les frais totaux
engagés par la ville pour réparer les dommages en question.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
(Le conseiller Titus quitte la réunion.)
12.2 Litigation Proceedings
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, a cheque in the amount of $32,500. payable to Barry Spalding in Trust be
issued for the purpose of effecting a settlement of the claims of John Reginald Fearon
and Irene MacDonald including the filing of a notice of discontinuance of the actions
brought by each against the City as well as full, total and inclusive Releases in favour of
the City.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
(Councillor Titus re-entered the meeting.)
12.2 Procédures judiciaires
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, un chèque au montant de 32 500 $ soit libellé à l'ordre de Barry Spalding in
Trust dans le but de procéder au règlement des réclamations de John Reginald Fearon
et d'Irene MacDonald, y compris le dépôt d'un avis d'abandon des actions intentées
contre la ville par ces derniers, ainsi que l'établissement d'une quittance complète et
totale en faveur de la ville.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
(Le conseiller Titus est de nouveau présent à la réunion.)
12.3 Re-Establishment of Easements - Red Head Area
On motion of Councillor White
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager:
1. The City of Saint John grant to New Brunswick Power Transmission Corporation
an easement through Parcel 06-18 upon substantially the same terms and conditions
articulated in the easement taken by The New Brunswick Electric Power Commission
and recorded in the Saint John County Registry Office in Book 602 at page 405 on April
25, 1969, as No. 219404.
2. The City of Saint John grant to Irving Oil Limited an easement through Parcel 06-
18 upon substantially the same terms and conditions articulated in the easement given
to Hughes Surveys Limited (a predecessor in title to Irving Oil Limited) and recorded in
92-163
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
the Saint John County Registry Office in Book 613 at page 796 on October 28, 1969, as
No. 221942.
3. That the Mayor and Common Clerk execute the Grant of Easement (Form 14).
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.3 Remise en place des servitudes dans le secteur Red Head
Proposition du conseiller White
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général:
1. The City of Saint John accorde une servitude à Corporation de transport Énergie
Nouveau-Brunswick, relativement à la parcelle 06-18, selon des conditions à peu près
semblables à celles établies dans la servitude attribuée à la Commission d'énergie
électrique du Nouveau-Brunswick et déposée au bureau de l'enregistrement pour le
comté de Saint John, le 25 avril 1969, sous le document numéro 219404, dans le
registre 602, à la page 405;
2. The City of Saint John accorde une servitude à Irving Oil Limited, relativement à
la parcelle 06-18, selon des conditions à peu près semblables à celles établies dans la
servitude attribuée à Hugues Surveys Limited (prédécesseur en droit de Irving Oil
Limited) et déposée au bureau de l'enregistrement pour le comté de Saint John, le 28
octobre 1969, sous le document numéro 221942, dans le registre 613, à la page 796;
3. et que le maire et le greffier communal procèdent à l'octroi d'une servitude
(formulaire 14).
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.4 Bayside Middle School Site
On motion of Councillor White
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that Common Council:
1. Authorize advertising of its intention to consider on the 8th day of May 2006 at
7:00 o'clock in the evening in Common Council Chamber, a by-law to stop-up and close
those portions of Westmorland Road and Saint Catherine Street within the boundaries of
PID Number 322180 and Hays Avenue in its entirety;
2. Authorize the publication of a notice of its intention to move a resolution to vest in
The City of Saint John the fee simple interest in the 15 foot wide lanes commonly
referred to as "fire lanes" shown on the plan on Tisdale Place being within the
boundaries of PID Number 322180 subject to any easements over the same expressly
granted or otherwise acquired by adjoining owners;
3. In the event that the by-law is enacted and the resolution adopted, the City
convey its interest in the former street(s) or portions thereof and former "fire lanes" to
Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of New Brunswick as represented by the
Minister of Education; and
4. The Mayor and Common Clerk sign the documents evidencing conveyance.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.4 Terrain de l'école secondaire intermédiaire Bayside
Proposition du conseiller White
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU que le conseil communal :
1. autorise la publication d'un avis indiquant son intention d'adopter un arrêté visant
à interrompre la circulation et à fermer les parties du chemin Westmorland et de la rue
Saint Catherine situées dans les limites du NID 322180, ainsi que l'avenue Hays dans
sa totalité;
2. autorise la publication d'un avis indiquant son intention de présenter une
résolution en vue d'attribuer à The City of Saint John l'intérêt en fief simple des voies
larges de 15 pieds communément appelées « voies réservées au service d'incendie »
92-164
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
figurant sur le plan de la place Tisdale, dans les limites du NID 322180, sous réserve de
toute servitude sur ladite allée explicitement cédée aux propriétaires des terrains
attenants ou autrement acquise par ces derniers.
3. Advenant le décret de l'arrêté et l'adoption de la résolution, que la ville cède son
intérêt dans les anciennes rues ou portions de ces dernières et dans les anciennes
« voies réservées au service d'incendie » à Sa Majesté la Reine du chef du Nouveau-
Brunswick, représentée par le ministre de l'Éducation.
4. Que le maire et le greffier communal signent les documents attestant le transfert.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.5 Tender for Asphaltic Concrete Mixes
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, the tender for the supply of asphaltic concrete mixes for the 2006 season be
awarded to the lowest bidder in each case as indicated on the submitted summary of
bids.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.5 Soumission relative aux mélanges de béton asphaltique
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, la soumission relative à la fourniture de mélanges de béton asphaltique pour la
saison 2006 soit accordée au soumissionnaire moins-disant dans chaque cas, comme
l'indique le sommaire des soumissions présenté.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.6 Tender for Tires and Tubes
On motion of Councillor Court
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, the tender for the supply of new and retread tires and tubes and associated
services be awarded to the lowest bidder, in each case, to meet the specifications and
requirements of the tender, as indicated on the submitted summary of bids.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.6 Soumissions relatives aux pneus et aux chambres à air
Proposition du conseiller Court
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, le contrat de fourniture de services relatifs aux nouveaux pneus, aux pneus
rechapés, aux chambres à air et aux services connexes soit accordé au soumissionnaire
le moins disant dans chaque cas, afin de respecter les spécifications et exigences
visées par de telles soumissions, comme l'indique le sommaire des soumissions
présenté.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.8 Design and Construction Management - Latimer Lake and Spruce Lake
Water Treatment Facilities - Electrical, Mechanical and Structural Upgrades
On motion of Councillor White
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, the proposal of Ralph Smith Engineering Inc. for engineering (design and
construction management) services for Latimer Lake and Spruce Lake Water Treatment
92-165
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
Facilities: Electrical, Mechanical and Structural Upgrades be accepted and that the
Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to execute the appropriate documentation in
that regard.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.8 Gestion de la conception et de la construction – usines de traitement des
eaux usées situées aux lacs Latimer et Spruce – mises à niveau de
l'équipement électrique, mécanique et structurel
Proposition du conseiller White
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, la proposition de Ralph Smith Engineering Inc., visant les services d'ingénierie
(gestion de la conception et de la construction) relatifs aux mises à niveau de
l'équipement électrique, mécanique et structurel des usines de traitement des eaux
usées situées aux lacs Latimer et Spruce, soit acceptée et, que le maire et le greffier
communal soient autorisés à signer la documentation exigée à cet égard.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.9 Construction of New Water Pipeline Easement Acquisition - 560 Gault Road
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, The City of Saint John acquire an easement for municipal services/municipal
services easement in a 53 square metre ± portion of PID Number 415687 from New
Brunswick Southern Railway Company Limited for $5.00 per square metre plus HST if
applicable, as generally shown on the submitted sketch. As part of the transaction the
City shall:
a). prepare and pay for any plan of survey required;
b). where applicable, reinstate the subject property to a condition that existed prior to
construction;
c). pay to a maximum of $500.00 (plus HST) the legal costs incurred by New Brunswick
Southern Railway Company Limited to finalize the transaction; and
d). the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign any documents required to
formalize this transaction.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.9 Construction d'une nouvelle conduite d'eau et acquisition d'une emprise
relativement au 560, chemin Gault
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, The City of Saint John acquière, aux fins de services municipaux, l'emprise
municipale sur une parcelle de terrain d'environ 538 mètres carrés, portant le
NID 415687, appartenant au Chemin de fer du Sud, Nouveau-Brunswick Limitée, pour la
somme de 5 $ le mètre carré, TVH en sus, le cas échéant, comme le montre de manière
générale le croquis présenté. En vertu de ladite transaction, la ville convient de
respecter les modalités prévues ci-dessous, comme suit :
a) préparer et payer les plans d'arpentage requis;
b) le cas échéant, rétablir ladite propriété dans des conditions semblables à celles qui
prévalaient avant l'aménagement;
c) acquitter les honoraires juridiques, jusqu'à concurrence de 500 $ (TVH en sus)
engagés par le Chemin de fer du Sud, Nouveau-Brunswick Limitée afin de conclure
ladite transaction; et
d) autoriser le maire et le greffier communal à signer toute documentation requise afin
de conclure ladite transaction.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
92-166
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
12.10 Construction of New Water Pipeline Easement Acquisition - Dexter
Construction
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, The City of Saint John acquire an easement for municipal services/municipal
services easement in a 1,812 square metre ± portion of PID Number 408831 from
Dexter Construction Company Limited for $5.00 per square metre plus HST if applicable,
as generally shown on the submitted sketch. As part of the transaction the City shall:
a). prepare and pay for any plan of survey required;
b). where applicable, reinstate the subject property to a condition that existed prior to
construction;
c). pay $2,500.00 (HST inclusive) the legal costs incurred by Dexter Construction
Company Limited to finalize the transaction; and
d). the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign any documents
required to formalize this transaction.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.10 Construction d'une nouvelle conduite d'eau et acquisition d'une emprise
relativement à la construction sur la promenade Dexter
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, The City of Saint John acquière, aux fins de services municipaux, l'emprise
municipale sur une parcelle de terrain d'environ 1 812 mètres carrés, portant le
NID 408831, appartenant à Dexter Construction Company Limited, pour la somme de
5 $ le mètre carré, TVH en sus, le cas échéant, comme le montre de manière générale
le croquis présenté. En vertu de ladite transaction, la ville convient de respecter les
modalités prévues ci-dessous, comme suit :
a) préparer et payer les plans d'arpentage requis;
b) le cas échéant, rétablir ladite propriété dans des conditions semblables à celles qui
prévalaient avant l'aménagement;
c) acquitter les honoraires juridiques, jusqu'à concurrence de 2 500 $ (TVH en sus)
engagés par Dexter Construction Company Limited afin de conclure ladite transaction;
et
d) autoriser le maire et le greffier communal à signer toute documentation requise afin
de conclure ladite transaction.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.11 Project Change in Leisure Services Capital Program
On motion of Councillor Titus
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that the report from the City Manager
regarding a project change in the Leisure Services Capital Program, be received for
information.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.11 Changement de projet dans le programme d'immobilisations des Services
des loisirs
Proposition du conseiller Titus
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que le rapport du directeur général
concernant un changement de projet dans le programme d'immobilisations des Services
des loisirs soit accepté à titre informatif.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
92-167
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
12.12 Land for Public Purposes Trust Fund Application
On motion of Councillor White
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that as recommended by the City
Manager, Common Council, under the existing policy, approve a grant of $5,000. to St.
Rose School, provided written permission is given by the School District to enable this
playground to be open for the use of the public at all times.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.12 Demande en vertu du fonds en fiducie visant les terrains d'utilité publique
Proposition du conseiller White
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le directeur
général, le conseil communal, en vertu de la politique en vigueur, approuve une
subvention de l'ordre de 5 000 $ à l'école St. Rose, pourvu que le district scolaire ait
donné une autorisation écrite afin de permettre que ce terrain de jeux soit ouvert au
public en tout temps.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.13(a) and 12.13(b) Items Added to the Agenda
On motion of Councillor Tait
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that items 12.13(a) and 12.13(b) be
added to the agenda.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.13(a) Agreement - Red Head Secondary Access Road
Sierra Supplies Ltd. Property
On motion of Councillor Tait
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that The City of Saint John acquire the
fee simple interest in a 1.849 hectare +/- portion of PID Number 55172050, as per the
submitted plan, from Sierra Supplies Ltd., pursuant to the terms and conditions
contained in the submitted agreement; and further that the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute any document required to finalize this transaction.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.13(b) Red Head Secondary Access Road
Notice of Intention to Expropriate (Objection Withdrawn)
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor McGuire
RESOLVED that
WHEREAS Common Council, by resolution dated November 7, 2005, authorized the
commencement of expropriation proceedings and the filing with the Expropriations
Advisory Officer Notice of Intention to Expropriate the lands and premises hereinafter
described;
AND WHEREAS Notice of Intention to Expropriate the hereinafter described lands and
premises was filed with the Expropriations Advisory Officer on February 1, 2006;
AND WHEREAS Notice of Objection to the proposed expropriation was filed with the
Expropriations Advisory Officer within the time prescribed by statute and was
subsequently withdrawn;
AND WHEREAS Common Council wishes to confirm the Notice of Intention to
Expropriate;
92-168
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Common Council does hereby confirm the
Notice of Intention to Expropriate and does hereby authorize the expropriation of the
lands and premises described as Parcel 06-05 (PID 55172050) and the registering of
Notice of expropriation of the lands and premises hereinbefore described in the Office of
the Registrar of Deeds in and for the County of Saint John/Land Titles Office New
Brunswick, as the case may be;
WHEREAS Common Council has by resolution immediately preceding these presents
authorized the expropriation of certain lands and premises;
AND WHEREAS Section 22(1) of the Expropriation Act, Chapter E-14 of the Revised
Statutes of New Brunswick 1973 as amended, allows an Expropriating Authority to take
physical possession of expropriated lands and premises and occupation as an owner as
of the date of registration of the Notice of Expropriation, if at that time no owner is in
occupation of the land;
AND WHEREAS the following lands and premises Parcel 06-05 (PID 55172050) are not
occupied by the owners;
NOW THEREFORE Common Council does hereby authorize the taking of physical
possession by The City of Saint John, the Expropriating Authority, of the lands and
premises Parcel 06-05 (PID 55172050) on the date of registration of the Notice of
Expropriation.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
12.13a) et 12.13b) Points ajoutés à l'ordre du jour
Proposition du conseiller Tait
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU que les points 12.13a) et 12.13b) soient
ajoutés à l'ordre du jour.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.13a) Entente – Voie d'accès secondaire Red Head à la propriété Sierra
Supplies Ltd.
Proposition du conseiller Tait
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que The City of Saint John acquière
l'intérêt en fief simple d'une partie du terrain portant le NID 55172050, d'une superficie
de 1,849 hectares, comme l'indique le plan présenté, de Sierra Supplies Ltd., sous
réserve des modalités et conditions que renferme l'entente présentée; et que le maire et
le greffier communal soient autorisés à signer tous les documents nécessaires pour
mener à bonne fin cette transaction.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
12.13b) Réglementation de l'accès à la voie secondaire Red Head – Avis
d'intention d'exproprier (objection retirée)
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller McGuire
RÉSOLU que
ATTENDU QUE le conseil communal, par résolution datée du 7 novembre 2005,
autorisait le début des procédures d'expropriation et le dépôt auprès du commissaire
consultatif de l'expropriation des avis d'intention d'exproprier les biens-fonds décrits ci-
après;
ET ATTENDU QUE les avis d'intention d'exproprier les biens-fonds décrits ci-après ont
été déposés auprès du commissaire consultatif de l'expropriation le 1er février 2006;
ET ATTENDU QUE des avis d'opposition à l'encontre des expropriations proposées ont
été déposés auprès du commissaire consultatif de l'expropriation dans les délais
prescrits par la loi et qu'ils ont été retirés par la suite;
92-169
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
ET ATTENDU QUE le conseil communal désire confirmer les avis d'intention
d'exproprier;
POUR CES MOTIFS, IL EST RÉSOLU que le conseil communal confirme, aux
présentes, les avis d'intention d'exproprier et autorise, aux présentes, l'expropriation des
biens-fonds décrits comme étant les parcelles 06-05 (NID 55172050), ainsi que
l'enregistrement des avis d'expropriation des biens-fonds décrits précédemment au
bureau du conservateur des titres pour le comté de Saint John ou au bureau
d'enregistrement de titres de biens-fonds du Nouveau-Brunswick, selon le cas.
ATTENDU que le conseil communal a pris la résolution précédant immédiatement les
présentes d'autoriser l'expropriation de certains biens-fonds;
ET ATTENDU que le paragraphe 22(1) de la Loi sur l'expropriation, chapitre E-14 des
Lois révisées du Nouveau-Brunswick de 1973,et modifications afférentes, permet au
détenteur du pouvoir d'expropriation de prendre possession physique des biens-fonds à
titre de propriétaire à compter de la date d'enregistrement de l'avis d'expropriation si, à
cette date, aucun propriétaire n'occupe le bien-fonds;
ET ATTENDU QUE le bien-fonds suivant, soit la parcelle 06-05 (NID 55172050), n'est
pas occupé par les propriétaires;
POUR CES MOTIFS, le conseil communal autorise, aux présentes, la prise de
possession physique du bien-fonds suivant, soit la parcelle 06-05 (NID 55172050), par
The City of Saint John, détentrice du pouvoir d'expropriation, à compter de la date
d'enregistrement de l'avis d'expropriation.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
13. Committee Reports
13.1 Environment Committee - Environment Awards
On motion of Councillor Court
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that the letter from the Saint John
Environment Committee requesting that the public be invited to submit nominations of
individuals, groups, schools and businesses who in the past year have made a
significant contribution to the enhancement of the environment of the City of Saint John,
be received for information; and the presentation of awards be scheduled for the Council
meeting of June 5, 2006.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
13. Rapports déposés par les comités
13.1 Comité sur l'environnement relativement aux prix pour l'environnement
Proposition du conseiller Court
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU que la lettre du Comité sur
l'environnement de Saint John demandant que le public soit invité à présenter des
nominations de personnes, groupes, écoles et entreprises qui, au cours de la dernière
année, ont contribué de façon significative à l'amélioration de l'environnement de The
City of Saint John, soit acceptée à titre informatif; et que la présentation des prix soit
inscrite à l'ordre du jour de la réunion du conseil du 5 juin 2006.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
13.2 Committee of the Whole Report - Nominating Committee
On motion of Mayor McFarlane
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that as recommended by the
Nominating Committee, Wayne Power be nominated to the Saint John Airport Board of
Directors for a term of three years ending May, 2009; Scott Wilson be appointed to the
Planning Advisory Committee for a term of three years ending January 1, 2009; and Jay
Reid be appointed to the Lord Beaverbrook Rink Commission for a term of three years
ending April 10, 2009.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
92-170
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
13.2 Rapport du comité plénier relativement au Comité des candidatures
Proposition du maire McFarlane
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU que, comme le recommande le Comité
des candidatures, Wayne Power soit nommé pour siéger au conseil d'administration de
la Saint John Airport Inc. pour une période de trois ans, se terminant en mai 2009; Scott
Wilson soit nommé pour siéger au Comité consultatif d'urbanisme pour une durée de
trois ans se terminant le 1er janvier 2009 ; et Jay Reid soit nommé pour siéger à la
commission de la patinoire Lord Beaverbrook pour une durée de trois ans se terminant
le 10 avril 2009.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
14. Consideration of Issues Separated from Consent Agenda
14.1 Request for financial support - Jacob Kilpatrick, Reds Juvenile boys
Volleyball Team
On motion of Councillor Ferguson
Seconded by Councillor Farren
RESOLVED that the letter from Jacob Kilpatrick, of
the Reds Juvenile Boys Volleyball Team, requesting financial support and suggesting
that the City create a policy supporting young athletes financially, be referred to the City
Manager.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
14. Étude des sujets écartés des questions soumises à l'approbation du
conseil
14.1 Demande de soutien financier – Jacob Kilpatrick, équipe de volley-ball
junior Reds (accepter à titre informatif)
Proposition du conseiller Ferguson
Appuyée par le conseiller Farren
RÉSOLU que la lettre de Jacob Kilpatrick, équipe
de volley-ball junior Reds, demandant un soutien financier et proposant que la Ville
établisse une politique en vue d'appuyer financièrement les jeunes athlètes, soit
soumise au directeur général.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
15. General Correspondence
15.1 Thomas Galbraith Request for Jack Kyle Memorial Ball Field
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor Ferguson
RESOLVED that the letter from Thomas Galbraith
requesting that the North End Little League ball field behind Centennial School be
renamed The Jack Kyle Memorial Field, be referred to the City Manager.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
15. Correspondance générale
15.1 Demande de Thomas Galbraith relativement au terrain de balle Jack Kyle
Memorial
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller Ferguson
RÉSOLU que la lettre de Thomas Galbraith
demandant que le terrain de balle de la North End Little League (petite ligue du quartier
nord) en arrière de l'école Centennial soit renommé The Jack Kyle Memorial Field, soit
soumise au directeur général.
92-171
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
15.2 Eric Teed - Honourary Positions
On motion of Councillor Tait
Seconded by Councillor White
RESOLVED that the letter from Eric Teed
requesting that consideration be given to handing out Honourary Charter Official
appointments on May 18, the City's birthday, be received for information.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
15.2 Eric Teed - postes honoraires
Proposition du conseiller Tait
Appuyée par le conseiller White
RÉSOLU que la lettre de Eric Teed demandant
qu'on examine la possibilité de procéder à des nominations honoraires officielles en
vertu de la Charte le 18 mai, date d'anniversaire de la ville, soit acceptée à titre
informatif.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
15.3 NB Historical Society - "One Tonne Challenge" - Loyalist House
On motion of Councillor Farren
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that the letter from the NB Historical
Society which was tabled on March 13, 2006 be lifted.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
On motion of Councillor Chang
Seconded by Councillor Titus
RESOLVED that the letter from NB Historical
Society regarding the "One Tonne Challenge" be received for information.
Question being taken, the motion was carried.
15.3 New Brunswick Historical Society – « Défi d'une tonne » - Maison loyaliste
Proposition du conseiller Farren
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU que la lettre de la New Brunswick
Historical Society, reportée lors de la réunion du 13 mars 2006, soit soumise aux fins de
discussion.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
Proposition du conseiller Chang
Appuyée par le conseiller Titus
RÉSOLU que la lettre de la New Brunswick
Historical Society relative au « Défi d'une tonne », soit acceptée à titre informatif.
À l'issue du vote, la proposition est adoptée.
16. Adjournment
The Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at 12:40 a.m.
16. Clôture de la réunion
Le maire déclare que la séance est levée à 0 h 40.
92-172
COMMON COUNCIL/CONSEIL COMMUNAL
APRIL 10, 2006/LE 10 AVRIL 2006
Assistant Common Clerk/greffière communale adjointe
M & C –2006-98
April 21, 2006
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Amending Resolution for Sale of 14 Castle Street
BACKGROUND:
In December 2005, Common Council resolved to sell the fee simple absolute
interest in PID Number 14506, also known as civic #14 Castle Street to the
Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation (AHSC), on or before April 30, 2006.
The proposed closing date noted above cannot be met as the Municipal Plan
Amendment and Rezoning application is just now being considered by Common
Council. It would be appropriate to extend the closing date for an additional two
(2) months, as noted below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Common Council amend its resolution contained in M&C 2005-357, by
deleting “That The City of Saint John sell the fee simple absolute interest in PID
14506 to the Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation (AHSC) on or before April 30,
2006”…; and replace with “That The City of Saint John sell the fee simple
absolute interest in PID 14506 to the Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation
(AHSC) on or before June 30, 2006”.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim R. Baird, MCIP Terrence Totten, F.C.A.
Commissioner City Manager
Planning and Development
CL/c
M & C – 2006 – 97
April 20, 2006
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane and
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Public Hearing Date
725 Westmorland Road
BACKGROUND:
As provided in Common Council’s resolution of August 3, 2004, this report
indicates the Rezoning and Section 39 applications received and recommends an
appropriate public hearing date.
The full applications are available in the Common Clerk’s office and will form
part of the documentation presented at the Public Hearing.
The following application has been received.
Name of Location Existing Proposed Reason
Applicant Zone Zone
Richard Burbridge 725 West- “RS-1” “R-2” & To permit a
morland Rd. “RM-1” subdivision for
two-family and
multiple
dwellings
RECOMMENDATION:
That Common Council schedule the Public Hearing for the rezoning application
of Richard Burbridge., 725 Westmorland Road, for Tuesday, May 23, 2006 at
7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim R. Baird, MCIP Terrence Totten, F.C.A.
Commissioner City Manager
Planning and Development
AHSC Department of Emergency Medical Services
Briefing Note
TO:
Mayor and Council
City of Saint John
COPY TO:
AHSC Senior Executive
Response Required New
No Response Required Replacement (discard previous)
Update (add to previous)
TOPIC:
· Sudden Cardiac Arrest in Saint John
BACKGROUND:
· Sudden cardiac arrest is the unexpected onset of disorganized electrical activity in the
heart muscle. Sudden cardiac arrest results in death unless treated immediately.
· Sudden cardiac arrest can happen anytime, anywhere, to anyone. Those with existing
heart disease are at increased risk.
· Sudden cardiac arrest strikes over 50 residents of Saint John every year. Some of those
incidents occur in public places. Without immediate treatment, these people die.
· Defibrillation is the only effective treatment to terminate the chaotic cardiac electrical
activity typical of sudden cardiac arrest patients. Additional care offered by Paramedics is
important, but not as important as early defibrillation.
· Time is critical: The probability of defibrillation being successful decreases the longer it
takes to deliver the treatment. If defibrillation can be completed within 4 minutes of a
cardiac arrest occurring, at least 60% of victims survive. For every minute thereafter,
survival decrease by 10%. If defibrillation is delayed to over 9 minutes after cardiac arrest
occurs, the chances of survival are less than 10%
· Immediate application of CPR can extend these timelines modestly, but defibrillation is
still required to save the patient.
· The Department of Emergency Medical Services at AHSC has optimized response
capacity for cardiac arrest patients, including:
· Equipping every EMS unit AED, including administrative vehicles and Bike
Patrol Paramedic units.
· Deploying EMS units in the community to optimize response time
· Creating shift schedules that ensure continued community coverage during
shift change
· Ensuring that the Saint John Public Safety Communications Centre provides
caller with instructions in CPR and AED use when appropriate
· Providing training, authority and quality management in the delivery of CPR and
AED by every front line fire crew with the Saint John Fire Department
· Together, these strategies have improved cardiac arrest survival in Saint John/KV to 12%
in 2005 – well over the national urban range of 4.3-9.0%.
· Notwithstanding the above, the Department of Emergency Medical Services is interested
in further improving cardiac arrest survival for citizens of Saint John.
· Automatic External Defibrillators (AEDs) are commercially available, are easy to use and
require minimal maintenance for safe operation. The price of AEDs ranges from
approximately $1500 to $5000 per device.
· Several local organizations are expressing interest in purchasing AEDs in their
workplaces, and training their staff in both CPR and AED application.
· As a result of the above, and together with a Steering Committee with broad community
representation, the Department is providing logistical assistance to local businesses and
organizations interested in providing CPR and AED. Our goal is to improve cardiac arrest
survival through strategic placement of AEDs (with personnel trained and authorized to
use them) throughout the community.
· There is no Canadian or New Brunswick legislation to restrict AED use. There is also no
history of legal action taken against those who have performed CPR and AED on cardiac
arrest patients. That said, CPR and AED is quickly being accepted as a standard of care,
particularly in the United States, where organizations are being questioned for not having
CPR and AED capacity.
ISSUE/RISK:
· Strategic placement of AEDs, together with personnel trained and authorized to use them,
is indicated to further enhance cardiac arrest in Saint John.
ADVICE AND/OR RECOMMENDATION(S):
· Consider formal endorsement of AHSC’s Department of Emergency Medical Services
Public Access Defibrillation Program as a means of enhancing cardiac arrest survival in
Saint John.
· Consider acquisition and strategic placement of AEDs in City of Saint John public
venues, together with resources required to train affected City of Saint John Departments
in CPR and AED application.
DOCUMENT
PREPARED BY
Ian Watson
Region Manager, EMS
DATE: April 19, 2006
CONTACT PERSON
WITHIN
DEPARTMENT
Ian Watson
PHONE
#:
648-7007
ALTERNATE
Mary Lou Price
PHONE
648-7227
CONTACT PERSON PAD Program Coordinator #:
Sudden Cardiac Arrest in Saint John…
How can we save more lives?
Presented by:
Department of Emergency Medical Services
Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation
April 24, 2006
Sudden Cardiac Arrest
•Ventricular Fibrillation (VF) is the most frequent
initial rhythm in witnessed sudden cardiac
arrest, affecting 85% of all sudden cardiac arrest
victims
•VF occurs when the heart muscle fails to pump
blood in an organized way –acting instead like
a “bag of worms”. The victim collapses, is not
breathing and does not have a pulse
•It can happen anytime, anywhere, to anyone
Sudden Cardiac Arrest:
Who is at greatest risk?
•Previous heart attack
•Previous sudden cardiac arrest
•Fast rhythm in lower portion of heart
•Family history of sudden cardiac arrest
•Heart failure
Where Does Sudden
Cardiac Arrest Occur?
•Single Residence Dwelling
•Multi-Residence Building
•Nursing Home
•Shopping Mall
•Street/Road/Highway
•Recreation Facility
•Office Building
What About CPR?
•The survival rate from CPR alone is 0-2%
•CPR will buy you time to defibrillation, but it will
rarely reverse a sudden cardiac arrest
•“Rather than independently saving lives, CPR
helps early defibrillation succeed…”
Defibrillation is the only
effective treatment of
VF, reorganizing the
chaotic electrical
activity of heart
What About Defibrillation?
What is an AED?
An AED is an Automated External Defibrillator:
•Automatically analyzes the patients heart
rhythm
•Determines whether a shock is needed
•Uses voice and screen prompts to guide the
rescuer through the process
Advantages of AEDs
•Reduces time to treatment
•Eliminates need to recognize rhythms
•Personnel with minimal training can defibrillate
•Makes early defibrillation practical and
achievable
Current AED Users
Courtney Bay Generating Station
AHSC Regional EMS Bike Patrol
Saint John Fire Department
Putting it all together:
The Chain of Survival
How Important is Time?
•The probability of successful defibrillation
decreases the longer AED access to the victim
is delayed.
•VF can be successfully treated at least 60% of
the time if defibrillation is delivered within 4
minutes
•After 4 minutes, every minute of delay reduces
the chance of survival by about 10%
Resuscitation Success vs. Time
Factors Influencing
Response Time
•Traffic and weather delays
•Rural locations
•Security buildings (e.g. locked lobby
apartments)
•Elevators/stairs
•Locating the correct address
•Locating the patient in large or crowded facilities
What’s Been Done So Far??
Multi-fronted effort at system optimization:
•Integrated 911 call-taking and dispatching
•Pre-alert dispatching of EMS units
•AEDsin EMS supervisory and admin. vehicles
•Zone deployment for EMS units
•Co-response programs with SJFD and RRFD
What About a Public Access
Defibrillation (PAD) Program?
•PAD programs involve the strategic placement
of AEDs-and personnel trained to use them -in
the community
•PAD programs have proven to save lives in
other communities
•There is no legislative restriction from doing so
in New Brunswick
The Value of Public Access
Defibrillation (PAD) Programs
•Significantly strengthens the Chain of Survival
•Reduces impact of public safety agency delay
•Involves the community in caring for each other
Public Access Defibrillation
Communities in Canada
•Vancouver
•Edmonton
•Ottawa
•Calgary
•Prince Albert
•Toronto
•Mississauga
•Windsor
•Saskatoon
•Moose Jaw
•Regina
Saint John?
Our Vision
To save more victims of sudden cardiac
arrest through comprehensive and
sustained support of strategic, evidence-
based placement of Automatic External
Defibrillators (AEDs) -and personnel
trained to use them -within the City of Saint
John and the Towns of Rothesay,
Quispamsisand Grand Bay-Westfield.
OPEN SESSION
April 21, 2006
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Proposed Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning
14 Castle Street (& 25-39 Golding Street)
On March 13, 2006 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning
Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee
considered the attached report at its April 18, 2006 meeting.
Mr. David Roberts of Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation appeared before the
Committee in support of the application and staff recommendation. There were
no other presentations made at the meeting, but two (2) letters of support were
received concerning this matter.
After considering the presentation and staff report, the Committee resolved to
adopt the staff recommendation, which is set-out below for your convenience.
The Committee also granted the requested variances relating to the manner in
which the parking lot would be developed (please refer to the attached report).
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That Common Council redesignate on Schedule 2-C of the Municipal
Development Plan a parcel of land with an area of approximately 440
square metres, located at 14 Castle Street, also identified as being PID
Number 00014506, from Medium Density Residential to Major
Community Facilities.
2. That Common Council rezone the same parcel of land from “RM-1”
Three Storey Multiple Residential to “IL-2” Major Institutional.
3. That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning
Act, the proposed development of the parcel of land located at 14 Castle
Street, having an area of approximately 440 square metres, also identified
as being PID Number 00014506, be limited to the use of a parking lot, and
that the land and any structure thereon must be developed and used in
conformity with the proposal and condition identified herein.
Planning Advisory Committee Page 2
April 21, 2006
Respectfully submitted,
Philip Hovey
Chairman
MRO
Attachments
Project No. 06-074
DATE: APRIL 13, 2006
TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
FOR: MEETING OF APRIL 18, 2006
Mark O'Hearn
Planning Officer
SUBJECT:
Name of Applicant: Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation
Name of Owner: St. Joseph’s Hospital and the City of Saint John
Location: 14 Castle Street & 25-39 Golding Street
PID: 00014506, 00014423, 00014431, 00014449, 00015982,
and 00014498
Municipal Plan: Existing: Major Community Facilities and
Medium Density Residential
Proposed: Major Community Facilities
Zoning: Existing: “IL-2” Major Institutional and “RM-1”
Three Storey Multiple Residential
Proposed: “IL-2” Major Institutional
Proposal: To develop a surface parking lot for the St. Joseph’s
Hospital.
Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation Page 2
14 Castle Street & 25-39 Golding Street April 13, 2006
Type of Application: Municipal Development Plan Amendment, Rezoning and
Variances that would:
(a) Reduce the required front yard landscaping depth
from 15 metres to 1.5 metres and no landscaping;
(b) Reduce the minimum parking stall width from 2.7
metres to 2.6 metres; and
(c) Not require any trees, shrubs or hedges to be
incorporated into the landscaping along the eastern
property boundary.
JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE:
The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to
Common Council concerning proposed amendments to the Municipal Plan and Zoning By-law.
Common Council will consider the Committee’s recommendation at a Public Hearing on
Monday, April 24, 2006.
The Act also authorizes the Committee to grant reasonable variances from the requirements of the
Zoning By-law. Conditions can be imposed by the Committee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE:
1. That Common Council redesignate on Schedule 2-C of the Municipal Development Plan a
parcel of land with an area of approximately 440 square metres, located at 14 Castle
Street, also identified as being PID Number 00014506, from Medium Density Residential
to Major Community Facilities.
2. That Common Council rezone the same parcel of land from “RM-1” Three Storey
Multiple Residential to “IL-2” Major Institutional.
3. That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act, the
proposed development of the parcel of land located at 14 Castle Street, having an area of
approximately 440 square metres, also identified as being PID Number 00014506, be
limited to the use of a parking lot, and that the land and any structure thereon must be
developed and used in conformity with the proposal and condition identified herein.
Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation Page 3
14 Castle Street & 25-39 Golding Street April 13, 2006
4. That the Planning Advisory Committee grant the following variances from the
requirements of the Zoning By-law for the proposed parking lot at 14 Castle Street &
25-39 Golding Street, as generally illustrated on the submitted site plan, that would:
(a) Reduce the required front yard landscaping depth from 15 metres to 1.5 metres
along Golding Street and no landscaping along Castle Street;
(b) Reduce the minimum parking stall width from 2.7 metres to 2.6 metres; and
(c) Not require any trees, shrubs or hedges to be incorporated into the landscaping
along the eastern property boundary.
BACKGROUND:
On October 25, 1994 the Planning Advisory Committee favourably considered a rezoning
application by proponents of the St. Joseph’s Hospital to construct a parking lot at 25-39 Golding
Street (including 18 Castle Street). At the time these five (5) parcels of land were zoned “RM-1”
Three Storey Multiple Residential, and in order to allow for the development of a parking lot for
the hospital had to be rezoned to “IL-2” Major Institutional. On November 7, 1994 Common
Council rezoned the property as requested, but did impose a Section 39 condition limiting the use
of the area to a parking lot.
INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES:
Municipal Operations and Engineering has no objection to the construction of a parking lot.
The site surface drainage must be properly directed into the municipal storm sewer system.
Building and Technical Services has no concerns with regards to this proposal.
Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline has been advised of this development.
ANALYSIS:
The subject area is comprised of six (6) parcels of land situated between Golding Street and
Castle Street. One of these parcels (PID No. 00014506) is owned by the City of Saint John. This
parcel is immediately adjacent to Castle Street, and is presently zoned “RM-1” Three Storey
Multiple Residential. The remainder of the site is owned by the St. Joseph’s Hospital, and was
rezoned to “IL-2” Major Institutional in 1994 in order to construct a parking lot (see
Background section of this report).
Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation Page 4
14 Castle Street & 25-39 Golding Street April 13, 2006
Municipal Plan Amendment and Rezoning
The applicant, Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation, is now seeking permission to construct a
new parking lot over the entire area. Common Council has agreed to sell the City-owned parcel
subject to rezoning approval. In order to include this City-owned parcel as part of the anticipated
parking lot it must be redesignated from Medium Density Residential to Major Community
Facilities on Schedule 2-C of the Municipal Development Plan. In addition, this parcel of land
must also be rezoned from “RM-1” Three Storey Multiple Residential to “IL-2” Major
Institutional.
There are a number of parking lots developed on the St. Joseph’s Hospital site and surrounding
properties. In fact, the subject site is presently being informally used by the public. The
proponent (Saint John Parking Commission) would develop the existing gravel area into a paved
parking lot with concrete curbing, landscaping and necessary drainage facilities. Their consultant
has submitted a site plan illustrating the manner that this parking lot would be developed.
Parking Lot Variances
While consistent with the long-existing parking facilities in the general area, the applicant is
seeking permission to decrease the parking stall width standard from 2.7 metres (8.9 feet) to 2.6
metres (8.5 feet). The parking aisles will still satisfy the Zoning By-law requirement width of 7.5
metres (25 feet), providing sufficient area for manoeuvrability of vehicles.
The applicant is also proposing only a 1.5-metre (5-foot) wide landscaping area along Golding
Street. While the By-law would normally require 15 metres (49 feet), the other parking lots in the
area have no front yard landscaping, including the residential properties along the street. There
would also be no landscaping provided at the rear (Castle Street). However, while the street
right-of-way abuts the site this portion is actually undeveloped and consists of a sloped area
comprised of rock and grass with a width of approximately 13 metres (43 feet).
Finally, the Zoning By-law requires a 1.5-metre (5-foot) wide area of landscaping along the side
property boundary adjacent to the residential properties to the east. While the design provides for
twice that amount (3 metres or 10 feet), because of the size of the parking lot the By-law also
requires trees, shrubs or hedges to be incorporated into the landscaping in order to interfere with
the shinning of headlights onto the immediately adjacent residential property.
The consultant has indicated that the parking lot would be used in the daytime by the public, and
that this will not be an issue in this particular case. Also, it was felt by the consultant that a
spacious landscaped area would be of more benefit in order to preserve air and light space for the
adjacent property than if taller trees and shrubs (or fencing) was installed. There is only one
window situated low enough that could be affected by headlights. Should the Committee not be
willing to grant this variance then the applicant would plant the necessary trees and/or shrubs.
Atlantic Health Sciences Corporation Page 5
14 Castle Street & 25-39 Golding Street April 13, 2006
The requested Municipal Plan amendment and rezoning are consistent with the relevant Plan
policies, and is in conformity to the rezoning approval granted by the City back in 1994 for the
surrounding parcels of land as a parking lot. Therefore, approval of the Plan amendment and
rezoning can be recommended. To be consistent with the condition imposed on the other parcels
of land, a Section 39 condition has been recommended limiting the use of the City-owned parcel
to a parking lot. The requested variances relating to the design of the parking lot are considered
reasonable and are also recommended for approval.
MRO
Project No. 06-074
April 21, 2006
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Proposed Rezoning
125 Daniel Avenue
On March 27, 2006 Common Council referred the above matter to the Planning
Advisory Committee for a report and recommendation. The Committee
considered the attached report at its April 18, 2006 meeting.
Mr. Bruce Dowd and Ms. Melanie Dowd attended the meeting on behalf of the
applicant, Spectrum Enterprises Ltd. Mr. Rick Turner of Hughes Surveys &
Consultants Inc. also attended the meeting on behalf of the applicant. They
described the proposed development and expressed agreement with the staff
recommendation.
Ms. Susan Isaacs-Lubin, a Millidgeville resident and potential owner of one of the
proposed garden homes, and Ms. Lisa Hovey, 54 Westminster Court, both spoke
in favour of the proposal.
Messrs. Tom Higgins, 155 Daniel Avenue, Bill Neal, 151 Daniel Avenue, and
Mike Jones, 91 Westminster Court, appeared before the Committee in opposition
to the proposed rezoning. They indicated that they would prefer to see the site
developed with one-family dwellings, and expressed concerns about the density
of the proposal, traffic impact, possible adverse effect on property values and
compatibility of the development with the surrounding neighbourhood. They also
expressecd the opinion that Millidgeville already has an adequate number of
garden homes, townhouses, senior citizens’ homes and small single-storey
bungalows and that any additional development of this type should be directed to
the Boars’ Head Road and Woodward Avenue area. The Committee also
received seven letters and a 76-name petition against the proposal (copies
attached).
In response to a suggestion that the proposed one-family unit be moved from the
intersection of Daniel Avenue and MacAuley Avenue to the opposite side of the
site (i.e. adjacent to the existing one-family lot at 151 Daniel Avenue), the
applicants indicated that the proposal could be modified in this manner; however,
a variance would be required to permit a reduced yard of 6.35 metres (20.8 feet)
Planning Advisory Committee Page 2
April 21, 2006
on MacAuley Avenue, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum yard of
7.5 metres (24.6 feet).
After considering the report, presentations, letters and petition, the Committee
decided to recommend approval of the rezoning, subject to a Section 39 condition
requiring that the use of the lot adjacent to 151 Daniel Avenue be restricted to a
one-family dwelling. The Committee also granted the resulting necessary
variance to permit a 6.35-metre (20.8-foot) yard on MacAuley Avenue. It should
be noted that, due to the change in location of the proposed one-family lot, the
original requested variance for a reduced lot width for the corner lot is no longer
necessary.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land located at 125 Daniel Avenue,
having an area of approximately 5750 square metres, also identified as being
PID No. 55176457, from “R-1A” One Family Residential to “R-2” One and
Two Family Residential.
2. That, pursuant to the provisions of Section 39 of the Community Planning Act,
the proposed development of a parcel of land having an area of approximately
5750 square metres, also identified as being PID No. 55176457, with a one-
and two-family garden home development be subject to the condition that the
use of the proposed lot that abuts the property at 151 Daniel Avenue (PID No.
55054258) is restricted to a one-family dwelling, and further that upon the
rezoning the area, the land and any building or structure thereon must be
developed and used in conformity with the proposal and condition identified
herein.
Respectfully submitted,
Philip Hovey
Chairman
RGP/r
Attachments
Project No. 06-085
DATE: APRIL 13, 2006
TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
FOR: MEETING OF APRIL 18, 2006
Randall G. Pollock, MCIP
Planner
SUBJECT:
Name of Applicant: Spectrum Enterprises Ltd.
Name of Owner: Spectrum Enterprises Ltd.
Location: 125 Daniel Avenue
PID: 55176457
Municipal Plan: Low Density Residential
Millidgeville Secondary Plan: Development Area A – Millidgeville Core
Zoning: Existing: “R-1A” One Family Residential
Proposed: “R-2” One and Two Family Residential
Proposal: To develop the subject site with one-family and two-family
garden homes
Type of Application: 1. Rezoning
2. Variance to permit the proposed lot at the
intersection of Daniel Avenue and MacAuley
Avenue to have a lot width of 18.12 metres (59.4
Spectrum Enterprises Ltd. Page 2
125 Daniel Avenue April 13, 2006
feet), whereas the Zoning By-law requires a
minimum lot width of 21 metres (68.9 feet) for a
corner lot.
JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE:
The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to
Common Council concerning proposed amendments to the Zoning By-law. Common Council will
consider the Committee’s recommendation at a public hearing on Monday, April 24, 2006.
The Act also authorizes the Committee to grant reasonable variances from the requirements of the
Zoning By-law. Conditions can be imposed by the Committee.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE:
1. That Common Council rezone a parcel of land located at 125 Daniel Avenue, having an area
of approximately 5750 square metres, also identified as being PID No. 55176457, from “R-
1A” One Family Residential to “R-2” One and Two Family Residential.
2. That the Planning Advisory Committee grant the requested variance to permit the proposed
lot at the intersection of Daniel Avenue and MacAuley Avenue to have a minimum lot width
of 18.12 metres (59.4 feet).
BACKGROUND:
On April 7, 2003 Common Council rezoned the area immediately to the south of the subject site
to “R-1A” One Family Residential and “R-2” One and Two Family Residential, in order to permit
the applicant’s proposal to develop an approximately 23-lot subdivision for one and two-family
dwellings on an extension of MacAuley Avenue. Approval of the proposal had been
recommended by the Planning Advisory Committee at its meeting on March 11, 2003. As
recommended by the Committee, Council also assented to the subdivision plan with respect to the
public street extension, land for public purposes (including a cash-in-lieu dedication to be required
at the time of subdivision of the subject site) and the required easements. This subdivision is now
being developed.
At the same time, Common Council tabled third reading and adoption of a proposed rezoning of
the subject site to “TH” Townhouse, pending submission by the applicant of more detailed
development plans for the Committee’s and Council’s review and, ultimately, Council’s approval
(the Committee had recommended that the rezoning be approved subject to a Section 39
condition requiring the Committee’s review and approval of detailed plans). However, the
Spectrum Enterprises Ltd. Page 3
125 Daniel Avenue April 13, 2006
applicant did not submit the requested plans and the statutory six-month time limit for giving third
reading subsequently expired.
INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES:
Municipal Operations and Engineering has no objection to the proposal.
Building and Technical Services has no objection to the proposal.
Saint John Transit advises that this area is well served by the Millidgeville bus route. The route
travels through the intersection of Daniel Avenue and Black Street in close proximity to this
location.
Saint John Energy has no objection and advises that it has overhead and underground single
phase facilities in the area. If an extension of facilities is required this will be at the owner’s
expense.
Aliant Telecom has no issues at this time with the proposal. Any facilities issues will be discussed
with the developer and coordinated jointly with Saint John Energy.
Rogers has submitted no comments.
Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline has no objection to the proposal.
Enbridge Gas N.B. has submitted no comments.
Leisure Services has submitted no comments.
Fire Department has no objection to the application.
School District 8 has submitted no comments.
ANALYSIS:
Site and Neighbourhood
The subject site is a large undeveloped parcel of land located at the intersection of Daniel Avenue
and the new extension of MacAuley Avenue in Millidgeville. The site has a frontage of
approximately 135 metres (443 feet) on Daniel Avenue and approximately 42 metres (138 feet)
on MacAuley, and contains a total area of approximately 5750 square metres (1.42 acres). The
area to the north and west of the subject site consists of a mix of older and newer suburban-style
Spectrum Enterprises Ltd. Page 4
125 Daniel Avenue April 13, 2006
one-family dwellings. As mentioned in the Background, the area to the south of the site is the
applicant’s recently-approved subdivision of one and two-family lots fronting on MacAuley
Avenue. To the east of the site, directly across MacAuley Avenue, is the large property containing
the Millidgeville Community Centre and the M. Gerald Teed Memorial School.
The site includes a 6-metre (20-foot) and a 7.5-metre (24.6 foot) municipal services easement
along its westerly and southerly boundaries, respectively.
Proposal
As noted in the Background, the applicant previously sought rezoning of the subject site to the
“TH” Townhouse zone. The preliminary proposal at that time was to develop a two-family
dwelling and two townhouse blocks of four units and five units, respectively, resulting in a total of
eleven dwelling units.
The present proposal includes the same number of dwelling units but, rather than including
townhouse units, consists of a mix of five two-family dwellings and one one-family dwelling. The
proposed units are one-storey “garden homes” with each unit containing approximately 110
square metres (1,184 square feet) of ground floor living area, plus basement and an attached
single-car garage. Each unit is approximately 9 metres (30 feet) wide. Each building will be
located on a separate lot and each of the semi-detached dwellings will be further subdivided into
“part lots” along the common walls. The proposal is illustrated on the attached site plan and
perspective drawing.
The applicant indicates that the proposed development is designed to provide a high-quality
housing alternative for existing residents of Millidgeville who are seeking to downsize but remain
in their own neighbourhood. According to the applicant, the garden homes are expected to be
valued just below $200,000.
Proposed Rezoning
Under the existing “R-1A” One Family Residential zoning of the site, the applicant would be
permitted to develop up to six lots with one-family dwellings. The applicant’s proposal to
develop semi-detached dwellings requires that the site be rezoned from “R-1A” One Family
Residential to “R-2” One and Two Family Residential.
The subject site and surrounding area are designated Low Density Residential by the City’s
Municipal Development Plan. The Plan’s policies for Low Density Residential areas encourage
the development of a variety of housing types up to an overall maximum neighbourhood density
of 38 units per hectare (15 units per acre). The density of the subject site, considered on its own,
will be approximately 19 units per hectare, or slightly under 8 units per acre. The resulting overall
neighbourhood density will remain well below the Plan’s guidelines.
Spectrum Enterprises Ltd. Page 5
125 Daniel Avenue April 13, 2006
The development of the Millidgeville community is also subject to the policies and development
area guidelines of the Millidgeville Secondary Plan. The subject area lies within Development
Area A: Millidgeville Core. The Plan encourages primarily one-family development with limited
two-family and townhousing in certain areas.
The March 7, 2003 staff report on the previous proposal for a mix of one-family and two-family
lots on MacAuley Avenue, and townhouses on the subject site, included the observation that the
proposed development would be appropriate for this area. With respect to the townhouses
specifically, the report indicated that, while the Secondary Plan favours townhouse development
along Woodward Avenue and Boars Head Road, the development of a small-scale townhouse
project would also be appropriate for this location. It was observed that there are many examples
where townhouse projects have been successfully integrated in close proximity to existing one-
family dwellings. Approval of the previous proposal was supported on this basis.
The present proposal involves only one and two-family dwellings, which is even more compatible
with the surrounding one-family development than the previous townhouse proposal. This should
have no negative impact on the neighbourhood. Approval of the rezoning application is
recommended.
Proposed Variance for Lot Width
The applicant’s proposal can satisfy all of the requirements for the “R-2” One and Two Family
Residential zone except for the proposed 18.12-metre (59.4-foot) lot width for the lot at the
intersection of Daniel Avenue and MacAuley Avenue. The By-law requires an increased width of
21 metres (68.9 feet) for corner lots. The intent of this increased width requirement is to
accommodate what are essentially considered to be two front yards (one on each abutting street).
The minimum front yard setback requirement is 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) from each street. In this
instance, the proposed one-family dwelling on the lot will be able to provide the required yards
and, therefore, the intent of the By-law will be maintained. Approval of the requested variance can
be recommended on this basis.
CONCLUSION:
The proponent has decided not to proceed with the previous proposal to construct a townhouse-
style garden home development on the subject site. Instead, a rezoning to permit one and two-
family garden homes is proposed. The development will be compatible with the surrounding
neighbourhood and will provide a high-quality housing alternative for residents of Millidgeville
who wish to remain in the area but desire a smaller dwelling unit with all amenities on one level.
Approval of the proposed rezoning and related variance can be recommended.
RGP/r
Project No. 06-085
April 21, 2006
Common Council of
The City of Saint John
Your Worship and Councillors:
Re: Noise By-Law
On November 7, 2005 Common Council gave first and second reading to
amendments to the Noise By-Law. Third reading is in order if Council so
wishes. Two changes have been made. The first involves restricting the
persons who may lay Informations to the Common Clerk and to persons who
have been designated by Common Council to do so. The second change
involves, at the request of the By-Law Review Committee, changing the
amount of the proposed minimum fines to $250.00 instead of $200.00.
Section 101 of the Municipalities Act provides that:
“Proceedings for breach of a by-law shall be commenced in the name
of the clerk of the municipality or such other persons as is designated
for that purpose by the council.”
Proceedings are commenced in the Provincial Court of New Brunswick by the
laying of an Information within six months of the commission of the offence.
The Police Force has provided the names of four officers who may be
designated by Common Council to lay Informations for violations of the Noise
By-Law. The following resolution would be in order if Council so wishes:
… / 2
Common Council City Solicitor
April 21, 2006 Page 2
Re: Noise By-Law
Resolved that the Common Clerk J. Patrick Woods, Sergeant Bill
Crowley, Constable Gary Boyle, Constable Kent Atherton, and
Constable Cory Jamieson are hereby designated and authorized to
commence proceedings on behalf of The City of Saint John by laying
Informations in the Provincial Court of New Brunswick with respect to
breaches of the Saint John Noise By-Law. The designation and
authorization of each person shall cease when it is revoked by Common
Council or when the officer ceases to be a member of the Saint John
Police Force, whichever comes first.
Respectfully Submitted,
John L. Nugent
City Solicitor
Attachment
1
BY-LAW NUMBER M-22
A BY-LAW RESPECTING THE
PREVENTION OF EXCESSIVE NOISE
IN THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
ARRÊTÉ Nº M-22
ARRÊTÉ CONCERNANT LA PRÉVENTION
DE BRUIT EXCESSIF DANS
THE CITY OF SAINT JOHN
Be it enacted by the Common Council of
The City of Saint John as follows:
Le conseil communal de The City of Saint
John édicte :
A By-Law of The City of Saint John
entitled “Saint John Noise By-Law” enacted on the
18th day of May, A.D. 2005, is hereby amended as
follows:
Par les présentes, l’arrêté de The City of
Saint John intitulé “Arrêté de Saint John
concernant le bruit” édicté le 18 may 2005 est
modifié comme suit :
1 Section 3 is repealed and the following is
substituted:
3(1) No person shall during the times set out in
subsection 3(3) make a noise which results from an
action listed therein if the noise is clearly audible
on a street and is likely to cause a public nuisance
or otherwise disturb one or more inhabitants of the
City.
3(2) No person shall during the times set out in
subsection 3(3) permit to be made on property
which is owned by him or is leased by him a noise
which results from an action listed therein if the
noise is clearly audible on a street and is likely to
cause a public nuisance or otherwise disturb one or
more inhabitants of the City.
3(3) The actions and times relating to this By-Law
are:
a) The racing of any motor vehicle other than
in a racing event regulated by law, at any
time;
b) The operation of a motor vehicle in such a
way that the tires squeal, at any time;
c) The unnecessary idling or revving of a
motor vehicle engine, at any time;
d) The operation of a motor vehicle horn or
any other warning device, at any time
except where required or authorized by law
or in accordance with good safety
practices;
1 L’article 3 est aborgé et remplacé par ce qui
suit:
3(1) Il est interdit, pendant les heures indiquées au
paragraphe 3(3), d’émettre un ou des sons
découlant d’une des actions énumérées audit
paragraphe 3(3), sons parfaitement audibles dans
une rue et qui causent ou pourraient causer une
nuisance publique ou qui pourraient déranger un ou
plus d’un citoyen de la ville.
3(2) Il est interdit, pendant les heures indiquées au
paragraphe 3(3), au propriétaire ou au locataire
d’une propriété de permettre que soit émis de sa
propriété ou de son loyer un ou des sons découlant
d’une des actions énumérées audit paragraphe 3(3),
sons parfaitement audibles dans une rue et qui
causent ou pourraient causer une nuisance publique
ou qui pourraient déranger un ou plus d’un citoyen
de la ville.
3(3) Les actions et les heures qui s’appliquent au
présent arrêté sont les suivants :
a) à tout moment, faire une course de véhicules à
moteur, sauf dans une compétition régie par la loi;
b) à tout moment, conduire un véhicule à moteur de
façon à faire crisser les pneus;
c) à tout moment, faire tourner inutilement le
moteur d’un véhicule au ralenti ou donner des
coups de gaz;
d) à tout moment, sauf dans les cas où la loi l’exige
ou l’autorise ou conformément aux règles en
matière de sécurité, utiliser l’avertisseur d’un
véhicule à moteur ou un autre dispositif
d’avertissement;
2
e) The operation of any combustion engine or
pneumatic device without an effective
exhaust or intake muffling device in good
working order and in constant operation, at
any time;
f) The operation of any item of construction
equipment without an effective muffling
device in good working order and in
constant operation, at any time;
g) By yelling, shouting, hooting, or
unreasonably loud whistling or singing, at
any time;
h) The operation of domestic outdoor power
tools, between the hours of 9:00 o’clock in
the evening and 7:00 o’clock of the
following morning;
i) The operation of construction equipment,
between the hours of 9:00 o’clock in the
evening and 7:00 o’clock of the following
morning;
j) The operation of a combustion engine
which is used in or is intended for use in a
toy or a model or replica of any device
which model or replica has no function
other than amusement and which is not a
conveyance, between the hours of 7:00
o’clock in the evening and 9:00 o’clock of
the following morning;
k) The detonation of fire works or explosive
devices not used in construction, at any
time;
l) The discharge of fire arms, at any time;
m) The operation of any public address
system, gramophone, radio or other device
or apparatus for reproducing or amplifying
sound, at any time.
e) à tout moment, utiliser un moteur à combustion
ou un dispositif pneumatique non muni d’un
silencieux d’échappement ou d’admission efficace
en bon état de marche et fonctionnant de façon
continue;
f) à tout moment, utiliser des engins de chantier
non munis d’un silencieux efficace en bon état de
marche et fonctionnant de façon continue;
g) à tout moment, crier, huer, siffler ou chanter à
tue-tête;
h) entre 21 heures et 7 heures le lendemain, utiliser
des outils électriques domestiques extérieurs;
i) entre 21 heures et 7 heures le lendemain, utiliser
des engins de chantier;
j) entre 19 heures et 9 heures le lendemain, faire
fonctionner un moteur à combustion utilisé ou
destiné à être utilisé dans un jouet, un modèle ou
une réplique d’un dispositif ne servant pas de
moyen de transport et n’ayant d’autre utilité que
celle de divertir;
k) à tout moment, faire exploser des pièces
d’artifice ou des dispositifs explosifs ne servant pas
à la construction;
l) à tout moment, décharger une arme à feu;
m) à tout moment, utiliser un système de
sonorisation, un tourne-disque, une radio ou un
autre dispositif ou appareil pour reproduire ou
amplifier le son.
2 Section 5 is repealed and the following is
substituted:
5(1) Members of the Saint John Police Force are
authorized to enforce this By-Law.
2 L’article 5 est abrogé et remplacé par ce qui
suit:
5(1) L’application du présent arrêté relève du
service de police de The City of Saint John.
3
5(2) Informations with respect to violations of this
By-Law may be laid in the Provincial Court by the
Common Clerk or by such other persons as may be
designated by Common Council.
5(2) Toute dénonciation relative à une infraction
au présent arrêté est déposée à la Cour Provinciale
par le greffier communal ou par toute autre
personne désignée par le Conseil Communal.
3 Section 6 is repealed and the following is
substituted:
6. A person who violates any provision of this By-
Law is guilty of an offence and is liable on
summary conviction to a fine of not less than Two
Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00) and not more than
One Thousand and Seventy Dollars ($1,070.00).
3 L’article 6 est abrogé et remplacé par ce qui
suit:
6. Quiconque enfreint le présent arrêté commet
une infraction et est passible, sur déclaration de
culpabilité par procédure sommaire, d’une amende
d’au moins deux cents cinquante dollars (250,00$)
et d’au plus mille soixante-dix dollars (1 070,00$).
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
_________, A.D. 2006 and signed by:
EN FOI DE QUOI The City of Saint John a fait
apposer son sceau communal sur le présent arrêté le
____________ 2006, avec les signatures suivantes :
_________________________________________
Mayor/Maire
________________________________________
Common Clerk / Greffier communal
First Reading - November 7, 2005
Second Reading - November 7, 2005
Third Reading -
Première lecture -
Deuxième lecture -
Troisième lecture -
REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL
M & C – 2006-104
21 April 2006 His Worship Norman McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Fire Apparatus Replacement Program
BACKGROUND:
Staff of the Materials & Fleet Management Division had, in the fall of 2005,
undertaken and completed a comprehensive inspection of the Saint John Fire
Departments fleet of fire apparatus.
This action was prompted as a result of concerns raised by the Fire Chief with
reports from Fleet Services regarding the condition and life expectancy of certain
front line and reserve units. As a result of the findings presented to the Chief, funds
were requested to be placed in the Capital Budget for 2006 to cover the cost for
the immediate purchase 2 new fire pumper units.
Of greater concern to the Materials and Fleet Management Division is the fact that
there is at present no plan for the long term apparatus requirements of the Saint
John Fire Department. The normal replacement cycle for the replacement of a fire
truck is approximately 18 months from the time the need is identified, through the
budget cycle, the creation of a tender specification, the bid cycle and finally
construction and delivery.
Without an approved and documented replacement program, the Fire Department
finds itself in the unenviable position of waiting until the need becomes near critical
and then incurring excessive repair costs to keep the critical vehicle in service until
a new one arrives. Given the age and condition of the existing fleet, and the
additional strain put on resources in order to prolong the life of the vehicle to be
replaced, by the time it arrives the department finds itself facing the same problem
with the next vehicle in line.
Page Two
BACKGROUND….Cont’d
It is therefore in the best interest of the Saint John Fire Department and the City of
Saint John to have an approved and properly funded apparatus replacement
program.
The following information and attached documents formed the bases of the
Materials and Fleet Management audit of the Fire Departments apparatus fleet,
which was submitted to the Fire Chief in the fall of 2005. We now present this to
Council for your information, consideration and possible approval.
RESEARCH:
Materials and Fleet Management under took to gather data, in preparation for this
report, from a number of sources.
The first step was to perform a complete assessment of the apparatus fleet. This
task was assigned to the dedicated Journeyman, Specialist, T & T mechanic whose
duty it is to provide maintenance to the Fire Departments vehicle fleet. The results
of this survey are enclosed as Appendix A.
This was followed by the creation of a maintenance history for each vehicle. Staff
of Fleet Administration reviewed vehicle service records and tabulated the results
from 1999 through to April 30, 2005; see Appendix B, enclosed.
Finally, the Manager of Fleet Administration contacted his counter parts in other
municipalities in order to determine their apparatus replacement practices. The
majority of municipalities reported that they have established guidelines for
apparatus removal from front line service to reserve and from reserve to disposal.
As evidence of this please find enclosed a copy of a Council approved apparatus
replacement strategy from the City of London Ontario. This is enclosed for
information purposes only, as Appendix C.
ANALYSIS:
The present fleet of fire apparatus consists of 16 units as follows;
3 Tanker Trucks
8 Pumper Trucks (6 front line & 2 in reserve)
1 Combination Pumper/Rescue Unit
2 100 foot Aerial Ladder Trucks ( 1 front line & 1 in reserve)
1 Quint Combination 75 foot Aerial/Pumper
1 Van Style Rescue Unit ( in reserve)
Page Three
ANALYSIS.…Cont’d;
Of these, 12 are considered front line units, with the van style rescue, 1 of the 100
foot aerials and 2 pumper trucks considered to be reserve units. These reserve
units provide a variety of functions; however their main purpose is to be pressed
into front line service when the primary unit is unavailable, most often in order to
under go repairs or for testing for NFPA recertification.
Of immediate concern to the Saint John Fire Department and Fleet Services is the
condition and anticipated life expectancy of vehicles 27 and 31. Truck 27 is a 1985
International cab & chassis, reserve pumper unit. Truck 31 is a 1981 White cab
and chassis, reserve pumper unit. In both cases these trucks are on borrowed time
and could suffer catastrophic failures at any time(update- since submitting this
report to the Fire Chief both these trucks have now completely failed, due to
mechanical and structural defect, and have been removed from service)
Of additional concern are trucks 33 and 24. Truck 33 is a 1988 Volvo front line
pumper while truck 24 is a 1994 Spartan combination pumper/rescue, front line
unit. Truck 24 was initially scheduled for replacement in 2004.
The following is a summary of the maintenance costs incurred for each of the
vehicles referred to above, for the period of January 1, 1999 through April 30,
2005.
Vehicle 27 – 1985 International pumper – reserve unit $48,794.12
Vehicle 31 – 1981White pumper – reserve unit $70,040.90
Vehicle 33 – 1988 Volvo/White pumper –front line $100,481.40
Vehicle 24 – 1994 Spartan pumper/rescue – front line $156,632.79
It is important to note that while the maintenance history shows less money being
spent to maintain the reserve units, this is deceiving in that these are not front line
units and as such are not called upon as often as the front line units and therefore
cost less to maintain.
CONCLUSIONS:
For the most part the audit shows that the fire apparatus inventory appears to be in
reasonably good condition however in the short term four vehicles require
immediate attention. These include front line trucks 33, a 1988 Volvo/Pierre
pumper and 24 a 1994 Spartan pumper/rescue, and reserve units 31, a 1981
White/Pierre pumper and 27, a 1985 IH/Pierre pumper.
Page Four
CONCLUSIONS.…Cont’d;
In the long term it is necessary to establish a fleet replacement strategy that
addresses the optimum replacement point for fire apparatus and allows for a
progression of front line units to reserve status. The previously accepted practice
was based on the premise that a fire truck had a life expectancy of 20 years at
which time, based on its condition it might serve as a reserve vehicle thus allowing
for the disposal of the worst truck in the fleet. This is no longer the case.
Fire apparatus has a shorter life expectancy than 20 years of front line service.
Reasonable estimates range from between 15 and 17 years of active duty followed
by 3 to 5 years in reserve. This new reality is as a result of a number of factors,
including but not limited to;
· Additional wear and tear on apparatus as a result of increased response
requirements,
· Additional wear and tear on apparatus as a result of the constant pounding
it takes traveling on fair to poor road surfaces at high speeds,
· The lack of a sustainable preventative maintenance program,
· The reduction of vehicle weight through the replacement of steel parts with
aluminum in order to allow for the transport of more water and equipment,
· Advances in technology that make existing equipment obsolete at a faster
rate.
Given this, it is essential that a strategy that addresses the long term requirements
of the City of Saint John and the Saint John Fire Department be implemented and
be properly funded so as to be sustainable. This strategy must set parameters for
the timing of vehicle acquisition, the establishment of a co-operative preventative
maintenance program, the definition and life expectancy of a reserve vehicle and
the necessary funding required in order to sustain the entire program on a long
term bases.
SHORT-TERM SOLUTION:
In the short term there are 4 trucks of concern, 2 front line units and 2 reserves. Of
the front line trucks addressed vehicle 24, the pumper/rescue unit was previously
identified for replacement and as such funds were included in the 2004 Capital
Budget.
Page Five
SHORT-TERM SOLUTIONS.…Cont’d;
In addition and given that it takes approximately 8 to 10 months to build and
deliver, as a result of a public tender call, a new fire pumper unit, staff of Fleet
Administration were given the task of finding either previously owned units or
manufacturers demonstrators which meet the minimum specification requirements
of the Fire Department at a cost less than the new apparatus pricing.
While some success was realized in this effort, it would appear that given the age
and cost of the available, previously owned trucks, the best option for the City in
this instance lays with the manufacturer’s demonstrator or stock model units.
Two companies responded to our inquiries by submitting specifications and price
information for stock model trucks that could be available on a short delivery
bases. These stock models, while not being fully compliant with the requirements
of a tendered specification, will provide the department with units that meet their
basic needs with regards vehicle size, power train and water tank and pump
capacities.
A separate report has been prepared and submitted for Councils review and award.
LONG TERM STRATEGY:
As previously stated it is important to look not only at the short term requirements
of the Fire Department but on the establishment of a sustainable long term strategy
for apparatus renewal.
It would appear, based on research undertaken by staff of the Materials and Fleet
Management Division that in the majority of cases municipalities have come to
recognize the need to replace front line units sooner than the previously accepted
20 year threshold. As well they recognize the need for a viable fleet of reserve
vehicles capable of meeting the demands of front line duty when the need arises.
The City of London report included with this document contains a chart which
demonstrates this type of commitment on the part of several municipalities,
primarily those in Ontario. The results reflect a general appreciation for the need of
a sustainable apparatus replacement program. The average age for a pumper unit
would appear to be 15 years while aerial trucks have a longer life of 20 years and
rescue units have a shorter term of 10 years. It is assumed that this is a direct
reflection on the demands placed on each type of apparatus. Rescue units by and
large respond to a greater number of calls than do pumper trucks. Pumpers may
respond to fewer rescue calls but are called upon for a greater number of fire calls
than are the aerial units which are normally located in closer proximity to high rise
structures as opposed to residential areas.
Page Six
LONG TERM STRATEGY….Cont’d;
In order to sustain this type of replacement program, and given the current age and
condition of the City’s fleet it is imperative that this type of program be supported
with an on going financial or budgetary program.
The City of Saint John, at one time, had in place an “Apparatus Reserve Fund”.
This five year program, when established, provided for an annual allotment of
funds in the General Fund Capital Budget of sufficient size as to allow for the
purchase of a new piece of apparatus, on an annual bases.
The City already has in place a sustainable vehicle and equipment replacement
program. This program is funded from 3 sources; a) by a portion of the revenue
from monthly usage charges to the user departments, b) from the sale of surplus
vehicles and equipment and c) from funds identified in the annual capital budget.
At present fire apparatus does fall under this program and while the department is
charged a monthly usage fee, the amount of that fee is only equal to the actual cost
of maintenance.
OPTIONS:
Staff believes the City has three possible options to deal with the issue of timely
apparatus replacement as outlined in this report.
The first option is to continue with the status quo. That is to deal with the Fire
Department’s apparatus requirements, on an item by item bases, by dealing with
capital budget requests during the annual budget deliberations.
The second option is the adoption of the proposed apparatus replacement program
which follows other municipal models and is detailed in Appendix D enclosed.
Accepting this option would still require the identification of funds in the annual
capital budget.
The third option is to adopt the proposed apparatus replacement program, as
detailed in Appendix D and incorporate it into the existing Fleet Replacement
Program.
Page Seven
FINANCIAL IMPLICATION:
Each of the available options carries a different financial implication. In the case of
option one, Council would not be required to make a prior financial commitment
and would address apparatus replacement as and when requests come forward
during budget deliberations. However, as previously stated the time line from
recognition of need to actual delivery of apparatus is approximately 18 months.
During this time the cost to maintain both the reserve vehicle to be disposed and
the frontline vehicle to be replaced would continue at a higher rate than necessary.
As well, 100 percent of the replacement cost would come from the capital budget
which requires the borrowing of money which would incur interest charges over
the term of the loan, usually 10 years.
In the case of option two, ie the adoption of an apparatus replacement schedule,
this would shorten the apparatus replacement time line, thus saving some of the
maintenance costs for the affected vehicle, however once again funds are being
borrowed to cover the capital budget cost.
Option three would not only see a shortening of the time line, through the adoption
of an apparatus replacement plan, but would make the purchase of apparatus a part
of an existing, sustainable program. As was the case with the absorption of the
Municipal Operations fleet of refuse packers last year, the Fire Department would
have to increase its budget for vehicle usage charges to allow for the investment of
a portion of those charges into the Fleet Reserve Fund. Municipal Operations was
able to accommodate this requirement through the reassessment of some existing
budgeted items and without increasing its overall operating budget requirements.
In 2005 the Fire Departments operating budget contained $380,861.00 to cover
vehicle usage charges. This amount covered the combined vehicle usage charges
for replacement and repair of the department’s fleet of cars and light trucks, and
the maintenance costs only for their apparatus fleet. The department under spent
this budget last year by $41,003.00. This is due in large part because one reserve
pumper truck was taken completely out of service and therefore incurred no
maintenance costs from the time it was parked. As well, the other reserve truck
received only the minimal amount of maintenance as it also would be coming out
of service and therefore was not worth any extraordinary additional investment.
The Fire Department has budgeted $390,382.00 to cover fleet usage charges in
2006. Given that at present 2 trucks remain sidelined and as such are incurring no
maintenance cost, and the fact that 2 new trucks, when delivered, will require
minimum maintenance for the balance of the year, it is anticipated that this object
line will once again be under spent.
Page Eight
FINANCIAL IMPLICATION….Cont’d;
In order to become a part of the existing fleet replacement program and to replace
apparatus in accordance with the plan outlined in Appendix D it will be necessary
for the Fire Department to invest approximately $100,000.00 annually into the
Fleet Reserve Fund. The cost of apparatus is more than the fund can bear without
adversely affecting its primary function, therefore it is necessary for fire to become
an active participant by contributing at least a portion of the cost. The balance of
the purchase price could then be borne by the existing fund.
Given the anticipated budget savings this year and on a go forward bases, the Fire
Department already has approximately 50 percent of the necessary funds available
in the existing vehicle usage budget. It then would be incumbent on the department
to follow the Municipal Operations lead by finding the balance of the money
required in other budget lines or to request an increase of $50,000.00 per year in
future operating budget submissions.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is recommended that Council ;
1) Adopt the proposed Apparatus Replacement Strategy that would see
pumper and tanker trucks removed from front line service and placed in
reserve after fifteen (15) years, rescue units placed in reserve after 10 years
and aerial trucks after 20 years,
2) Allow for the expansion of the Fleet Replacement Program to encompass
fire apparatus so that the above program becomes a part of a sustainable
fleet replacement program.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________
David Logan, CPPB
Purchasing Agent
_____________________
Andrew Beckett, CA
Commissioner of Finance
_____________________
T.L. Totten, FCA
City Manager
APPENDIX “A”
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
APPARATUS INSPECTIONS
&
MECHANIC’S REPORTS
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1981 White Road Boss Pumper
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
00031 031 34
POWERTRAIN
Engine
Detroit Diesel
V-6
Transmission
Allison
Automatic
Comments Motor and transmission work good, motor has a few oil leaks (typical old Detroit)
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C frame, rusty and has been welded
Cab & Chassis Paint is good. Cab is rusty underneath
Body Decent shape
Comments
Frame is separating between C channels, cracked and has been welded under cab.
Frame is sitting very seedy
ATTACHMENTS
Pump
1050 Pump
Tank
500 Gallon steel tank
Ladders
Standard Attic ladders
Comments
Steel tank is pretty rusty, needs to have holes repaired
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1985 International Pumper
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0026 027 38
POWERTRAIN
Engine
Transmission Automatic
Comments Engine smokes bad, and leaks oil (breather box)
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C rusted bad spread apart
Cab & Chassis Rusted bad
Body
Aluminum has
cracks around
doors
Comments Cab and body tired, truck needs to go
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1050
Tank 500 Gallon
Ladders
Standard ladder
Comments Pumps good, pipes rusted, motor smokes bad while under full pump
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1987 Chev Van
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0008 0073 31
POWERTRAIN
Engine 8.2 Litres
Transmission Automatic
Comments Motor smokes, runs rough
STRUCTURAL
Frame Single C, good shape
Cab & Chassis Fair condition, needs paint
Body Fair condition, needs paint
Comments
Truck is in decent shape, has a few rattles and shakes. Out-dated for spare rescue
ATTACHMENTS
Pump
Tank
Ladders
Comments Compartment door hinges wore, doors rattle
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1988 Simon LTI 100 FT
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0023 042 31
POWERTRAIN
Engine Silver 92 Detroit Diesel
Transmission Allison automatic
Comments
Engine was rebuilt the winter of 2004, has been using oil ever since, going back for
warranty
STRUCTURAL
Frame Triple C frame some corrosion but not swelled
Cab & Chassis
Cab and chassis in fair shape. Paint blistered in a few spots
Body Some corrosion around well wells
Comments
Suspension has some movement and corrosion. Body and frame also has some
corrosion but could be touched up
ATTACHMENTS
Pump None
Tank None
Ladders 100 FT Inspection due October 2006
Comments
Ladder is in good condition, but does have some rust and chips, could use some attention. Wear strips were replaced
in 2004 , hydraulics a little bit slow, compared to new trucks
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1988 Volvo White GMC Pumper
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0039 033 33
POWERTRAIN
Engine V6 Detroit
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments Engine leaks a bit of oil out of blow by tubes. Transmission oil dark but seems ok
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C frame rusted but not swelled
Cab & Chassis Rusted
Body Aluminum body
Comments
Cab is rusted badly; it has been touched up every year. Body is welded every year,
but cracks keep coming back. All new cross members last year and still keeps
cracking
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1050 Pump
Tank 1200 Gal steel
Ladders Standard
Comments New pump installed in 2004. Tank keeps breaking baffles inside, it always leaks, just gets fixed and breaks again
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1992 Metal Fab Freightliner Tanker
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0030 056 23
POWERTRAIN
Engine Cummins 300 HP
Transmission Allison automatic
Comments Motor and transmission seem ok. No record of any oil consumption
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C in good shape
Cab & Chassis Paint is yellow corroded a little, should be painted
Body Good, little corrosion
Comments
Paint, frame and body in good shape. A little corrosion on rear body. If painted truck
would last a long time
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 625 Hale Pump
Tank Poly 1250 Gallon
Ladders Standard roof ladders
Comments
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1993 Simon Duplex
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0028 045 23
POWERTRAIN
Engine Detroit Diesel
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments Motor and transmission work ok. Small oil leak
STRUCTURAL
Frame Triple C, Rusted but not swelled
Cab & Chassis Good shape
Body Good shape outside, underneath is corroded
Comments Truck is in decent shape. Undercoated, but corroded pretty bad before undercoating
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1250 Waterous Pump. New pump in 2004
Tank 250 Gallon water
Ladders 110 Feet. Ladder inspection due October 2005
Comments Ladder is in decent shape, no sign of rust
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1993 Freightliner Metal Fab Pumper
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0037 021 25
POWERTRAIN
Engine 60 Series Detroit diesel
Transmission Allison automatic
Comments Motor and transmission seems ok. No significant oil use or leaks
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C rusty but not swelled
Cab & Chassis Good shape
Body Good shape
Comments Truck was painted in 2004. Cab and body in good shape
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1050 Hale
Tank 1200 Gallon Poly
Ladders Standard
Comments Pumps good
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1994 Spartan
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0036 024 23
POWERTRAIN
Engine 60 Series Detroit
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments
Motor and transmission work good, but we have had motor and transmission trouble.
Electrics for engine and transmission corroded bad
STRUCTURAL
Frame Single C , two cross members just replaced due to rust
Cab & Chassis Some corrosion over wheel wells
Body
Stainless ( heavy) Rollers on trays broke, not heavy enough
for weight they try to carry. Frame rusted, cross members
and air tanks corroded. Fuel tank in good shape, cab 7
body blistering bad, needs paint bad
Comments
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1050 Hale Pump
Tank 500 Gallon Poly tank
Ladders Standard ladders
Comments Pump good
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1996 Spartan Metal Fab Pumper
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0022 025 22
POWERTRAIN
Engine Cummins
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments Motor and transmission seems ok. No major oil consumption, no major leaks
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C frame undercoated
Cab & Chassis Cab in good shape
Body Good shape, no cracks
Comments Cab and body are showing a little corrosion, truck should be painted soon
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1500 Gallon Hale
Tank 1000 gallons of water, 100 Gallons of foam, Poly tank
Ladders Standard, electric jack
Comments Pump seems ok
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1997 E-One
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0020 022 19
POWERTRAIN
Engine Cummins
Transmission Allison Automatic MD 3060P
Comments Motor and transmission seem to be ok, no record of using any oil
STRUCTURAL
Frame Rusty but not bad. Single rail
Cab & Chassis Paint good
Body Good
Comments Paint and frame good for age
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1500 Hale pump
Tank 500 Gallon water, 100 foam, plastic
Ladders
Comments
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
1997 Freightliner Metal Fab Tanker
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
0071 055 15
POWERTRAIN
Engine Cat diesel
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments Motor and transmission work good. Small oil leak from motor
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C, good shape, undercoated
Cab & Chassis Good shape
Body Good shape
Comments Truck is in good shape
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 420 Hale pump
Tank 1200 Gallon Poly
Ladders Standard ladders
Comments Pump and tank in good shape, Pump new April 2005
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
2000 Spartan Pumper
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
1246 020 15
POWERTRAIN
Engine Cummins diesel
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments Motor and transmission work well; no significant oil use or leaks
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C; undercoated
Cab & Chassis Truck is in good shape
Body Good shape; a little corrosion around wheel wells
Comments Truck fairly new, went back for warranty 1 year ago for paint
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1500 Hale Pump
Tank 1200 gallon water 100 foam Poly
Ladders Standard
Comments Pumps good
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
2001 Spartan Pumper
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
1340 026 13
POWERTRAIN
Engine Cummins Diesel
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments New truck, motor and transmission work good
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C
Cab & Chassis Good shape
Body Good
Comments New truck, sent back to Metal Fab for touch up, looks ok now
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1500 Hale pump
Tank 1200 Gallon water, 100 gallon foam Ploy
Ladders Standard
Comments Pumps good
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
2001 Freightliner Metal Fab Tanker
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
1362 052 13
POWERTRAIN
Engine 300 HP Cummins
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments Tank is in good condition
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C frame, well undercoated
Cab & Chassis Paint and cab in good condition
Body OK
Comments Truck is in good condition
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 625 Hale
Tank 1500 Poly tank
Ladders Standard
Comments Pump seems ok
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
FLEET ANALYSIS
2002 E-One 75 Ft ladder
EQUIPMENT VEHICLE CLASS ORP
1560 043 9
POWERTRAIN
Engine 450 HP Cummins
Transmission Allison Automatic
Comments New truck, motor and transmission work good
STRUCTURAL
Frame Double C, undercoated
Cab & Chassis Good shape Aluminum pitting on bumper and mirrors
Body Aluminum in good shape
Comments Two rear door windows corroding
ATTACHMENTS
Pump 1700 GPM
Tank 400 water, 100 foam, Poly tank
Ladders 75 Feet aluminum
Comments Ladder inspection due October 2005
Veh#Equip#Description Year Cost New 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005*Total
Front line Aerials
045 00028 1993 Simon Lti Aer. Ladder 1993 $555,000.00 5,870.34 13,651.33 40,092.61 19,739.93 22,900.79 48,385.92 6,695.23 157,336.15
043 01560 2003 E-One Aerial Ladder 2003 $551,168.00 NA NA NA NA NA 11,000.38 5,162.57 16,162.95
Front Line Pumpers
024 00036 1994 Spartan Pumper/Rescue 1994 $534,108.69 22,561.26 26,521.83 29,838.55 26,273.62 18,255.10 29,695.67 3,486.76 156,632.79
021 00037 1993 Freightliner Pumper 1993 $236,600.00 3,707.59 14,120.11 11,334.96 11,231.69 12,200.43 32,303.54 6,543.71 91,442.03
033 00039 1988 Volvo/White Pumper 1988 $234,615.00 3,228.60 11,810.40 22,226.65 14,248.73 27,016.03 16,026.34 6,724.65 101,281.40
020 01246 2000 Spartan Pumper 2000 $415,151.00 NA 2,102.16 1,568.16 7,779.46 4,854.15 10,479.05 7,994.22 34,777.20
026 01340 2001 Spartan Pumper 2001 $358,800.00 NA NA 2,305.95 2,782.22 4,796.71 8,285.03 8,279.30 26,449.21
022 00020 1997 Emergency Pumper 1997 $319,076.00 3,311.24 5,034.86 6,257.19 11,676.00 11,415.75 12,030.77 8,569.68 58,295.49
025 00022 1996 Spartan Pumper 1996 $299,929.00 3,823.88 16,420.74 23,400.39 16,827.51 17,237.88 18,310.59 14,277.11 110,298.10
Front Line Tankers
055 00071 1996 MetalfabTanker 1996 247.22 3,474.32 851.32 3,954.34 5,283.83 7,413.55 12,432.36 33,656.94
052 01362 2001 Freightliner Tanker 2001 $203,462.72 NA NA 630.00 1,427.75 3,396.56 7,462.31 5,341.76 18,258.38
056 00030 1992 Freightliner Tanker 1992 $228,926.00 76.81 6,031.72 3,699.72 6,350.96 7,115.06 1,297.99 2,109.72 26,681.98
Reserve Units
042 00023 1988 Kovotc Mobile Equipment 1988 $532,866.60 9,873.79 27,109.83 48,314.58 24,177.46 23,316.95 61,062.60 3,521.00 197,376.21
031 00031 1981 White/Pierre Pumper 1981 $121,500.00 3,177.42 6,713.89 7989.74 8,359.05 26,919.90 9,846.08 7,034.82 70,040.90
027 00026 1985 IH/Pierre Pumper 1985 $137,500.00 3,092.08 7,391.68 9,003.92 16,000.64 4,516.15 6,415.76 2,373.89 48,794.12
073 00008 1987 Chev Van 1987 $81,450.14 126.3 2854.81 1993.53 11974.7 7550.78 2412.5 2129.7 29,042.32
$4,810,153.15 $59,096.53 $143,237.68 $209,507.27 $182,804.06 $196,776.07 $282,428.08 $102,676.48 ###########
Maintenance-1999-April 30,2005
FIRE APPARATUS
APPENDIX "B"
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
MAINTENANCE HISTORY
Proposed Apparatus Replacement Schedule
Veh#Equip#Description Year Original Status ReplacementReplace Comments
Cost Schedule (Year)
Front Line Aerial Trucks
042 00023 1988 Kovotc 100' Aerial 1988 $532,866.60 Active 20 years 2008
043 01560 2003 E-One Aerial Ladder(Quint)2003 $551,168.00 Active 20 years 2023
Front Line Pumper Trucks
024 00036 1994 Spartan Pumper/Rescue 1994 $534,108.69 Active 10 years 2006 Purchase demo unit. Place vehicle 24 in reserve
021 00037 1993 Freightliner Pumper 1993 $236,600.00 Active 15 years 2006 Purchase demo unit. Place vehicle #21 in reserve
to replace vehicle #31
033 00039 1988 Volvo/White Pumper 1988 $234,615.00 Active 15 years 2006 Purchase demo unit. Place vehicle #33 in reserve
to replace 27 on a temporary bases
020 01246 2000 Spartan Pumper 2000 $415,151.00 Active 15 years 2015
026 01340 2001 Spartan Pumper 2001 $358,800.00 Active 15 years 2016
022 00020 1997 E-One Pumper 1997 $319,076.00 Active 15 years 2012
025 00022 1996 Spartan Pumper 1996 $299,929.00 Active 15 years 2010 Tender in 2010 for new truck to Fire Department
specifications and delivery in 2011
Front Line Tanker Trucks
055 00071 1996 MetalfabTanker 1996 $200,000.00 Active 15 years 2011 Tender in 2011 for delivery 2012
052 01362 2001 Freightliner Tanker 2001 $203,462.72 Active 15 years 2016
056 00030 1992 Freightliner Tanker 1992 $228,926.00 Active 15 years 2008 Tender in 2007, with delivery 2008. Do not
dispose, establish as a reserve unit
Reserve Units
045 00028 1993 Simon LTI 100' Aerial 1993 $555,000.00 Reserve 20 years 2013
031 00031 1981 White/Pierre Pumper 1981 $121,500.00 Reserve 15 years 2006 Retired from service
027 00026 1985 IH/Pierre Pumper 1985 $137,500.00 Reserve 15 years 2006 Retired from service
073 00008 1987 Chev Van(Reserve Rescue)1987 $81,450.14 Reserve 10 years 2006 Replace with vehicle #24(1994 Spartan Pumper/
Rescue). Recycle as misc equipment vehicle
FLEET REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
FIRE APPARATUS
APPENDIX "D"
SAINT JOHN FIRE DEPARTMENT
MATERIALS & FLEET MANAGEMENT
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL
M & C – 2006-105
21 April 2006 His Worship Norman McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Replacement Fire Apparatus
BACKGROUND:
In August of 2005 The Materials and Fleet Management Department advised the
Saint John Fire Department that its 2 reserve pumper trucks and its front line
pumper/rescue unit were in serious need of replacement.
At the time the reserve truck, vehicle 27 – a 1985 International was deemed to be
unfit for the road. The mechanics report indicated that the engine was smoking and
leaking oil through the breather box. This would have required an extensive and
costly repair that most likely would have been undertaken except for the rest of the
mechanics report. Structurally this truck was not safe given the condition of its
frame which was rusted through in places and separated in others. As a result this
truck was removed from service which left the Fire Service with only 1 spare unit.
In addition to the report on vehicle 27, Fleet Services advised the Fire department
that 3 more of its fleet were in similar condition. Upon the recommendation of
Fleet Services the Fire Chief agreed to a complete mechanical audit of his
apparatus fleet in preparation for the 2006 budget.
The results of that undertaking were reported to the Fire Chief in September of
2005. Staff found that at present the majority of the apparatus fleet was in
reasonable condition, however 3 units required immediate attention.
Page Two
BACKGROUND….Cont’d;
Of concern was vehicle 31 – a 1981 Volvo/White pumper truck in use as a reserve
to the front line units. It was found to be mechanically and structurally in similar
condition to vehicle 27. Vehicle 31 has since the writing of the audit report been
condemned and as a result has been removed from active duty. This action has left
the Fire Department short 2 reserve pumpers.
Of additional concern to the Fire Department and Fleet Services is the condition of
vehicle 24. This is the 1994 Spartan combination pumper/rescue unit. Given the
demands placed on this unit and the increasing maintenance costs to keep it in
service, we find that it is in less than acceptable condition and in fact should have
been replaced, as scheduled, in 2004.
ANALYSIS:
This information is not new to Council as the Fire Chief and the Commissioner of
Corporate Services reported the need to purchase 2 new fire pumper trucks during
budget deliberations for 2006. In response to this Council set aside $700,000.00 to
cover the cost.
Given the complex nature of fire apparatus and the detailed and diverse
specifications required to meet the needs of different Fire Departments, fire
pumpers awarded as a result of a public tender call normally cost in excess of the
$350,000.00 per unit amount set aside in the budget and normally take between 8
and 10 months to build. As well the last pumper/rescue unit purchased by the City,
in 1994, cost $534,108.00 and indications from the manufacturer are that a
tendered rescue, given the demand for trucks of this type, could cost in excess of
$600,000.00 and would take 400 days to build.
In order to keep the cost within the scope of the budget and meet the need for
immediate delivery, Fleet Administration undertook the task of locating 2 used or
demonstrator trucks that would meet the very minimum requirements of the Saint
John Fire Department and with few alterations be pressed into immediate, active
duty.
What was discovered is that used fire apparatus, while readily available, was not of
an age and condition to provide relief to the fire department. In other words most
used equipment is either too old or not of a type to meet the basic requirements of
the City. However, what Fleet Administration did find was what some
manufacturers refer to as “Stock Model Demonstrators”.
Page Three
ANALYSIS….Cont’d;
Stock models are trucks built by the manufacturers on spec. What they do is start a
truck through the build cycle in the hopes that while it is in production some one
will place an order for a unit that the stock model can be easily adapted to suit. If
no order is placed during this build cycle then the resulting “Stock Model
Demonstrator” truck is completed to the very minimum standards.
Two companies, E-One Canada Ltd. and Micmac Fire and Safety, representing
Pierce Manufacturing submitted proposals for various trucks they felt would meet
the needs of the City of Saint John. A team of 4 individuals including 2 from the
Fire Department, 1 from Fleet Services and 1 from Fleet Administration were
dispatched to visit both vendor sites to inspect the equipment being offered. The
purpose of this inspection was to determine how closely each of the units offered
met the minimum standards of the Fire Department, what modification would be
necessary and the cost and delay anticipated to undertake these modifications.
The committee has recommended that the most cost effective apparatus, with the
shortest turn around time is available from E-One. They have 2 similar pumper
trucks that with the minimum of modifications can go into immediate service. In
addition, they have a 2004 model demonstrator pumper/rescue unit that was on
loan, for hurricane relief, to a southern municipality. This unit once inspected and
converted to meet Canadian standards, is also available for delivery within 30 – 45
days.
While none of these units are completely compliant with the City’s standards, with
very few modifications they will provide useful units that will not only meet the
immediate but long term needs of the Fire Department.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The cost of the demonstrator pumper/rescue unit has been quoted at $417,295.77
plus the cost of necessary modifications, estimated to be valued at $25,000.00.
The first of the demo pumper trucks is available, after modifications, for a price of
$ 319,207.84, while the second truck which has a larger water capacity but is in
need of more modifications, is available at a cost of $321,319.00.
The total cost, if awarded as recommended, to purchase 3 demonstrator fire trucks
will be approximately $1,082,822.60, plus tax. As previously stated the
pumper/rescue was scheduled for replacement in 2004, at which time funds were
put into the Capital Budget to cover the cost. Similarly funds were put into the
2006 Capital Budget to cover the cost to purchase 2 replacement fire department
pumper trucks.
Page Four
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that, subject to final inspection and acceptance of the vehicles
offered, the proposal submitted by E-One Canada Corp. for the supply of 2 only
stock demonstrator pumper trucks in the amounts of $319,207.84 and
$321,319.00 respectively and 1 only demonstrator pumper/rescue unit in the
amount of $417,295.77, plus (the cost of required modifications and) sales tax, be
accepted.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________
David Logan, CPPB
Purchasing Agent
_____________________
Andrew Beckett, CA
Commissioner of Finance
_____________________
T.L. Totten, FCA
City Manager
REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL
M & C – 2006-99
April 10, 2006 His Worship Norman McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Tender for Traffic Paint
BACKGROUND:
In previous years, the cities of Fredericton and Saint John called a joint tender for the
supply of traffic paint for the roadway surfaces. Last year the City of Edmundston
was also included in the joint tender. This joint tendering process has proven to be a
very cost effective approach for all cities involved.
In 2004 and again last year the cities, in an effort to extend the road life of the paint
used, purchased a new product identified as Premium/High Performance Traffic Line
Paint. This product has proven to be superior to previous paint used and once again
this year, the cities jointly requested pricing for this product.
ANALYSIS:
As is normally the case, two companies responded to the tender call by submitting
bids. Staff from the City of Fredericton, City of Edmundston and the City of Saint
John’s Materials & Fleet Management Division and the Municipal Operations
Department have reviewed both tenders and have found them to be complete in every
regard.
A summary of the tenders as they apply to the City of Saint John, is enclosed for your
consideration.
PAGE TWO
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Based on the quantities estimated and the prices quoted by the lowest bidder, the City
will spend approximately $43,188.01 HST included to purchase street marking paint
in 2006.
This is an annual expenditure and as such, funds are included in the annual operating
budget.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the tender for the supply of Premium/High Performance
Traffic Paint be awarded to Laurentide Atlantic Ltd., as indicated on the enclosed
summary of bids.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________
David Logan, CPPB
Purchasing Agent
___________________
T.L. Totten, FCA
City Manager
T E N D E R
TRAFFIC PAINT
CITY OF SAINT JOHN, N. B.
JOINT TENDER: #T06-34
CLOSING: March 1, 2006
APPROX.
QUANTITY
IBIS
PRODUCTS LTD.
SCARBOROUGH
ON
LAURENTIDE
CHEMICALS
RICHIBUCTO NB
2005
SAINT JOHN
PRICES
P/HP = PREMIUM HIGH PERFORMANCE PAINT
Unit Price Extended Price Unit price Extended Price Unit Price
8,400L P/HP yellow
(42 – 200 litre drums)
2,000L P/HP white
(10 – 200 litre drums)
2,379L P/HP White
(130 – 18.9 Litre pails)
756L P/HP Yellow
(40 – 18.9 Litre pails)
$ 3.565/L
$ 3.565L
$ 3.795/L
$ 3.795/L
$ 29,946.00
$ 7,130.00
$ 9,028.31
$ 2,869.02
$ 3.151/L *
$ 3.151/L *
$ 3.323/L *
$ 3.323/L *
$ 26,468.40 *
$ 6,302.00 *
$ 7,905.42 *
$ 2,512.19 *
$ 3.565/L
$ 3.565L
$ 3.738/L
$ 3.738/L
Grand Total $ 48, 973.33 $ 43,188.01
Prices are HST included
*Indicates Recommendation
M & C 2006 – 95
April 20, 2006
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane
And Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Members of Council,
SUBJECT: Contract No. 2006 – 7:
McAllister Wastewater Pumping Station – Electrical Service Repairs
BACKGROUND:
This Contract consists of a project that was approved in the 2005 Water & Sewerage
Utility Fund Capital Program as follows:
1. Repairs to the electrical services of the McAllister Drive wastewater pumping station
located opposite of Highmeadow Park.
TENDER RESULTS
Tenders closed on April 19, 2006 with the following results:
1. O’Brien Electric $79,235.00
Saint John, NB
2. G.N. LeBlanc Construction Ltd $63,500.00
Grand Barachois, NB
The Engineer’s estimate for the work was $50,600.00
M & C 2006 – 95
April 20, 2006
Page 2
ANALYSIS:
The tenders were reviewed by Staff and the tenders were found to be formal in all
respects. A third tender in the amount of $74,462.00, submitted by ICS State, was
rejected at the Tender Opening by the Tender Opening Committee in accordance with
Division 2.15 item (d) as this tender was not on the Form of Tender provided by the City.
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 one capital work project. Assuming
award of the Contract to the low tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes
the estimated amount of work on this project that will be performed by City forces and
others.
The analysis concludes that a total amount of $75,000 was provided in the budget and
that the projected completion cost of the project included in the Contract is estimated to
be $63,730 including the City’s eligible HST rebate – a positive difference of $11,269 in
the 2005 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Contract 2006 – 7: McAllister Wastewater Pumping Station –
Electrical Service Repairs, be awarded to the low tenderer, G.N. LeBlanc Construction
Ltd. at their tendered price of $63,500.00 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. Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A.
Commissioner, City Manager
Municipal Operations & Engineering
M & C 2006 - 96
April 19, 2006
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane
and Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Members of Council,
SUBJECT: Engagement of Engineering Consultant –
2006 Rural Roads Upgrade Project
PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
The purpose of this report is to request that Common Council authorize staff to conduct
appropriate negotiations for the engagement of an engineering consultant to carry out
engineering design services for the 2006 Rural Roads Upgrade Project.
BACKGROUND
Common Council approved the 2006 General Fund Capital Program on January 16, 2006
(M & C 2006-16). The Transportation category of the General Fund Capital Program
includes the following approved project:
Project
Location Description Other
Share
City
Share
Rural Road
Upgrades
Sullivan Road; Fox Hill
Road; Clark Road No. 1,
Clark Road No.2; Buckley
Road
Design and land
acquisition for upgrade
of rural roads, including
design services
0 $60,000
Report to Common Council
M & C 2006 – 96
April 19, 2006
Page 2
ANALYSIS
Staff recommend the direct engagement of Hughes Surveys & Consultants Inc. for the design
work associated with the 2006 Rural Roads Upgrade Project as Hughes has demonstrated
that they have the expertise and experience in the completion of a similar Rural Roads
Upgrade design project under the 2004 Capital Program.
The estimated cost of the design work is approximately $60,000. The consultant engagement
will be conducted in accordance with the process approved by Council on February 13, 2006
for the Engagement of Engineering Consultants - 2006 Capital Program (M & C 2006-31).
RECOMMENDATION
Notwithstanding the City’s Procurement Policy for engagement of professional services,
Common Council authorize staff to conduct negotiations for the engagement of Hughes
Surveys & Consultants Inc. to carry out design services for the 2006 Rural Roads Upgrade
Project as contained in the approved General Fund Capital Program – Transportation
Category.
Respectfully submitted,
J. M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. .
Commissioner,
Municipal Operations & Engineering
Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A.
City Manager
M & C 2006 - 100
April 20, 2006
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane
& Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Members of Council,
SUBJECT
CONTRACT 2006-14: OLD BLACK RIVER ROAD – SANITARY SEWER & STORM
SEWER INSTALLATION AND ROAD RECONSTRUCTION
BACKGROUND
This contract consists of projects that are approved in the 2006 Water & Sewerage Utility Fund
Capital Program and the 2006 General Fund Capital Program as follows:
1. Installation of approximately 1370 m of new 200 mm diameter sanitary sewer on Old Black River
Road, between Expansion Avenue and Cottage Road.
2. Reconstruction of approximately 987 m of roadway including new storm sewer, curb & gutter
and new concrete sidewalk on Old Black River Road , between Expansion Avenue and Cottage
Road.
TENDER RESULTS
Tenders closed on April 18, 2006 with the following results:
1) Galbraith Construction Ltd. $2,369,906.00
Saint John, NB
The Engineer’s estimate for the work was $2,121,393.25.
M & C 2006 - 100
April 20, 2006
Page 2
ANALYSIS
The tender was reviewed by staff and the tender was found to be formal in all respects. Staff is of the
opinion that the 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 two different capital work projects. Assuming
award of the contract to the tenderer, an analysis has been completed which includes the estimated
amount of work on this project that will be performed by City forces and others.
The analysis concludes that a total amount of $2,460,000 was provided in the budgets and that the
projected completion cost of the projects included in the contract is estimated to be $2,156,448,
including the City’s eligible HST rebate, a $38,718 positive difference in the Water & Sewerage Utility
Fund Capital Program and a $264,833 positive difference in the General Fund Capital Program.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Contract 2006 – 14: Old Black River Road – Sanitary Sewer & Storm Sewer
Installation and Road Reconstruction be awarded to the tenderer, Galbraith Construction Ltd, at
their tendered price of $2,369,906.00 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. Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A.
Commissioner, City Manager
Municipal Operations & Engineering
M & C 2006 - 91
April 20, 2006
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane
& Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Members of Council,
SUBJECT
CONTRACT 2006-2: SYDNEY STREET - WATER & SEWER RENEWAL
BACKGROUND
This Contract consists of projects that are approved in the 2006 Water & Sewerage Capital
Program and under the 2006 General Fund Capital Program as follows:
1. A 200 mm watermain on Sydney Street, from Britain Street to St. James Street,
including St. James Street from Civic #118 to #151, to replace an existing
watermain which is in poor condition.
2. A 200 mm and 375 mm sanitary sewer on Sydney Street, from Britain Street to St.
James Street, including St. James Street from Civic #118 to #151, to replace an
existing sanitary sewer which is in poor condition.
3. A 300 mm and 750 mm storm sewer on Sydney Street, from Britain Street to St.
James Street, including St. James Street from Civic #118 to #151, to separate
storm flow from sanitary in accordance with the City’s separation policy.
TENDER RESULTS
Tenders closed on April 19, 2006 with the following results:
1) Galbraith Construction Ltd. $498,571.00
Saint John, NB
The Engineer’s estimate for the work was $385,434.00.
M & C 2006 - 91
April 20, 2006
Page 2
ANALYSIS
The tender was reviewed by staff and the tender was found to be formal in all respects.
Staff is of the opinion that the 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 three different capital work projects.
Assuming award of the Contract to the tenderer, an analysis has been completed which
includes the estimated amount of work on this project that will be performed by City forces
and others.
The analysis concludes that a total amount of $265,000.00 was provided in the budgets and
that the projected completion cost of the project included in the Contract is estimated to be
$457,399.03, including the City’s eligible HST rebate - a $137,300.55 negative difference in
the Water & Sewerage Utility Fund Capital Program and a $55,098.48 negative difference
in the General Fund Capital Program. The budget shortfalls can be managed within the
respective Water & Sewerage Fund Capital Program and the General Fund Capital Program
budget envelopes for 2006.
COMMENT
Staff is very concerned with two aspects of this tender; first, the single tender submission
and, secondly, the tender amount relative to the engineer’s estimate. A recommendation to
reject the tender was given serious consideration.
From the perspective of need, however, there is concern for public safety in that the timber
sewer slated for replacement has developed two sink holes; the last just two weeks ago.
There is some urgency to get this work done.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that Contract 2006-2: Sydney Street - Water & Sewer Renewal be
awarded to the tenderer, Galbraith Construction Ltd., at their tendered price of
$498,571.00 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. Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A.
Commissioner, City Manager
Municipal Operations & Engineering
REPORT TO COMMON COUNCIL
M & C – 2006-103
April 20, 2006 His Worship Norman McFarlane and Members of Common Council Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Carleton Accessible Playground Equipment & Safety Surface
BACKGROUND:
The Carleton Community Centre Advisory Board decided to take on a project to
develop a new Accessible Playground at the Carleton Community Centre as
Carleton has a number of low income families and this location is easily accessible
for those who lack a means of transportation, and is also easily accessible by
vehicle with parking available. The Community Recreation & Open Space Strategy
[1992] also recommended this site for an Accessible Playground.
The Carleton Board applied to Common Council to obtain LPP funding and
a Council resolution was passed on April 25, 2005 to approve the funding in the
amount not to exceed $ 100,000.00.
Tenders for the playground equipment and safety surface were called in January
2006 but the recommendation to council for the award of these tenders was
delayed until verification that all funding from outside sources had been secured.
ANALYSIS:
Tender 2005-082601T – Carleton Accessible Playground – Safety Surface
Tenders were called for the supply and installation of a playground safety surface.
A Playground safety surface is a poured in place recreation and play surface
consisting of recycled rubber crumb bound together with a polyurethane binder
which makes the play surface safer for children. Specifications for this tender also
included a granular base preparation to be provided by the supplier.
Two companies responded to this tender and were found to be compliant in every
regard by staff from Leisure Services and Materials and Fleet Management. A
summary of bids is enclosed with this report.
PAGE TWO
Tender 2005-781001T – Carleton Accessible Playground – Equipment
A separate tender was called for the supply and installation of Play structures and
equipment with two companies responding. Tenders were evaluated by staff from
Leisure Services and Materials and Fleet Management and found to be complete in
every regard. A summary of bids is enclosed with this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The total cost of the equipment and safety surface for the Carleton Accessible
Playground project if awarded to the lowest bidder is $188,705.00 plus HST.
Funding up to $100,000 from the Land for Public Purposes (LPP) reserve fund
was approved by Common Council (April 25th, 2005) subject to the restriction that
the amount to be provided from LPP does not exceed the amount of funds
contributed by other parties.
To date cash collected as well as a commitment in writing from the Province of
New Brunswick have resulted in the provision of funding sufficient to comply with
the restriction imposed by Common Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the tender for the playground safety surface be awarded to
PlayTeck in the amount of $68,000.00 plus HST and the tender for playground
equipment be awarded to Little Tikes Commercial in the amount of $120,705.00
plus HST as indicated on the enclosed summary of bids.
Respectfully submitted,
__________________
David Logan, CPPB
Purchasing Agent
___________________
T.L. Totten, FCA
City Manager
City of Saint John
Tender
2005-781001T
CARLETON ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND – PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT
Tender Opening: 2:30 P.M., Wednesday, JANUARY 18, 2006 2nd Floor Boardroom, 175 Rothesay Avenue
DESCRIPTION
Fundy Fencing
Saint John
Little Tikes Commercial
(Power Play Inc)
Paris, ON
Price per specifications and terms and
conditions
$145,798.00
$120.705.00 *
* Indicates Recommendation
City of Saint John
Tender
2005-082601T
CARLETON ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND – SAFETY SURFACE
Tender Opening: 2:30 P.M., Wednesday, JANUARY 18, 2006 2nd Floor Boardroom, 175 Rothesay Avenue
* Indicates Recommendation
DESCRIPTION
EVERPLAY
BRAMPTON, ON
PLAYTECK
DIEPPE, NB
Price as per specifications and terms
and conditions
$100,441.50
$68,000.00 *
M & C 2006 - 101
April 20, 2006
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane
and Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Members of Council,
SUBJECT:
Request from St. Pius X Church for Traffic Lights at the Crosswalk Between the
Church and its Parking Lot on Somerset Street.
BACKGROUND
St. Pius X Church is located on Somerset Street approximately 150 meters north of Pugsley
Avenue.
In response to concerns expressed by church members, a number of years ago the city
installed an RA-5 Special Crosswalk (designated by the Transportation Association of Canada
(TAC)) to facilitate pedestrian crossings between the church and its parking lot on the other
side of Somerset Street. Complaints have been received that cars do not respect this
crosswalk and yield to pedestrians. One particular concern expressed is that often only one of
the southbound lanes will stop for the pedestrian actuated flashing signals. Pedestrians then
start across and fear being hit by an unseen car in the other lane if sight lines are obstructed by
a high vehicle. Staff has observed that vehicular traffic does not always stop for pedestrians
at this crossing.
The current request is to replace these flashing amber lights with a full set of traffic signals
with red, amber and green lights.
ANALYSIS
Somerset Street is an arterial street, 3 lanes wide at this point with a speed limit of 50 km/h.
M& C 2006 - 101
Request from St. Pius X Church for Traffic Lights at the Crosswalk Between the
Church and its Parking Lot on Somerset Street.
Page 2
The criteria set out in the TAC Pedestrian Crossing Control Manual for installation of the
requested Pedestrian Signal are as quoted below.
“This type of crosswalk should be used only when all of the following criteria have been met:
a. Pedestrian volumes are high and sufficient gaps in vehicular traffic are not available
to accommodate the pedestrian demand.
b. The crosswalk location is a minimum of 200 m (400 m preferred) from an adjacent
traffic control signal or special crosswalk.
c. Traffic volumes do not warrant full vehicular signals.” (This applies only at an
intersection)
This location does not meet the first criterion. Pedestrian volumes here are very low except
during the time just before and after well attended church services, when the overflow parking
lot is used by many cars. Most services do not coincide with rush hour so traffic volumes will
be at lower levels. Aside from church attendees there is virtually no other pedestrian traffic
using this crosswalk. Traffic conditions are such that frequent gaps are present for
pedestrians to cross. The traffic signals at Churchill Boulevard serve to create these gaps.
The second criterion is met since the nearest lights, at Churchill Boulevard, are approximately
300 m distant.
The third criterion is moot since the crosswalk is not at an intersection.
The installation of traffic signals at this location may create at least two new potential hazards
over and above those normal hazards that exist when crossing any street. If these lights are
installed and not frequently actuated the regular traffic on the street will become accustomed
to them being green and may not notice when they turn red. This can result in accidents:
1) A pedestrian seeing the walk signal steps out in front of a moving car. This can
happen especially with children who put too much faith in the lights. Or
2) A driver who fails to notice the light change to amber at a safe distance suddenly
applies the brakes when close to the crosswalk causing a rear end collision when a
following vehicle fails to stop in time.
Pedestrian signals should not be installed here for the reasons stated. The pedestrian volumes
do not warrant them and they could create a potential hazard at least as bad as what is there
now.
Chesley Drive
M& C 2006 - 101
Request from St. Pius X Church for Traffic Lights at the Crosswalk Between the
Church and its Parking Lot on Somerset Street.
Page 3
The City recently installed a Pedestrian Signal on Chesley Drive at the request of Ocean Steel
for employees to cross to the parking lot on the other side of the street. All the TAC criteria
are not met at this location. Pedestrian volumes are very low, being limited almost exclusively
to Ocean Steel employees on the way to and from work. Chesley Drive is much busier than
Somerset Street, is 4 lanes wide and, at rush hour, gaps in traffic are very infrequent. The
second criterion is met since the nearest lights, at Bentley Street, are approximately 650m
distant. The third criterion is moot since the crosswalk is not at an intersection.
These signals were installed at the request of Ocean Steel on a 50/50 cost sharing basis with
Ocean Steel. A previous set of outdated signals had been removed a number of years before.
INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES
Somerset Street is a Regional Designated Highway and concurrence from the Department of
Transportation should be sought.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
If Council decides that the signals should be installed, such installation would cost
approximately $20,000. Funds have not been specifically allocated for these signals in the
2006 Operating Budget. Since this pedestrian crossing is used primarily by church members
to directly access their parking lot, the City should pay no more than 50% of the cost.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of a technical evaluation of this request against the TAC standards, a set of
pedestrian actuated traffic signals is not warranted at this location. Staff have formulated the
recommendation below on that basis. Traffic signals, in and of themselves, are not necessarily
safer.
RECOMMENDATION
M& C 2006 - 101
Request from St. Pius X Church for Traffic Lights at the Crosswalk Between the
Church and its Parking Lot on Somerset Street.
Page 4
It is recommended that the letter from St. Pius X Roman Catholic Church should be received
and filed, and the requested traffic signals not be installed.
Respectfully submitted,
J. M. Paul Groody, P. Eng. Terrence L. Totten, F.C.A.
Commissioner, City Manager
Municipal Operations & Engineering
OPEN SESSION
M & C 2006 – 106
April 20, 2006
His Worship Norm McFarlane
and Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT
Annual Sidewalk Vendor Auction
BACKGROUND
The City of Saint John has conducted an annual auction for sidewalk vendors
since 1994. These vendors typically competitively bid on selected sidewalk sites
which have been approved by Council. At the beginning of the program there
were as many as 22 sites available for competitive bidding. However, in the past
ten years the number of persons interested in these sites has significantly
diminished and therefore Council eliminated a number of sites to be more
reflective of the actual demand. In 2004 there were a total of six sites available
and a total of two sites were sold. All of the sidewalk sites are very closely tied to
either pedestrian traffic flows or are in the vicinity of night time entertainment
locations. For this reason the sites are adjusted from year to year with the
evolution of downtown entertainment. In 2005 Council approved a total of 14
sites. Of these 14 sites a total of eight sites were sold at the auction. Each of
these sites with the exception of one were sold at the minimum price of $600 per
site. For Council’s information the following background is provided.
The City of Saint John held its first annual auction for sidewalk vendors in 1994.
The auction provided specific sidewalk sites and/or metered vehicle sites for
interested persons to bid on for the purpose of establishing mobile vending
operations. A total of 18 sites were approved by Council at that time. Licenses
were awarded to individuals based on the highest bid submission for each site.
During the years subsequent to 1994, there had been considerable dialogue among
sidewalk vendors, local businesses, Saint John Police Force, Common Council
and other affected parties concerning the number and location of the sites. The
need to add/delete sites in the uptown area is closely tied to the number and
M & C 2006 – 106 - 2 - April 20, 2006
location of evening entertainment facilities and the number of persons interested
in purchasing sites(s). The sidewalk vendor sites operate between the hours of
7:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m.
Vendors do not require a Hawkers and Peddlers License or a Sidewalk Vendor
License to sell from private property.
ANALYSIS
Appended to this report is a history of sidewalk sites sold at auction beginning in
1994 through to 2004. The number of sites sold in recent years has diminished
significantly. Also, the number of persons interested in purchasing sites has
declined from four in 2000, two in 2001-2003 and one in 2004. In all but one
instance, sites sold since 1998 were purchased for the minimum bid price. There
was no competitive bidding. Because of the evident absence of competitive
bidding in 1998, Council increased the minimum bid price to $600 each in 1999.
Staff, in consultation with community stakeholders, are now recommending that
Council increase the minimum bid price to $2,000 beginning in 2006. Although
this is a significant increase from the previous minimum, it is consistent with
other communities. In larger centers where competitive bidding exists the more
attractive sites sell for $10,000 and more.
The annual auction is scheduled for Tuesday, May 9th at 2:30 p.m.
Staff have received input from various stakeholders with respect to current
available sites. The Police Force, Works Department, Uptown Saint John, the
Parking Commission, the Hardman Group have all been solicited for their input.
The Police have some concerns with the sites on Princess Street, sites # 12 and
14. The main concern is that these sites offer a venue for congregation of crowds
after area nightclubs close their doors. The congregation of larger crowds can
lead to confrontations. The Hardman Group, Uptown Saint John and the City
Manager’s Office each have a concern with respect to the site immediately
adjacent to the clock at Market Square, site # 2. There have been situations that
the operators of this site in the past have had complaints with respect to the
unsightly condition of their operation. The operators of Market Square have
expressed concern about this. Staff are, therefore, recommending that this site be
removed as the new configuration of Water Street offers other opportunities.
Staff are suggesting the site that was immediately adjacent to the clock at Market
Square be relocated to across the street adjacent to Loyalist Plaza. Additionally,
site #11 which is located adjacent to the bus lay-by at the foot of King Street
should not be offered for sale this year as significant work is anticipated by
Municipal Operations to reconfigure that entire area. The vendor sites are
described on the attached list and indicated on the attached map.
It should be noted that the City can only exercise authority with respect to
sidewalk vendors whom are located on the street right of way. Vendors who
make arrangements with private property owners are not regulated. For example,
in 2004 we had an experience with a market type arrangement in Jardine’s Alley
M & C 2006 – 106 - 3 - April 20, 2006
and later in Loyalist Plaza. These vendors were not regulated by the City by-law
and in all likelihood will set up shop again in 2006. Uptown Saint John will
attempt to arrange that these installations are neat and orderly in appearance.
In consideration of the comments provided, and in consideration of our past
experiences, staff are prepared to make a recommendation for the year 2006.
RECOMMENDATION
Your City Manager recommends that:
Sites 2 and 11 be eliminated and that a new site be established on reconstructed
Water Street adjacent to Loyalist Plaza as indicated on the attached map,
and further that the minimum bid price be increased from $600 to $2,000,
and staff be authorized to advertise and conduct the auction on May 2006,
and that this report be received and filed.
Respectfully submitted,
Wm. Edwards, P. Eng.
Commissioner, Buildings and Inspection Services
Terrence Totten, CA
City Manager
Attachments
Schedule A
2006 SIDEWALK VENDOR SITES
Site ID Location
1 Sidewalk in front of 7 Market Square (Hong Kong Bank) at St. Patrick Street,
PID #00037002.
2 (delete) Sidewalk in front of Market Square entrance, at St. Patrick Street, PID #55025530
and #55022834.
3 Sidewalk in front of Market Square entrance, (at foot of stairs) at St. Patrick
Street, PID #55025530 and #55027809.
4. Sidewalk in front of 91 King Street at corner of Charlotte Street, PID #39982.
5 Sidewalk in King’s Square at corner of King Square North and Charlotte Street,
PID #00032227.
6 Sidewalk in King’s Square at intersection of King Street and Charlotte Street, PID
#00032227.
7 Sidewalk in front of 9-11 Sydney Street (Studio 54), PID #00016295.
8 Sidewalk in front of 40 Charlotte Street, at corner of King Square North, PID
#00016212.
9 Sidewalk in front of 44 King Street (CIBC) at corner of Germain Street, PID
#00009654.
10 Sidewalk in front of 1 King Street (Brunswick House) at corner of Chipman Hill,
PID #00037010.
11 (delete) Sidewalk on the island (south of King Street) beside the bus stop between Water
Street and Prince William Street.
12 Sidewalk in front of 110-114 Prince William Street (Studio 112) at corner of
Princess Street, PID #00008987.
13 Sidewalk in front of 123 Prince William Street (Club Oasis), PID #00011437.
14 Sidewalk in front of 55 Canterbury Street at corner of Princess Street, PID
#00008987.
Proposed New Site:
Sidewalk in front of Loyalist Plaza at intersection of St. Patrick Street and Water
Street, PID # 00000003.
00000004
00000004
0 00 0 000 4
0 0 00 0 004
0000000 4000000040000000400000004
5
50
24
434
0
0000004
00000004000000034
r u e C a n t er b u ry St.
ruePrincessSt.
c ô t e C h i p m a n H i ll
q
u
a
i
North
M
a
r
k
et
Wh
.
car.
Market
S
q
.
r
u
e
S
o
u
t
h
M
a
r
ketSt.
r
u
e
N
o
r
t
h
M
a
r
k
e
t
S
t.
r ue S my th e St .
ru e S aint P atrick St.
r
u
e
K
i
n
gSt.car.N.KingSq.N.
q
u
a
i
P
e
t
e
r
s
W
h
.
rueHorsfieldSt.rue S y d n e y St.St.
a n g Wel l in g to n R ow
es t erSt.
P e e l S t.
a v.H a z e n A v.
r u e W a r d S t .
ruerueLeirueE.KingS r u e S y d n e y St .
r u e G er m a i n St.
r u e C h a r l o t te St .
ru
e
C
h
i
pm
an
S
t
.
r u e W a te rSt.
r u e P r i
r
u
e
Un
i
o
n
St
.
car.S.KingSq.S.
r
u
e
P
r
i
n
c
e
s
s
S
t
.
r
u
e
G
r
a
nn
a
n
S
t
.
r u e C a n te r b u ry St.
r u e Sm y th e St.
Si
d
e
w
a
l
k
V
e
n
d
o
r
S
i
t
e
s
Em
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
d
e
v
e
n
t
e
s
u
r
l
e
t
r
o
t
t
o
i
r
OPEN SESSION
M & C 2006 – 94
April 19, 2006
His Worship Norm McFarlane
and Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT
Bill 34
This is provided for Council’s information. On Thursday, April 13, 2006, Bill 34
received third reading and royal assent. This bill was an act to amend the
Municipalities Act. This piece of legislation will give significant new powers and
authorities respecting substandard housing and dangerous and unsightly premises
to municipalities throughout the province.
As per Council’s direction, your staff have been working diligently with the
Province of New Brunswick in an effort to convince the Province that additional
powers and authorities are required to both expedite and convince property
owners to bring their buildings to a minimum standard condition. This has been a
very long process; however, we believe it was well worth the effort. There is
more work to be done in conjunction and cooperation with the Province of New
Brunswick; however, we are optimistic that within a few months new regulations
will be in effect and our city’s Minimum Standards By-law will be amended to
reflect the changes in legislation.
The authorities being made available to municipalities appear to be extensive.
Fines have been increased substantially for those not in compliance, the
municipality will have the authority to designate by-law enforcement persons to
issue tickets to those in non-compliance, and the municipality will have the
authority to repair buildings, the cost of such repair can be directly applied to the
annual property taxes. These are just a few of the more significant authorities
provided by the new bill.
M & C 2006 – 94 - 2 - April 19, 2006
Your staff is appreciative of the efforts of all involved, both provincially and
municipally. It is our belief that once implemented these new authorities will
provide relief to those in our community who live in substandard conditions.
Staff of the Legal Department and the Building Inspector’s office, in conjunction
with Provincial staff, are in the process of carefully reviewing the language of the
new act and will be providing subsequent reports to Council. As stated,
appointments will have to be made, by-laws changed, and there may be a
requirement for additional human resources as a result of the high expectation that
our community has regarding this new law.
RECOMMENDATION
Your City Manager recommends that this report be received and filed.
Respectfully submitted,
Wm. Edwards, P. Eng.
Commissioner
Buildings and Inspection Services
Terrence Totten, CA
City Manager
MR. KELLY LAMROCKM. KELLY LAMROCK
BILL
34
AN ACT TO AMEND THE
MUNICIPALITIES ACT
Read first time: April 6, 2006
Read second time:
Committee:
Read third time:
3rd Session, 55th Legislature
New Brunswick
54-55 Elizabeth II, 2005-2006
PROJETDELOI
34
LOI MODIFIANT LA
LOI SUR LES MUNICIPALITÉS
Première lecture : le 6 avril 2006
Deuxième lecture :
Comité :
Troisième lecture :
3e session, 55e législature
Nouveau-Brunswick
54-55 Elizabeth II, 2005-2006
HON. ROSE-MAY POIRIERL’HON. ROSE-MAY POIRIER
1
2006
BILL 34
An Act to Amend the
Municipalities Act
Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the
Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick, enacts as fol-
lows:
1 Section 94.1 of the Municipalities Act, chapter M-22
of the Revised Statutes, 1973, is amended by striking out
“If a council makes a by-law under subsection 94(1) or
(3), subsection 190.01(3)” and substituting “If a council
makes a by-law under subsection 94(1) or (3), subsections
190.001(1) and 190.01(3)”.
2 The Act is amended by adding after section 94.1 the
following:
RESIDENTIAL MAINTENANCE AND
OCCUPANCY STANDARDS
94.2(1)In this section
“dwelling” means a building any part of which is used
or is intended to be used for the purposes of human habi-
tation, whether or not the building is in such state of dis-
repair so as to be unfit for such purpose;
“dwelling unit” means one or more rooms located
within a dwelling and used or intended to be used for hu-
man habitation by one or more persons.
94.2(2)A person who is leasing a dwelling or dwelling
unit to another person shall ensure that the dwelling or
PROJET DE LOI 34
Loi modifiant la
Loi sur les municipalités
Sa Majesté, sur l’avis et du consentement de l’Assem-
blée législative du Nouveau-Brunswick, décrète :
1 L’article 94.1 de la Loi sur les municipalités, chapi-
tre M-22 des Lois révisées de 1973, est modifié par la
suppression de «Si un conseil prend un arrêté en vertu
du paragraphe 94(1) ou (3), le paragraphe 190.01(3)» et
son remplacement par «Si un conseil prend un arrêté en
vertu du paragraphe 94(1) ou (3), les paragraphes
190.001(1) et 190.01(3)».
2 La Loi est modifiée par l’adjonction, après l’arti-
cle 94.1, de ce qui suit:
NORMES D’ENTRETIEN ET
D’OCCUPATION RÉSIDENTIELLES
94.2(1)Dans le présent article
«habitation» désigne un bâtiment dont une partie sert
ou est destinée à loger des personnes, que ce bâtiment soit
ou non dans un état de délabrement qui le rende inhabita-
ble;
«logement» désigne une ou plusieurs pièces situées
dans une habitation et servant ou destinées à loger une ou
plusieurs personnes.
94.2(2)Toute personne qui loue une habitation ou un lo-
gement à une autre personne doit s’assurer que l’habita-
2
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
dwelling unit complies at all times with the standards pro-
vided for pursuant to a by-law under subsection 94(1) or
(3).
94.2(3)A person who violates or fails to comply with
subsection (2) commits an offence punishable under Part
II of the Provincial Offences Procedure Act as a category
F offence.
94.2(4)Notwithstanding subsection 56(6) of the Pro-
vincial Offences Procedure Act, the minimum fine that
may be imposed by a judge under that Act in respect of an
offence under subsection (3) shall be one thousand dol-
lars.
94.2(5)Where an offence under subsection (3) contin-
ues for more than one day,
(a)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the sum
of
(i)one thousand dollars, and
(ii)the minimum fine set by the Provincial Of-
fences Procedure Act for a category F offence multi-
plied by the number of days during which the of-
fence continues after the first day, and
(b)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues.
3 The Act is amended by adding after section 100 the
following:
100.1 A council may by by-law provide that a person
who commits an offence under subsection 94.2(3) or
102.1(1.2) or in respect of a by-law under subsection
94(1) or (3) or section 190 may pay an amount fixed by
by-law that is less than the minimum fine that may upon
conviction be imposed for the offence and that, upon such
payment, the person is not liable to be prosecuted for the
offence.
100.2 For the purposes of the Provincial Offences Pro-
cedure Act,
tion ou le logement est conforme, en tout temps, aux nor-
mes prévues conformément à un arrêté pris en vertu du
paragraphe 94(1) ou (3).
94.2(3)Quiconque contrevient ou omet de se conformer
au paragraphe (2) commet une infraction punissable en
vertu de la Partie II de la Loi sur la procédure applicable
aux infractions provinciales à titre d’infraction de la
classe F.
94.2(4)Nonobstant le paragraphe 56(6) de la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales,
l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée par un juge en
vertu de cette loi relativement à l’infraction prévue au pa-
ragraphe (3) est de 1000$.
94.2(5)Lorsqu’une infraction prévue au paragraphe (3)
se poursuit pendant plus d’une journée,
a)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est la
somme des montants suivants:
(i)1000$; et
(ii)l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales
pour une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le
nombre de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se
poursuit après la première journée; et
b)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procédure
applicable aux infractions provinciales pour une in-
fraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre de jours
pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit.
3 La Loi est modifiée par l’adjonction, après l’arti-
cle 100, de ce qui suit:
100.1 Un conseil peut prévoir, par arrêté, qu’une per-
sonne qui commet l’infraction prévue au paragraphe 94.2(3)
ou 102.1(1.2) ou une infraction relativement à un arrêté
pris en vertu du paragraphe 94(1) ou (3) ou de l’article 190
peut payer un montant fixé par arrêté qui est inférieur à
l’amende minimale qui, sur déclaration de culpabilité,
pourrait être imposée pour l’infraction et une fois le mon-
tant payé, la personne n’est plus susceptible de poursuites
judiciaires.
100.2 Aux fins de la Loi sur la procédure applicable aux
infractions provinciales,
3
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
(a)offences under subsection 94.2(3) or 102.1(1.2)
or offences in respect of a by-law under subsection
94(1) or (3) or section 190 are prescribed offences for
the purposes of section 9 of that Act, and
(b)a by-law enforcement officer appointed under
section 14 of the Police Act and designated by resolu-
tion of the council of a municipality is an authorized
person who may serve tickets in respect of the offences
referred to in paragraph (a).
4 Section 102.1 of the Act is amended
(a)by adding before subsection (1) the following:
102.1(0.1)In this section
“dwelling” means a building any part of which is used
or is intended to be used for the purposes of human habi-
tation, whether or not the building is in such state of dis-
repair so as to be unfit for such purpose;
“dwelling unit” means one or more rooms located
within a dwelling and used or intended to be used for hu-
man habitation by one or more persons.
(b)by adding after subsection (1) the following:
102.1(1.1)Where an entry warrant has been obtained
under the Entry Warrants Act, a person who is leasing a
dwelling or dwelling unit to another person shall not
refuse entry to or obstruct or interfere with an officer re-
ferred to in subsection (1) who under the authority of that
subsection is entering or attempting to enter the dwelling
or dwelling unit to ensure compliance with a by-law under
subsection 94(1) or (3) or section 190.
102.1(1.2)A person who violates or fails to comply
with subsection (1.1) commits an offence punishable un-
der Part II of the Provincial Offences Procedure Act as a
category F offence.
102.1(1.3)Notwithstanding subsection 56(6) of the
Provincial Offences Procedure Act, the minimum fine that
may be imposed by a judge under that Act in respect of an
a)les infractions prévues au paragraphe 94.2(3) ou
102.1(1.2) ou les infractions relativement à un arrêté
pris en vertu du paragraphe 94(1) ou (3) ou de l’article 190
sont des infractions prescrites pour l’application de
l’article 9 de cette loi, et
b)les agents chargés de l’exécution des arrêtés muni-
cipaux nommés en vertu de l’article 14 de la Loi sur la
Police et désignés par résolution du conseil d’une mu-
nicipalité sont des personnes autorisées qui peuvent si-
gnifier des billets de contravention relativement aux in-
fractions mentionnées à l’alinéa a).
4 L’article 102.1 de la Loi est modifié
a)par l’adjonction, avant le paragraphe (1), de ce
qui suit:
102.1(0.1)Dans le présent article
«habitation» désigne un bâtiment dont une partie sert
ou est destinée à loger des personnes, que ce bâtiment soit
ou non dans un état de délabrement qui le rende inhabita-
ble;
«logement» désigne une ou plusieurs pièces situées
dans une habitation et servant ou destinées à loger une ou
plusieurs personnes.
b)par l’adjonction, après le paragraphe (1), de ce
qui suit:
102.1(1.1)Si un mandat d’entrée a été obtenu en vertu
de la Loi sur les mandats d’entrée, toute personne qui loue
une habitation ou un logement à une autre personne ne
peut refuser de permettre à un fonctionnaire visé au para-
graphe (1) de pénétrer dans l’habitation ou le logement en
vertu de ce paragraphe ni l’entraver ou le gêner alors qu’il
pénètre ou tente de pénétrer dans l’habitation ou le loge-
ment en vertu de ce paragraphe afin de s’assurer du res-
pect d’un arrêté pris en vertu du paragraphe 94(1) ou (3)
ou de l’article 190.
102.1(1.2)Quiconque contrevient ou omet de se confor-
mer au paragraphe (1.1) commet une infraction punissa-
ble en vertu de la Partie II de la Loi sur la procédure ap-
plicable aux infractions provinciales à titre d’infraction
de la classe F.
102.1(1.3)Nonobstant le paragraphe 56(6) de la Loi sur
la procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales,
l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée par un juge en
4
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
offence under subsection (1.2) shall be one thousand dol-
lars.
102.1(1.4)Where an offence under subsection (1.2)
continues for more than one day,
(a)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the sum
of
(i)one thousand dollars, and
(ii)the minimum fine set by the Provincial Of-
fences Procedure Act for a category F offence multi-
plied by the number of days during which the of-
fence continues after the first day, and
(b)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues.
5 Section 190 of the Act is amended by striking out
“sections 190.01 to 190.07” and substituting “sections
190.001 to 190.07”.
6 The Act is amended by adding after section 190 the
following:
190.001(1)In sections 190.01 to 190.07
“dwelling” means a building any part of which is used
or is intended to be used for the purposes of human habi-
tation, whether or not the building is in such state of dis-
repair so as to be unfit for such purpose;
“dwelling unit” means one or more rooms located
within a dwelling and used or intended to be used for hu-
man habitation by one or more persons.
190.001(2)In subsection 190.01(3) and sections
190.02, 190.021, 190.04, 190.041 and 190.05
“owner” includes the person for the time being manag-
ing or receiving the rent for premises or a building or
structure, whether on the person’s own account or as agent
or trustee of any other person, or who would receive the
rent if the premises, building or structure were let.
vertu de cette loi relativement à l’infraction prévue au pa-
ragraphe (1.2) est de 1000$.
102.01(1.4)Lorsqu’une infraction prévue au paragra-
phe (1.2) se poursuit pendant plus d’une journée,
a)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est la
somme des montants suivants:
(i)1000$; et
(ii)l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales
pour une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le
nombre de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se
poursuit après la première journée; et
b)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procédure
applicable aux infractions provinciales pour une in-
fraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre de jours
pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit.
5 L’article 190 de la Loi est modifié par la suppression
de «articles 190.01 à 190.07» et son remplacement par
«articles 190.001 à 190.07».
6 La Loi est modifiée par l’adjonction, après l’arti-
cle 190, de ce qui suit:
190.001(1)Aux articles 190.01 à 190.07
«habitation» désigne un bâtiment dont une partie sert
ou est destinée à loger des personnes, que ce bâtiment soit
ou non dans un état de délabrement qui le rende inhabita-
ble;
«logement» désigne une ou plusieurs pièces situées
dans une habitation et servant ou destinées à loger une ou
plusieurs personnes.
190.001(2)Au paragraphe 190.01(3) et aux articles
190.02, 190.021, 190.04, 190.041 et 190.05
«propriétaire» s’entend notamment de la personne
qui, pour le moment, gère des lieux, un bâtiment ou une
construction ou qui en perçoit le loyer pour son compte ou
à titre de mandataire ou de fiduciaire d’une autre personne
ou qui en percevrait le loyer si les lieux, le bâtiment ou la
construction étaient loués.
5
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
7 Section 190.01 of the Act is amended
(a)by adding after subsection (2) the following:
190.01(2.1)A person who violates or fails to comply
with subsection (2) commits an offence that is, subject to
subsections (2.2) and (2.3), punishable under Part II of the
Provincial Offences Procedure Act as a category F of-
fence.
190.01(2.2)Notwithstanding subsection 56(6) of the
Provincial Offences Procedure Act, where a person who is
leasing a dwelling or dwelling unit to another person com-
mits an offence under subsection (2.1) in relation to the
dwelling or dwelling unit, the minimum fine that may be
imposed by a judge under that Act in respect of the of-
fence shall be one thousand dollars.
190.01(2.3)Where an offence under subsection (2.1)
continues for more than one day,
(a)if the offence was committed in relation to a
dwelling or dwelling unit by a person who is leasing the
dwelling or dwelling unit to another person,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
sum of
(A)one thousand dollars, and
(B)the minimum fine set by the Provincial Of-
fences Procedure Act for a category F offence
multiplied by the number of days during which
the offence continues after the first day, and
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(b)in any other case,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
minimum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
7 L’article 190.01 de la Loi est modifié
a)par l’adjonction, après le paragraphe (2), de ce
qui suit:
190.01(2.1)Quiconque contrevient ou omet de se con-
former au paragraphe (2) commet une infraction qui est,
sous réserve des paragraphes (2.2) et (2.3), punissable en
vertu de la Partie II de la Loi sur la procédure applicable
aux infractions provinciales à titre d’infraction de la
classe F.
190.01(2.2)Nonobstant le paragraphe 56(6) de la Loi
sur la procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales,
lorsqu’une personne qui loue une habitation ou un loge-
ment à une autre personne commet l’infraction prévue au
paragraphe (2.1) relativement à l’habitation ou au loge-
ment, l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée par un
juge en vertu de cette loi relativement à l’infraction est de
1000$.
190.01(2.3)Lorsqu’une infraction prévue au paragra-
phe (2.1) se poursuit pendant plus d’une journée,
a)dans le cas où l’infraction a été commise relative-
ment à une habitation ou à un logement par une per-
sonne qui loue l’habitation ou le logement à une autre
personne,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est la
somme des montants suivants:
(A)1000$; et
(B)l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provincia-
les pour une infraction de la classe F multipliée
par le nombre de jours pendant lesquels l’infrac-
tion se poursuit après la première journée; et
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit; et
b)dans tout autre cas,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit, et
6
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues.
(b)in subsection (3)
(i)in the portion preceding paragraph (a) by
striking out “and the notice shall” and substituting
“by notice in the form prescribed by regulation
which shall”;
(ii)by adding after paragraph (e) the following:
(e.1)if an appeal may be brought under subsection
190.021(1), state the final date for giving notice of the
appeal.
(iii)by repealing paragraph (f).
8 The Act is amended by adding after section 190.01
the following:
190.011 A notice referred to in subsection 190.01(3)
shall be given
(a)if the person to be notified is an individual, by
personal delivery on the individual or by posting the
notice in a conspicuous place on the premises, building
or structure, or
(b)if the person to be notified is a corporation, by
personal delivery on an officer, director or agent of the
corporation or on a manager or person who appears to
be in control of any office or other place of business
where the corporation carries on business in New
Brunswick or by posting the notice in a conspicuous
place on the premises, building or structure.
9 Section 190.02 of the Act is amended
(a)in subsection (1) by striking out “paragraph
190.01(3)(f)” and substituting “section 190.011”;
(b)in subsection (4)
(i)in the portion preceding paragraph (a) by
striking out “subsection 190.01(3)” and substitut-
ing “section 190.011”;
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit.
b)au paragraphe (3),
(i)au passage qui précède l’alinéa a), par la sup-
pression de «et l’avis doit» et son remplacement
par «par avis selon la formule prescrite par règle-
ment et qui doit»;
(ii)par l’adjonction, après l’alinéa e), de ce qui
suit:
e.1)spécifier le délai imparti pour donner un avis
d’appel si un appel peut être interjeté en vertu du para-
graphe 190.021(1).
(iii)par l’abrogation de l’alinéa f).
8 La Loi est modifiée par l’adjonction, après l’arti-
cle 190.01, de ce qui suit:
190.011 L’avis visé au paragraphe 190.01(3) doit être
notifié
a)si le destinataire est un particulier, par remise en
main propre au destinataire ou par son affichage sur les
lieux, le bâtiment ou la construction en un endroit visi-
ble, ou
b)si le destinataire est une corporation, par remise en
main propre à tout dirigeant, à tout administrateur, à
tout représentant de la corporation ou à tout gérant ou à
toute personne qui paraît être responsable d’un bureau
ou autre établissement de la corporation au Nouveau-
Brunswick ou par son affichage sur les lieux, le bâti-
ment ou la construction en un endroit visible.
9 L’article 190.02 de la Loi est modifié
a)au paragraphe (1), par la suppression de
«l’alinéa 190.01(3)f)» et son remplacement par
«l’article 190.011»;
b)au paragraphe (4),
(i)au passage qui précède l’alinéa a), par la sup-
pression de «du paragraphe 190.01(3)» et son
remplacement par «de l’article 190.011»;
7
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
(ii)in paragraph (c) by striking out “on the hear-
ing of an information for a violation of a by-law
under section 190” and substituting “in a prosecu-
tion for a violation of a by-law under section 190”.
10 The Act is amended by adding after section 190.02
the following:
190.021(1)An owner or occupier of premises or a
building or structure who has been given a notice under
section 190.011, other than a notice prepared under sub-
section 190.041(2), and who is not satisfied with the terms
or conditions set out in the notice may appeal to the appro-
priate committee of council by sending a notice of appeal
by registered mail to the clerk of the municipality within
fourteen days after having been given the notice.
190.021(2)A notice that is not appealed within the time
referred to in subsection (1) shall be deemed to be con-
firmed.
190.021(3)On an appeal, the committee of council shall
hold a hearing into the matter at which the owner or occu-
pier bringing the appeal has a right to be heard and may be
represented by counsel.
190.021(4)On an appeal, the committee of council may
confirm, modify or rescind the notice or extend the time
for complying with the notice.
190.021(5)The committee of council shall provide a
copy of its decision to the owner or occupier of the pre-
mises, building or structure who brought the appeal within
fourteen days after making its decision.
190.021(6)The owner or occupier provided with a copy
of a decision under subsection (5) may appeal the decision
to a judge of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Bruns-
wick within fourteen days after the copy of the decision
was provided to the owner or occupier on the grounds that
(a)the procedure required to be followed by this Act
was not followed, or
(b)the decision is patently unreasonable.
190.021(7)On the appeal, the judge of The Court of
Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick may confirm, modify
or rescind the whole or any part of the decision of the
(ii)à l’alinéa c), par la suppression de «lors de
l’audition d’une dénonciation pour infraction à un
arrêté en vertu de l’article 190» et son remplace-
ment par «dans toute poursuite pour une infraction
à un arrêté pris en vertu de l’article 190».
10 La Loi est modifiée par l’adjonction, après l’arti-
cle 190.02, de ce qui suit:
190.021(1)Le propriétaire ou l’occupant des lieux, du
bâtiment ou de la construction à qui un avis a été notifié
aux termes de l’article 190.011, à l’exception d’un avis
qui a été préparé aux termes du paragraphe 190.041(2), et
qui n’accepte pas les modalités ou les conditions qui y
sont énoncées peut interjeter appel devant le comité du
conseil approprié en envoyant un avis d’appel par courrier
recommandé au secrétaire de la municipalité dans les qua-
torze jours qui suivent la notification de l’avis.
190.021(2)L’avis dont il n’est pas interjeté appel dans
le délai imparti au paragraphe (1) est réputé confirmé.
190.021(3)Lors d’un appel, le comité du conseil doit te-
nir, sur le point en litige, une audience au cours de laquelle
le propriétaire ou l’occupant qui interjette appel a le droit
d’être entendu et peut se faire représenter par un avocat.
190.021(4)Lors d’un appel, le comité du conseil
peutconfirmer, modifier ou annuler l’avis ou proroger le
délai pour s’y conformer.
190.021(5)Le comité du conseil doit fournir une copie
de sa décision au propriétaire ou à l’occupant des lieux, du
bâtiment ou de la construction qui lui a interjeté appel
dans les quatorzejours suivant la date à laquelle il a rendu
sa décision.
190.021(6)Le propriétaire ou l’occupant à qui une
copie d’une décision a été fournie aux termes du paragra-
phe (5) peut, dans les quatorze jours qui suivent, interjeter
appel de la décision devant un juge de la Cour du Banc de
la Reine du Nouveau-Brunswick au motif que
a)la démarche à suivre en vertu de la présente loi n’a
pas été suivie, ou
b)la décision est manifestement déraisonnable.
190.021(7)Lors de l’appel, le juge de la Cour du Banc
de la Reine du Nouveau-Brunswick peutconfirmer, modi-
fier ou annuler, en tout ou en partie, la décision du comité
8
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
committee of council, and the decision of the judge under
this subsection is not subject to appeal.
190.021(8)A notice that is deemed to be confirmed un-
der subsection (2) or that is confirmed or modified by the
committee of council under subsection (4) or a judge of
The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick under
subsection (7), as the case may be, shall be final and bind-
ing upon the owner or occupier who shall comply within
the time and in the manner specified in the notice.
190.021(9)An appeal does not prevent a further notice
from being given under section 190.011 or from being
prepared and signed under subsection 190.041(2) in rela-
tion to a condition referred to in the notice that is the sub-
ject of the appeal if there has been a change in the condi-
tion.
190.022(1)In this section
“land registration office” means the registry office for
a county or the land titles office for a land registration dis-
trict.
190.022(2)A notice given under section 190.011 may
be registered in the appropriate land registration office
and, upon such registration, any subsequent owner of the
premises, building or structure in respect of which the no-
tice was given shall be deemed, for the purposes of sec-
tions 190.04 and 190.041, to have been given the notice
on the day on which the notice was given under section
190.011.
190.022(3)For the purposes of registering a notice un-
der subsection (2), section 44 of the Registry Act and sec-
tion 55 of the Land Titles Act do not apply.
190.022(4)Within thirty days after the terms of the no-
tice have been complied with or a debt due to a municipal-
ity under subsection 190.04(1) or 190.041(5) or due to the
Minister of Finance under subsection 190.061(3), as the
case may be, is discharged, the municipality shall provide
a certificate in the form prescribed by regulation to that ef-
fect to the person to whom the notice was given under sec-
tion 190.011 or deemed to have been given under subsec-
tion (2), as the case may be, and the certificate shall
operate as a discharge of the notice.
du conseil et la décision du juge en vertu de ce paragraphe
n’est pas susceptible d’appel.
190.021(8)L’avis qui est réputé confirmé aux termes du
paragraphe (2) ou qui est confirmé ou modifié par le co-
mité du conseil aux termes du paragraphe (4) ou par un
juge de la Cour du Banc de la Reine du Nouveau-
Brunswick aux termes du paragraphe (7), selon le cas, est
définitif et lie le propriétaire ou l’occupant, qui sont tenus
de se conformer dans le délai et de la manière qui sont pré-
cisés dans l’avis.
190.021(9)Un appel n’a pas pour effet d’empêcher la
notification d’un autre avis aux termes de l’article 190.011
ou la préparation et la signature d’un autre avis aux termes
du paragraphe 190.041(2) par rapport à une situation indi-
quée dans l’avis faisant l’objet de l’appel s’il y eut un
changement de situation.
190.022(1)Dans le présent article
«bureau d’enregistrement des biens-fonds» désigne le
bureau d’enregistrement d’un comté ou le bureau d’enre-
gistrement foncier d’une circonscription d’enregistrement
foncier.
190.022(2)L’avis notifié aux termes de l’article 190.011
peut être enregistré au bureau d’enregistrement des biens-
fonds approprié et dès l’enregistrement, tout propriétaire
subséquent des lieux, du bâtiment ou de la construction
pour lesquels la notification a été effectuée est réputé,
pour l’application des articles 190.04 et 190.041, avoir
reçu notification de l’avis à la date à laquelle l’avis avait
été notifié aux termes de l’article 190.011.
190.022(3)L’article 44 de la Loi sur l’enregistrement et
l’article 55 de la Loi sur l’enregistrement foncier ne s’ap-
pliquent pas à l’enregistrement d’un avis aux termes du
paragraphe (2).
190.022(4)Si les exigences formulées dans l’avis ont
été satisfaites ou que la créance de la municipalité aux
termes du paragraphe 190.04(1) ou 190.041(5) ou la
dette du ministre des Finances aux termes du paragra-
phe 190.061(3), selon le cas, a été réglée, la municipalité
doit, dans les trente jours qui suivent, fournir à la personne
à qui un avis avait été notifié aux termes de l’article 190.011
ou à la personne qui est réputée avoir reçu notification de
l’avis aux termes du paragraphe (2), selon le cas, un certi-
ficat à cette fin, en la forme prescrite par règlement, qui a
pour effet d’annuler l’avis.
9
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
190.022(5)A person to whom a certificate is provided
under subsection (4) may register the certificate in the ap-
propriate land registration office, and, upon registration of
the certificate, the appropriate registrar of the land regis-
tration office may cancel registration of the notice in re-
spect of which the certificate was provided.
11 Section 190.03 of the Act is amended
(a)by repealing subsection (1) and substituting the
following:
190.03(1)A person who fails to comply with the terms
of a notice given under section 190.011 commits an of-
fence that is, subject to subsections (1.1) and (1.2), pun-
ishable under Part II of the Provincial Offences Procedure
Act as a category F offence.
(b)by adding after subsection (1) the following:
190.03(1.1)Notwithstanding subsection 56(6) of the
Provincial Offences Procedure Act, where a person who is
leasing a dwelling or dwelling unit to another person com-
mits an offence under subsection (1) in relation to a notice
given under section 190.011 with respect to the dwelling
or dwelling unit, the minimum fine that may be imposed
by a judge under that Act in respect of the offence shall be
one thousand dollars.
190.03(1.2)Where an offence under subsection (1) con-
tinues for more than one day,
(a)if the offence was committed by a person in rela-
tion to notice given under section 190.011 with respect
to a dwelling or dwelling unit the person is leasing to
another person,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
sum of
(A)one thousand dollars, and
(B)the minimum fine set by the Provincial Of-
fences Procedure Act for a category F offence
multiplied by the number of days during which
the offence continues after the first day, and
190.022(5)Toute personne à qui un certificat a été
fourni aux termes du paragraphe (4) peut faire enregistrer
le certificat au bureau d’enregistrement des biens-fonds
approprié et dès l’enregistrement, le registraire approprié
du bureau d’enregistrement des biens-fonds peut annuler
l’enregistrement de l’avis pour lequel le certificat avait été
fourni.
11 L’article 190.03 de la Loi est modifié
a)par l’abrogation du paragraphe (1) et son rem-
placement par ce qui suit:
190.03(1)Quiconque omet de se conformer aux exi-
gences formulées dans un avis notifié aux termes de l’ar-
ticle 190.011 commet une infraction qui est, sous réserve
des paragraphes (1.1) et (1.2), punissable en vertu de la
Partie II de la Loi sur la procédure applicable aux infrac-
tions provinciales à titre d’infraction de la classe F.
b)par l’adjonction, après le paragraphe (1), de ce
qui suit:
190.03(1.1)Nonobstant le paragraphe 56(6) de la Loi
sur la procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales,
lorsqu’une personne qui loue une habitation ou un loge-
ment à une autre personne commet l’infraction prévue au
paragraphe (1) relativement à l’avis notifié aux termes de
l’article 190.011 par rapport à l’habitation ou au loge-
ment, l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée par un
juge en vertu de cette loi relativement à l’infraction est de
1000$.
190.03(1.2)Lorsqu’une infraction prévue au paragra-
phe (1) se poursuit pendant plus d’une journée,
a)dans le cas où l’infraction a été commise par une
personne relativement à un avis notifié aux termes de
l’article 190.011 par rapport à une habitation ou à un lo-
gement que celle-ci loue à une autre personne,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est la
somme des montants suivants:
(A)1000$; et
(B)l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provincia-
les pour une infraction de la classe F multipliée
par le nombre de jours pendant lesquels l’infrac-
tion se poursuit après la première journée; et
10
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(b)in any other case,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
minimum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues.
(c)by repealing subsection (2).
12 Section 190.04 of the Act is repealed and the follow-
ing is substituted:
190.04(1)If a notice has been given under section
190.011, other than a notice prepared under subsection
190.041(2), and the owner or occupier does not comply
with the notice, as deemed confirmed or as confirmed or
modified by a committee of council or a judge under sec-
tion 190.021, within the time set out in the notice, the mu-
nicipality may, rather than commencing proceedings in re-
spect of the violation or in addition to doing so,
(a)if the notice arises out of a condition existing con-
trary to subsection 190.01(1), cause the premises of
that owner or occupier to be cleaned up or repaired, or
(b)if the notice arises out of a condition existing con-
trary to subsection 190.01(2), cause the building or
structure of that owner or occupier to be demolished,
and the cost of carrying out such work, including any re-
lated charge or fee, is chargeable to the owner or occupier
and becomes a debt due to the municipality.
190.04(2)For the purpose of subsection (1), the officer
who gave the notice in respect of the premises, building or
structure and the employees of the municipality or other
persons acting on behalf of the municipality may, at all
reasonable times, enter upon the premises, building or
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit; et
b)dans tout autre cas,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit, et
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit.
c)par l’abrogation du paragraphe (2).
12 L’article 190.04 de la Loi est abrogé et remplacé par
ce qui suit:
190.04(1)Si un avis a été notifié aux termes de l’arti-
cle 190.011, à l’exception d’un avis qui a été préparé aux
termes du paragraphe 190.041(2), et que le propriétaire ou
l’occupant ne se conforme pas à cet avis dans le délai im-
parti et tel qu’il est réputé confirmé ou tel qu’il est con-
firmé ou modifié par un comité du conseil ou par un juge
en vertu de l’article 190.021, la municipalité peut, au lieu
d’intenter des procédures relatives à l’infraction ou en
plus d’intenter des procédures relatives à l’infraction,
a)si l’avis a pour origine une situation contraire au
paragraphe 190.01(1), faire nettoyer ou réparer les
lieux de ce propriétaire ou de cet occupant, ou
b)si l’avis a pour origine une situation contraire au
paragraphe 190.01(2), faire démolir le bâtiment ou la
construction de ce propriétaire ou de cet occupant,
et les frais relatifs à l’exécution de ces travaux, y compris
toute redevance ou tout droit afférent, sont à la charge du
propriétaire ou de l’occupant et deviennent une créance de
la municipalité.
190.04(2)Pour l’application du paragraphe (1), le fonc-
tionnaire qui a notifié l’avis relativement aux lieux, au bâ-
timent ou à la construction et les employés de la munici-
palité ou toute autre personne qui agit au nom de celle-ci
peuvent pénétrer, à tout moment raisonnable, dans les
11
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
structure in order to clean up or repair the premises or de-
molish the building or structure, as the case may be.
190.04(3)A municipality or a person acting on its be-
half is not liable to compensate an owner or occupier or
any other person by reason of anything done by or on be-
half of the municipality in the reasonable exercise of its
powers under this section.
13 The Act is amended by adding after section 190.04
the following:
190.041(1)In this section
“emergency” includes a situation in which there is im-
minent danger to public safety or of serious harm to pre-
mises or to a building or structure.
190.041(2)If upon inspection of a property under sec-
tion 102.1, an officer referred to in that section is satisfied
that there is nonconformity with a by-law under section
190 to such an extent as to pose an emergency, the officer
may prepare and sign a notice referred to in subsection
190.01(3) requiring the owner or occupier of the pre-
mises, building or structure in respect of which the notice
is prepared to immediately carry out work to terminate the
danger.
190.041(3)After having prepared and signed a notice
referred to in subsection (2), the officer may, either before
or after the notice is given under section 190.011, take any
measures necessary to terminate the danger giving rise to
the emergency, and, for this purpose, the officer who pre-
pared the notice and the employees of the municipality or
other persons acting on behalf of the municipality may, at
any time, enter upon the premises, building or structure in
respect of which the notice was prepared.
190.041(4)A municipality or a person acting on its be-
half is not liable to compensate an owner or occupier or
any other person by reason of anything done by or on be-
half of the municipality in the reasonable exercise of its
powers under this section.
190.041(5)The cost of taking measures under subsec-
tion (3), including any related charge or fee, is chargeable
to the owner or occupier and becomes a debt due to the
municipality.
190.041(6)If the notice was not given before measures
were taken to terminate the danger, the officer shall give a
lieux, le bâtiment ou la construction pour nettoyer ou ré-
parer les lieux ou démolir le bâtiment ou la construction,
selon le cas.
190.04(3)La municipalité ou toute personne agissant en
son nom n’est pas tenue d’indemniser le propriétaire, l’oc-
cupant ou toute autre personne pour quelque acte accom-
pli dans l’exercice raisonnable des pouvoirs que lui con-
fère le présent article.
13 La Loi est modifiée par l’adjonction, après l’arti-
cle 190.04, de ce qui suit:
190.041(1)Dans le présent article
«situation d’urgence» s’entend notamment d’une si-
tuation où il existe un danger imminent à la sécurité publi-
que ou lorsque des lieux, un bâtiment ou une construction
sont en danger imminent de subir un grave préjudice.
190.041(2)Si au cours d’une inspection d’une propriété
aux termes de l’article 102.1 un fonctionnaire visé à cet
article est convaincu que la propriété n’est pas conforme
à un arrêté pris en vertu de l’article 190 au point de créer
une situation urgence, il peut préparer et signer l’avis visé
au paragraphe 190.01(3) exigeant que le propriétaire ou
l’occupant des lieux, du bâtiment ou de la construction vi-
sés par l’avis exécute immédiatement des travaux en vue
d’écarter le danger.
190.041(3)Après avoir préparé et signé l’avis men-
tionné au paragraphe (2), le fonctionnaire peut, avant la
notification de l’avis aux termes de l’article 190.011 ou
après, prendre les mesures nécessaires pour écarter le dan-
ger donnant lieu à la situation d’urgence et à cette fin, le
fonctionnaire qui a préparé l’avis, les employés de la mu-
nicipalité ou toute autre personne agissant au nom de
celle-ci peuvent pénétrer, en tout temps, dans les lieux, le
bâtiment ou la construction visés par l’avis.
190.041(4)La municipalité ou toute personne agissant
en son nom n’est pas tenue d’indemniser le propriétaire,
l’occupant ou toute autre personne pour quelque acte ac-
compli dans l’exercice raisonnable des pouvoirs que lui
confère le présent article.
190.041(5)Les frais relatifs à la prise de mesures en
vertu du paragraphe (3), y compris toute redevance ou tout
droit afférent, sont à la charge du propriétaire ou de l’oc-
cupant et deviennent une créance de la municipalité.
190.041(6)Si l’avis n’a pas été notifié avant que des
mesures ne soient prises pour écarter le danger, le fonc-
12
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
copy of the notice under section 190.011 as soon as possi-
ble after the measures have been taken, and the copy of the
notice shall have attached to it a statement by the officer
describing the measures taken by the municipality and
providing details of the amount expended in taking such
measures.
190.041(7)If the notice was given before the measures
were taken, the officer shall give a copy of the statement
mentioned in subsection (6) in the same manner as a no-
tice is given under section 190.011 as soon as practicable
after the measures have been taken.
190.042(1)No person shall refuse entry to or obstruct or
interfere with an officer referred to in subsection
190.04(2) or 190.041(3) who under the authority of that
subsection is entering or attempting to enter premises or a
building or structure.
190.042(2)A person who violates or fails to comply
with subsection (1) commits an offence that is, subject to
subsections (3) and (4), punishable under Part II of the
Provincial Offences Procedure Act as a category F of-
fence.
190.042(3)Notwithstanding subsection 56(6) of the
Provincial Offences Procedure Act, where a person who is
leasing a dwelling or dwelling unit to another person com-
mits an offence under subsection (2) in relation to the
dwelling or dwelling unit, the minimum fine that may be
imposed by a judge under that Act in respect of the of-
fence shall be one thousand dollars.
190.042(4)Where an offence under subsection (2) con-
tinues for more than one day,
(a)if the offence was committed in relation to a
dwelling or dwelling unit by a person who is leasing the
dwelling or dwelling unit to another person,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
sum of
(A)one thousand dollars, and
(B)the minimum fine set by the Provincial Of-
fences Procedure Act for a category F offence
tionnaire notifie aux termes de l’article 190.011 et aussitôt
que possible après que ces mesures aient été prises, une
copie de l’avis, à laquelle est jointe une déclaration du
fonctionnaire faisant état des mesures prises par la muni-
cipalité et donnant les détails des dépenses engagées pour
ces mesures.
190.041(7)Si l’avis a été notifié avant que des mesures
ne soient prises, le fonctionnaire notifie une copie de la
déclaration visée au paragraphe (6) de la même manière
qu’un avis est notifié aux termes de l’article 190.011, et
ce, aussitôt que possible après que ces mesures aient été
prises.
190.042(1)Nul ne peut refuser de permettre à un fonc-
tionnaire visé au paragraphe 190.04(2) ou 190.041(3) de
pénétrer dans les lieux, le bâtiment ou la construction en
vertu de ce paragraphe ni l’entraver ou le gêner alors qu’il
pénètre ou tente de pénétrer dans les lieux, le bâtiment ou
la construction en vertu de ce paragraphe.
190.042(2)Quiconque contrevient ou omet de se con-
former au paragraphe (1) commet une infraction qui est,
sous réserve des paragraphes (3) et (4), punissable en
vertu de la Partie II de la Loi sur la procédure applicable
aux infractions provinciales à titre d’infraction de la
classe F.
190.042(3)Nonobstant le paragraphe 56(6) de la Loi
sur la procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales,
lorsqu’une personne qui loue une habitation ou un loge-
ment à une autre personne commet l’infraction visée au
paragraphe (2) relativement à l’habitation ou au logement,
l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée par un juge en
vertu de cette loi relativement à l’infraction est de 1000$.
190.042(4)Lorsqu’une infraction prévue au paragra-
phe (2) se poursuit pendant plus d’une journée,
a)dans le cas où l’infraction a été commise relative-
ment à une habitation ou un logement par une personne
qui loue l’habitation ou le logement à une autre per-
sonne,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est la
somme des montants suivants:
(A)1000$; et
(B)l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provincia-
13
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
multiplied by the number of days during which
the offence continues after the first day, and
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(b)in any other case,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
minimum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues.
14 Subsection 190.05(1) of the Act is amended by strik-
ing out “Where the cost of carrying out work becomes a
debt due to a municipality under section 190.04” and
substituting “Where the cost of carrying out work or the
cost of taking measures becomes a debt due to a munici-
pality under subsection 190.04(1) or 190.041(5), as the
case may be”.
15 Section 190.06 of the Act is amended
(a)by repealing subsection (1) and substituting the
following:
190.06(1)The cost of carrying out work under subsec-
tion 190.04(1) or of taking measures under subsection
190.041(3), as the case may be, and all reasonable costs
and charges attendant upon the filing, entering and record-
ing of a certificate under section 190.05 shall, notwith-
standing subsection 72(2) of the Workers’ Compensation
Act and until paid, form a lien upon the real property in re-
spect of which the work is carried out or the measures are
taken in priority to every claim, privilege, lien or other en-
cumbrance, whenever created, subject only to taxes levied
under the Real Property Tax Act and a special lien under
subsection 189(10).
les pour une infraction de la classe F multipliée
par le nombre de jours pendant lesquels l’infrac-
tion se poursuit après la première journée; et
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit; et
b)dans tout autre cas,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit, et
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit.
14 Le paragraphe 190.05(1) de la Loi est modifié par
la suppression de «Lorsque les frais relatifs à l’exécu-
tion de travaux deviennent une créance de la municipa-
lité en vertu de l’article 190.04» et son remplacement
par «Lorsque les frais relatifs à l’exécution de travaux ou
à la prise de mesures deviennent une créance de la muni-
cipalité en vertu du paragraphe 190.04(1) ou 190.041(5),
selon le cas».
15 L’article 190.06 de la Loi est modifié
a)par l’abrogation du paragraphe (1) et son rem-
placement par ce qui suit:
190.06(1)Les frais relatifs à l’exécution des travaux en
vertudu paragraphe 190.04(1) ou à la prise de mesures en
vertu du paragraphe 190.041(3), selon le cas, et tous les
frais et dépenses raisonnables relatifs au dépôt, à l’inscrip-
tion et à l’enregistrement d’un certificat en vertu de l’arti-
cle 190.05 constituent, jusqu’à leur paiement, nonobstant
le paragraphe 72(2) de la Loi sur les accidents du travail,
un privilège grevant le bien réel sur lequel les travaux sont
effectués ou les mesures sont prises, en priorité sur toute
réclamation, droit, privilège ou autre charge, quelle que
soit l’époque de leur création, sous la seule réserve des
impôts levés en vertu de la Loi sur l’impôt foncier et d’un
privilège spécial en vertu du paragraphe 189(10).
14
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
(b)by repealing paragraph (2)(a) and substituting
the following:
(a)attaches when the work under subsection
190.04(1) is begun or the measures under subsection
190.041(3) are begun, as the case may be, and does not
require registration or filing of any document or the
giving of notice to any person to create or preserve it,
and
16 The Act is amended by adding after section 190.06
the following:
190.061(1)Where a debt due to a municipality under
subsection 190.04(1) or 190.041(5) remains unpaid in
whole or in part and the Minister of Finance is of the opin-
ion that the municipality has made reasonable efforts to
recover the unpaid amount, the Minister of Finance shall,
if the municipality requests him or her to do so before De-
cember 31 in any year, pay to the municipality the follow-
ing amounts at the same time as the first payment is made
to the municipality under section 6 of the Municipal As-
sistance Act in the following year:
(a)the unpaid amount of the debt; and
(b)interest on the unpaid amount of the debt
(i)calculated at the same rate as is applied in de-
termining the amount of a penalty under subsection
10(3) of the Real Property Tax Act, and
(ii)accruing from the day the municipality com-
pletes the work or measures in respect of which the
debt arose to the day the municipality makes a re-
quest under this subsection for payment in respect of
the debt.
190.061(2)A municipality shall make a request under
subsection (1) by submitting to the Minister of Finance a
statement of the expenditures of the municipality that
gave rise to the debt.
190.061(3)Subject to subsection (4), where a debt due
to a municipality under subsection 190.04(1) or
190.041(5) in relation to work carried out or measures
taken with respect to premises or a building or structure
remains unpaid, in whole or in part, by the person liable to
pay the debt and the Minister of Finance has made a pay-
ment under subsection (1) in respect of the debt,
b)par l’abrogation de l’alinéa (2)a) et son rempla-
cement par ce qui suit:
a)s’applique lorsque les travaux visés au paragraphe
190.04(1) ou les mesures visées au paragraphe
190.041(3), selon le cas, ont débuté et sans qu’il soit
nécessaire, pour le créer ou le conserver, d’enregistrer
ou de déposer un document quelconque ou d’aviser qui
que ce soit, et
16 La Loi est modifiée par l’adjonction, après l’arti-
cle 190.06, de ce qui suit:
190.061(1)Lorsqu’une créance d’une municipalité en
vertu du paragraphe 190.04(1) ou 190.041(5) demeure
impayée, en totalité ou en partie, et que le ministre des Fi-
nances est d’avis que la municipalité a fait des efforts rai-
sonnables pour recouvrer le montant impayé, le ministre
des Finances doit, si la municipalité lui a fait demande
avant le 31 décembre d’une année, verser les montants
suivants à la municipalité en même temps qu’il effectue,
lors de la prochaine année, le premier versement à la mu-
nicipalité en vertu de l’article 6 de la Loi sur l’aide aux
municipalités :
a)le montant impayé de la créance; et
b)l’intérêt sur le montant impayé de la créance
(i)calculé au même taux appliqué pour déterminer
le montant d’une pénalité prévue par le paragra-
phe 10(3) de la Loi sur l’impôt foncier, et
(ii)qui court à partir de la date à laquelle la muni-
cipalité a achevé les travaux ou les mesures qui ont
donné lieu à la créance jusqu’à la date à laquelle la
municipalité a fait sa demande pour un versement
relativement à la créance aux termes du présent pa-
ragraphe.
190.061(2)Une municipalité fait une demande aux ter-
mes du paragraphe (1) en présentant au ministre des Fi-
nances un état des dépenses engagées par celle-ci qui a
donné lieu à la créance.
190.061(3)Sous réserve du paragraphe (4), lorsqu’une
créance d’une municipalité en vertu du paragraphe 190.04(1)
ou 190.041(5) relative à des travaux effectués ou à des
mesures prises par rapport à des lieux, à un bâtiment ou à
une construction demeure impayée, en totalité ou en par-
tie, par la personne tenue au paiement de la créance et que
le ministre des Finances a effectué un versement aux ter-
mes du paragraphe (1) relativement à la créance,
15
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
(a)any part of the debt that remains unpaid by the
person liable to pay the debt becomes a debt due to the
Minister of Finance, and
(b)the Minister of Finance shall collect the following
amounts from the owner of the premises, building or
structure in the same manner that taxes on real property
are collected under the Real Property Tax Act:
(i)any part of the debt under subsection 190.04(1)
or 190.041(5) that remains unpaid by the person lia-
ble to pay the debt; and
(ii)interest on the unpaid part of the debt
(A)calculated at the same rate as is applied in
determining the amount of a penalty under sub-
section 10(3) of the Real Property Tax Act, and
(B)accruing from the day the municipality
completes the work or measures in respect of
which the debt arose to the day the municipality
makes a request under subsection (1) for payment
in respect of the debt.
190.061(4)Subject to subsections (5) and (6), section 7,
section 10, except subsection 10(2), and sections 11, 12,
13, 14, 14.1, 15, 16, 19, 20, 24 and 25 of the Real Property
Tax Act apply with the necessary modifications for the
purposes of subsection (3).
190.061(5)Where the amounts referred to in paragraph
(3)(b) remain unpaid, those amounts and any penalty
added to them under subsection (4) constitute a lien on the
real property in respect of which the work was carried out
or the measures were taken, and the lien ranks equally
with a lien under subsection 11(1) of the Real Property
Tax Act.
190.061(6)Where the real property is sold under any or-
der of foreclosure, order for seizure and sale, execution or
other legal process or a power of sale under a debenture or
mortgage or under subsection 44(1) of the Property Act,
the amount of a lien referred to in subsection (5) consti-
tutes a charge on the proceeds that ranks equally with a
charge under subsection 11(1) of the Real Property Tax
Act.
17 Section 190.07 of the Act is amended by striking out
“paragraph 190.04(b)” and substituting “paragraph
190.04(1)(b)”.
a)toute partie de la créance qui demeure impayée par
la personne tenue au paiement de la créance devient
une dette due au ministre des Finances, et
b)le ministre des Finances doit percevoir du proprié-
taire des lieux, du bâtiment ou de la construction les
montants suivants de la même manière que l’impôt fon-
cier en vertu de la Loi sur l’impôt foncier :
(i)toute partie de la créance en vertu du paragra-
phe 190.04(1) ou 190.041(5) qui demeure impayée
par la personne tenue au paiement de la créance; et
(ii)l’intérêt sur la partie de la créance qui demeure
impayée
(A)calculé au même taux appliqué pour déter-
miner le montant d’une pénalité prévue par le pa-
ragraphe 10(3) de la Loi sur l’impôt foncier, et
(B)qui court à partir de la date à laquelle la mu-
nicipalité a achevé les travaux ou les mesures qui
ont donné lieu à la créance jusqu’à la date à la-
quelle la municipalité a fait sa demande pour un
versement relativement à la créance aux termes
du paragraphe (1).
190.061(4)Sous réserve des paragraphes (5) et (6), l’ar-
ticle 7, l’article 10, à l’exception du paragraphe 10(2), et
les articles 11, 12, 13, 14, 14.1, 15, 16, 19, 20, 24 et 25 de
la Loi sur l’impôt foncier s’appliquent avec les modifica-
tions nécessaires pour l’application du paragraphe (3).
190.061(5)Lorsque les montants visés à l’alinéa (3)b)
demeurent impayés, ces montants et toute pénalité y ajou-
tée en vertu du paragraphe (4) constituent un privilège sur
les biens réels qui ont fait l’objet de travaux effectués ou
des mesures prises et le privilège prend un rang égal au
privilège prévu au paragraphe 11(1) de la Loi sur l’impôt
foncier.
190.061(6)En cas de vente d’un bien réel en vertu d’une
ordonnance de saisie hypothécaire, de saisie et vente ou
d’exécution ou par d’autres voies judiciaires ou en vertu
d’un pouvoir de vente en vertu d’une débenture ou d’une
hypothèque ou en vertu du paragraphe 44(1) de la Loi sur
les biens, le montant d’un privilège visé au paragraphe (5)
constitue une charge qui prend un rang égal à une charge
visée au paragraphe 11(1) de la Loi sur l’impôt foncier.
17 L’article 190.07 de la Loi est modifié par la suppres-
sion de «l’alinéa 190.04b)» et son remplacement par
«l’alinéa 190.04(1)b)».
16
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS
Unsightly Premises Act
18(1)The Unsightly Premises Act, chapter U-2 of the
Revised Statutes, 1973, is amended by adding after sec-
tion 1 the following:
1.01 In sections 3.1 and 6
“dwelling” means a building any part of which is used
or is intended to be used for the purposes of human habi-
tation, whether or not the building is in such state of dis-
repair so as to be unfit for such purpose;
“dwelling unit” means one or more rooms located
within a dwelling and used or intended to be used for hu-
man habitation by one or more persons.
18(2)The Act is amended by adding after section 3 the
following:
3.1(1)A person who violates or fails to comply with
subsection 3(2) commits an offence that is, subject to sub-
sections (2) and (3), punishable under Part II of the Pro-
vincial Offences Procedure Act as a category F offence.
3.1(2)Notwithstanding subsection 56(6) of the Provin-
cial Offences Procedure Act, where a person who is leas-
ing a dwelling or dwelling unit to another person commits
an offence under subsection (1) in relation to the dwelling
or dwelling unit, the minimum fine that may be imposed
by a judge under that Act in respect of the offence shall be
one thousand dollars.
3.1(3)Where an offence under subsection (1) continues
for more than one day,
(a)if the offence was committed in relation to a
dwelling or dwelling unit by a person who is leasing the
dwelling or dwelling unit to another person,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
sum of
(A)one thousand dollars, and
(B)the minimum fine set by the Provincial Of-
fences Procedure Act for a category F offence
multiplied by the number of days during which
the offence continues after the first day, and
MODIFICATIONS CORRÉLATIVES
Loi sur les lieux inesthétiques
18(1)La Loi sur les lieux inesthétiques, chapitre U-2
des Lois révisées de 1973, est modifiée par l’adjonction,
après l’article 1, de ce qui suit:
1.01 Aux articles 3.1 et 6
«habitation» désigne un bâtiment dont une partie sert
ou est destinée à loger des personnes, que ce bâtiment soit
ou non dans un état de délabrement qui le rende inhabita-
ble;
«logement» désigne une ou plusieurs pièces situées
dans une habitation et servant ou destinées à loger une ou
plusieurs personnes.
18(2)La Loi est modifiée par l’adjonction, après l’ar-
ticle 3, de ce qui suit:
3.1(1)Quiconque contrevient ou omet de se conformer
au paragraphe 3(2) commet une infraction qui est, sous ré-
serve des paragraphes (2) et (3), punissable en vertu de la
Partie II de la Loi sur la procédure applicable aux infrac-
tions provinciales à titre d’infraction de la classe F.
3.1(2)Nonobstant le paragraphe 56(6) de la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales,
lorsqu’une personne qui loue une habitation ou un loge-
ment à une autre personne commet l’infraction prévue au
paragraphe (1) relativement à l’habitation ou au logement,
l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée par un juge en
vertu de cette loi relativement à l’infraction est de 1000$.
3.1(3)Lorsqu’une infraction prévue au paragraphe (1)
se poursuit pendant plus d’une journée,
a)dans le cas où l’infraction a été commise relative-
ment à une habitation ou à un logement par une per-
sonne qui loue l’habitation ou le logement à une autre
personne,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est la
somme des montants suivants:
(A)1000$; et
(B)l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provincia-
les pour une infraction de la classe F multipliée
par le nombre de jours pendant lesquels l’infrac-
tion se poursuit après la première journée; et
17
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(b)in any other case,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
minimum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues.
18(3)Section 6 of the Act is amended
(a)by repealing subsection (1) and substituting the
following:
6(1)A person who fails to comply with the terms of a
notice under section 4 commits an offence that is, subject
to subsections (1.1) and (1.2), punishable under Part II of
the Provincial Offences Procedure Act as a category F of-
fence.
(b)by adding after subsection (1) the following:
6(1.1)Notwithstanding subsection 56(6) of the Provin-
cial Offences Procedure Act, where a person who is leas-
ing a dwelling or dwelling unit to another person commits
an offence under subsection (1) in relation to a notice un-
der section 4 given with respect to the dwelling or dwell-
ing unit, the minimum fine that may be imposed by a
judge under that Act in respect of the offence shall be one
thousand dollars.
6(1.2)Where an offence under subsection (1) continues
for more than one day,
(a)if the offence was committed by a person in rela-
tion to notice under section 4 given with respect to a
dwelling or dwelling unit the person is leasing to an-
other person,
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit; et
b)dans tout autre cas,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit, et
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit.
18(3)L’article 6 de la Loi est modifié
a)par l’abrogation du paragraphe (1) et son rem-
placement par ce qui suit:
6(1)Quiconque omet de se conformer aux exigences
formulées dans un avis donné en application de l’article 4
commet une infraction qui est, sous réserve des paragra-
phes (1.1) et (1.2), punissable en vertu de la Partie II de la
Loi sur la procédure applicable aux infractions provincia-
les à titre d’infraction de la classe F.
b)par l’adjonction, après le paragraphe (1), de ce
qui suit:
6(1.1)Nonobstant le paragraphe 56(6) de la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provinciales,
lorsqu’une personne qui loue une habitation ou un loge-
ment à une autre personne commet l’infraction prévue au
paragraphe (1) relativement à l’avis donné en application
de l’article 4 par rapport à l’habitation ou au logement,
l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée par un juge en
vertu de cette loi relativement à l’infraction est de 1000$.
6(1.2)Lorsqu’une infraction prévue au paragraphe (1)
se poursuit pendant plus d’une journée,
a)dans le cas où l’infraction a été commise par une
personne relativement à un avis donné par rapport à
une habitation ou à un logement que celle-ci loue à une
autre personne,
18
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
sum of
(A)one thousand dollars, and
(B)the minimum fine set by the Provincial Of-
fences Procedure Act for a category F offence
multiplied by the number of days during which
the offence continues after the first day, and
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(b)in any other case,
(i)the minimum fine that may be imposed is the
minimum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues,
and
(ii)the maximum fine that may be imposed is the
maximum fine set by the Provincial Offences Proce-
dure Act for a category F offence multiplied by the
number of days during which the offence continues.
(c)by repealing subsection (2).
18(4)Paragraph 7(a) of the Act is amended by striking
out “to be cleaned up” and substituting “to be cleaned up
or repaired”.
COMMENCEMENT
19 This Act or any provision of it comes into force on
a day or days to be fixed by proclamation.
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est la
somme des montants suivants:
(A)1000$; et
(B)l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la
procédure applicable aux infractions provincia-
les pour une infraction de la classe F multipliée
par le nombre de jours pendant lesquels l’infrac-
tion se poursuit après la première journée; et
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit; et
b)dans tout autre cas,
(i)l’amende minimale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende minimale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit, et
(ii)l’amende maximale qui peut être imposée est
l’amende maximale prévue par la Loi sur la procé-
dure applicable aux infractions provinciales pour
une infraction de la classe F multipliée par le nombre
de jours pendant lesquels l’infraction se poursuit.
c)par l’abrogation du paragraphe (2).
18(4)L’alinéa 7a) de la Loi est modifié par la suppres-
sion de «faire nettoyer les lieux» et son remplacement
par «faire nettoyer ou réparer les lieux».
ENTRÉE EN VIGUEUR
19 La présente loi ou l’une quelconque de ses disposi-
tions entre en vigueur à la date ou aux dates fixées par
proclamation.
19
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
EXPLANATORY NOTES
Section 1
The existing provision is as follows:
94.1 If a council makes a by-law under subsection 94(1) or (3), sub-
section 190.01(3) and sections 190.02 to 190.07 shall be incorporated
into the by-law with the necessary modifications.
Section 2
New provisions.
Section 3
New provisions.
Section 4
(a)New provision.
(b)New provisions.
Section 5
The existing provision is as follows:
190 A municipality may by by-law provide that sections 190.01 to
190.07 apply to such areas of the municipality as the by-law prescribes.
Section 6
New provisions.
Section 7
(a)New provisions.
(b)(i)The existing provision is as follows:
190.01(3)Where a condition mentioned in subsection (1) or (2) ex-
ists, an officer appointed by council may notify the owner or occupier
of the premises, building or structure and the notice shall …
(b)(ii)New provision.
(b)(iii)The existing provision is as follows:
190.01(3)Where a condition mentioned in subsection (1) or (2) ex-
ists, an officer appointed by council may notify the owner or occupier
of the premises, building or structure and the notice shall …
(f)be served either by personal delivery on the person to be noti-
fied or by posting in a conspicuous place on the premises, building
or structure.
Section 8
New provision.
NOTES EXPLICATIVES
Article 1
La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
94.1 Si un conseil prend un arrêté en vertu du paragraphe 94(1) ou
(3), le paragraphe 190.01(3) et les articles 190.02 à 190.07 doivent être
incorporés à l’arrêté avec les modifications nécessaires.
Article 2
Nouvelles dispositions.
Article 3
Nouvelles dispositions.
Article 4
a)Nouvelle disposition.
b)Nouvelles dispositions.
Article 5
La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190 Une municipalité peut, par arrêté, disposer que les articles
190.01 à 190.07 s’appliquent aux secteurs de la municipalité que déter-
mine l’arrêté.
Article 6
Nouvelles dispositions.
Article 7
a)Nouvelles dispositions.
b)(i)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.01(3)Lorsqu’une situation mentionnée au paragraphe (1) ou (2)
existe, un fonctionnaire nommé par un conseil peut aviser le proprié-
taire ou l’occupant des lieux, du bâtiment ou de la construction et l’avis
doit …
b)(ii)Nouvelle disposition.
b)(iii)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.01(3)Lorsqu’une situation mentionnée au paragraphe (1) ou (2)
existe, un fonctionnaire nommé par un conseil peut aviser le proprié-
taire ou l’occupant des lieux, du bâtiment ou de la construction et l’avis
doit …
f)être signifié soit par remise en main propre au destinataire ou
par son affichage sur les lieux, le bâtiment ou la construction en un
endroit visible.
Article 8
Nouvelle disposition.
20
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
Section 9
(a)The existing provision is as follows:
190.02(1)Proof of the giving of notice in either manner provided for
in paragraph 190.01(3)(f) may be by a certificate or an affidavit pur-
porting to be signed by the officer referred to in subsection 190.01(3),
naming the person to whom notice was given and specifying the time,
place and manner in which notice was given.
(b)(i)The existing provision is as follows:
190.02(4)A notice given under subsection 190.01(3) and purporting
to be signed by an officer appointed by council shall be …
(b)(ii)The existing provision is as follows:
190.02(4)A notice given under subsection 190.01(3) and purporting
to be signed by an officer appointed by council shall be …
(c)on the hearing of an information for a violation of a by-law un-
der section 190, proof in the absence of evidence to the contrary that
the person named in the notice is the owner or occupier of the pre-
mises, building or structure in respect of which the notice was
given.
Section 10
New provisions.
Section 11
(a)The existing provision is as follows:
190.03(1)A person who fails to comply with the terms of a notice
under subsection 190.01(3) commits an offence punishable under Part
II of the Provincial Offences Procedure Act as a category E offence and
notwithstanding the provisions of any Act to the contrary, no judge of
the Provincial Court may suspend the imposition of any penalty under
this section.
(b)New provisions.
(c)The existing provision is as follows:
190.03(2)A violation as provided for in subsection (1) is a continu-
ing offence and a separate information may be laid for each day such
offence continues and the penalty provided for in subsection (1) shall
be imposed for each conviction resulting from the laying of each infor-
mation.
Section 12
The existing provision is as follows:
190.04 If a notice has been given under subsection 190.01(3) and the
owner or occupier does not comply with the notice within the time al-
lowed, the municipality may, rather than commencing proceedings in
respect of the violation or in addition to doing so,
Article 9
a)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.02(1)La preuve de la notification d’un avis par l’une des façons
prévues à l’alinéa 190.01(3)f) peut être faite au moyen d’un certificat
ou d’un affidavit présenté comme étant signé par le fonctionnaire visé
au paragraphe 190.01(3), et indiquant le nom de l’intéressé, ainsi que
l’heure, la date, le lieu et le mode de notification.
b)(i)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.02(4)Un avis notifié en application du paragraphe 190.01(3) et
présenté comme étant signé par un fonctionnaire nommé par un
conseil…
b)(ii)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.02(4)Un avis notifié en application du paragraphe 190.01(3) et
présenté comme étant signé par un fonctionnaire nommé par un
conseil…
c)lors de l’audition d’une dénonciation pour infraction à un arrêté
en vertu de l’article 190, doit faire foi, en l’absence d’une preuve
contraire, que la personne qui y est nommée est le propriétaire ou
l’occupant des lieux, du bâtiment ou de la construction pour les-
quels la notification a été effectuée.
Article 10
Nouvelles dispositions.
Article 11
a)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.03(1)Quiconque omet de se conformer aux exigences formulées
dans un avis donné en application du paragraphe 190.01(3) commet
une infraction punissable en vertu de la Partie II de la Loi sur la procé-dure applicable aux infractions provinciales à titre d’infraction de la
classe E et, nonobstant les dispositions de toute loi à l’effet contraire,
il est interdit à un juge de la Cour provinciale de surseoir à l’imposition
d’une peine prévue au présent article.
b)Nouvelles dispositions.
c)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.03(2)Une infraction prévue au paragraphe (1) constitue une in-
fraction continue et une dénonciation distincte peut être déposée pour
chaque jour que dure l’infraction, et la peine prévue au paragraphe (1)
doit être imposée pour chaque déclaration de culpabilité résultant de
chaque dénonciation.
Article 12
La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.04 Lorsqu’un avis a été notifié en application du paragraphe
190.01(3) et que le propriétaire ou l’occupant ne se conforme pas à cet
avis dans le délai imparti, la municipalité peut, au lieu d’intenter des
procédures relatives à l’infraction ou en plus d’intenter des procédures
relatives à l’infraction,
21
An Act to Amend the Municipalities ActBill 34
(a)if the notice arises out of a condition existing contrary to sub-
section 190.01(1), cause the premises of that owner or occupier to
be cleaned up, or
(b)if the notice arises out of a condition existing contrary to sub-
section 190.01(2), cause the building or structure of that owner or
occupier to be demolished,
and the cost of carrying out such work, including any related charge or
fee, is chargeable to the owner or occupier and becomes a debt due to
the municipality.
Section 13
New provisions.
Section 14
The existing provision is as follows:
190.05(1)Where the cost of carrying out work becomes a debt due to
a municipality under section 190.04, an officer of the municipality may
issue a certificate stating the amount of the debt due and the name of
the owner or occupier from whom the debt is due.
Section 15
(a)The existing provision is as follows:
190.06(1)The cost of carrying out work under section 190.04 and all
reasonable costs and charges attendant upon the filing, entering and re-
cording of a certificate under section 190.05 shall, notwithstanding
subsection 72(2) of the Workers’ Compensation Act and until paid,
form a lien upon the real property in respect of which the work is car-
ried out in priority to every claim, privilege, lien or other encumbrance,
whenever created, subject only to taxes levied under the Real PropertyTax Act and a special lien under subsection 189(10).
(b)The existing provision is as follows:
190.06(2)The lien in subsection (1)
(a)attaches when the work under section 190.04 is begun and
does not require registration or filing of any document or the giving
of notice to any person to create or preserve it, and
Section 16
New provisions.
Section 17
The existing provision is as follows:
190.07 A municipality shall not proceed to act under paragraph
190.04(b) unless it has a report from an architect, an engineer, a build-
ing inspector or the Fire Marshal that the building or structure is dilap-
idated or structurally unsound and such report is proof in the absence
a)si l’avis a pour origine une situation contraire au paragraphe
190.01(1), faire nettoyer les lieux de ce propriétaire ou de cet occu-
pant, ou
b)si l’avis a pour origine une situation contraire au paragraphe
190.01(2), faire démolir le bâtiment ou la construction de ce pro-
priétaire ou de cet occupant,
et les frais relatifs à l’exécution de ces travaux, y compris toute rede-
vance ou tout droit afférent, sont à la charge du propriétaire ou de l’oc-
cupant et deviennent une créance de la municipalité.
Article 13
Nouvelles dispositions.
Article 14
La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.05(1)Lorsque les frais relatifs à l’exécution de travaux devien-
nent une créance de la municipalité en vertu de l’article 190.04, un
fonctionnaire de la municipalité peut délivrer un certificat indiquant le
montant de la créance et le nom du propriétaire ou de l’occupant res-
ponsable de la créance.
Article 15
a)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.06(1)Les frais relatifs à l’exécution des travaux en vertu de l’ar-
ticle 190.04 et tous les frais et dépenses raisonnables relatifs au dépôt,
à l’inscription et à l’enregistrement d’un certificat en vertu de l’arti-
cle 190.05 constituent, jusqu’à leur paiement, nonobstant le paragraphe
72(2) de la Loi sur les accidents du travail, un privilège grevant le bien
réel sur lequel les travaux sont effectués, en priorité sur toute réclama-
tion, droit, privilège ou autre charge, quelle que soit l’époque de leur
création, sous la seule réserve des impôts levés en vertu de la Loi surl’impôt foncier et d’un privilège spécial en vertu du paragraphe 189(10).
b)La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.06(2)Le privilège visé au paragraphe (1)
a)s’applique lorsque les travaux visés à l’article 190.04 ont dé-
buté et sans qu’il soit nécessaire, pour le créer ou le conserver, d’en-
registrer ou de déposer un document quelconque ou d’aviser qui
que ce soit, et
Article 16
Nouvelles dispositions.
Article 17
La disposition actuelle se lit comme suit:
190.07 La municipalité ne doit pas prendre les mesures prévues à
l’alinéa 190.04b) sans avoir eu un rapport émanant d’un architecte,
d’un ingénieur, d’un inspecteur des constructions ou du prévôt des in-
cendies établissant que le bâtiment ou la construction est délabré ou
22
Projet de loi 34Loi modifiant la Loi sur les municipalités
of evidence to the contrary that the building or structure is dilapidated
or structurally unsound.
Section 18
Consequential amendments to the Unsightly Premises Act.
Section 19
Commencement.
manque de solidité, et ce rapport fait foi, en l’absence d’une preuve
contraire, du délabrement ou du manque de solidité de ce bâtiment ou
de cette construction.
Article 18
Modifications corrélatives à la Loi sur les lieux inesthétiques.
Article 19
Entrée en vigueur.
M&C 2006-93
April 20, 2006-04-18
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane
And Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Members of Council.
SUBJECT
Saint John Water – Review of Rates and Rate Structure Options
BACKGROUND
At the December 5, 2005 meeting of Common Council, authorization was given for a
comprehensive review of the water rate structure and water rates to be undertaken in
early 2006. Staff subsequently prepared detailed terms of reference for the review
(submitted as Information of Council 2006-02-27), and negotiated a suitable price with
an R.V. Anderson Associates Limited led team.
The consultant will be required to complete five main components for this review:
A: Review Current Rates Structure
B: Request and Review Input from Saint John Water Customers
C: Evaluate Other Rate Structure Options
D: Identify Options to Assist Low-Income Water Customers
E: Update Utility Water and Sewerage Rates
Of particular note in this review will be Parts B & D: a process will be established that
will allow ratepayers to submit their issues for consideration; and the consultant will
evaluate options to assist low-income water customers.
ANALYSIS
On February 24, 2006 with a detailed scope of work document developed by staff, a
proposal for a review of rates and rate structure options was requested from R. V.
Anderson Associates Limited.
In response, the consultant submitted a proposal on March 27, 2006. A Review
Committee consisting of the following staff completed an analysis of the submission:
- Djoura Abbas, Corporate Services
- Peter Hanlon, Municipal Operations and Engineering
- Chris O’Keefe, Municipal Operations and Engineering
- Greg Yeomans, Corporate Services
M & C 2006 – 93
April 20, 2006
Page 2
Each member completed a review of the submission and meetings were held to discuss
the information provided in the R. V. Anderson Associates Limited proposal. The upset
price and scope of work contained in the proposal met all of the requirements of the
proposal call, in a manner acceptable to the Committee, with a cost effective bid for the
project. The review of rates and rate structure options is expected to be completed by
August 25, 2006.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The proposed cost of the work from R. V. Anderson Associates Limited to complete a
review of rates and rate structure options is approximately $128,614 not including the
City’s eligible HST rebate. Sufficient funds are identified in the 2006 Utility Fund
Operating Budget for this project.
CONCLUSION
The success of this undertaking will be founded on the City receiving the following from
the consultant:
- Principles: A solid set of principles upon which to base the system of
charges.
- Logical Approach: A logical approach for the development of the rate
structure, the types of charges used, appropriate cost allocation and a
sound financial model. Ultimately, the goal is fair and equitable customer
charges for the services provided. It is also important that the system of
charges and the approach can be defended in any forum – with ratepayers,
with the public and with ICI customers.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposal of R. V. Anderson Associates Limited for a review
of rates and rate structure options be accepted and that the Mayor and Common Clerk be
authorized to execute the appropriate documentation in that regard.
Respectfully submitted
J. M. Paul Groody P.Eng Terry Totten, F.C.A.
Commissioner, City Manager
Municipal Operations & Engineering
M & C – 2006-92
April 21, 2006
His Worship Mayor Norm McFarlane
Members of Common Council
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Sale of City Land
Corner of Millidge Avenue and Somerset Street
ANALYSIS:
Real Estate Services has received an offer to purchase the subject property (see attached
map). The property contains approximately 1.8 acres. The prospective purchaser, Mr.
Michael Cavanaugh is planning to develop the site by constructing a high quality, single
family dwelling. This parcel of land has been considered surplus to the City’s needs for a
number of years.
This property is situated at a significantly higher elevation than the two adjoining streets
of Millidge Avenue and Somerset Street. The site is essentially rock with minimal
overburden of soil material. A City Engineer met the proponent at the site to discuss
access to this property. Access to the site will be challenging. City Engineering has
determined that access to the site from the most eastern limit, adjoining Somerset Street
is satisfactory This is intended to provide the most sight distance for approaching traffic
and to situate the driveway as far from the street intersection as possible.
Although the surrounding area is serviced with municipal water and sewer, due to the
topographical challenges, the developer was planning to service this property with on-site
septic and well. However, the Water and Sewer By-law requires any property that is
within a serviceable area is required to hook-up to the municipal services. Mr.
Cavanaugh has agreed to tie into the municipal water and sewer services.
The current Provincial property assessment for this parcel is $7,700.00. Real Estate
Services have negotiated a proposed sale price of $3,500.00. This price reflects the
significant costs the developer will incur to provide access to and servicing of this site.
The parcel is zoned one and two family and as such the density of the proposed
development does not afford the prospective purchaser the economies of scale normally
involved with infrastructure commitments of this magnitude. Hence a reduction in sale
price is supported to offset the extraordinary development costs which must be incurred
by the developer.
Report to Common Council Page 2
April 21, 2006
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That The City of Saint John sell the fee simple interest in PID Number 47381,
subject to any necessary municipal services easements/easements for municipal
services to 600608 N.B. Ltd. for $3,500.00 (plus HST, if applicable) on or before
July 30, 2006.
2. That the above noted transaction be subject to the following terms and
conditions:
a) placement of access to the subject property from a public street is subject
to approval by the Chief City Engineer or his designate, and a restrictive
covenant that the placement of access, as approved by the City Engineer
will not be enlarged, amended, extended or replaced, unless prior written
approval has been obtained from the Chief City Engineer or his
designate;
b) the subject property must be connected to municipal water and sewer
services, prior to any occupancy of the building;
c) that a restrictive covenant be placed on the deed/title limiting the
development of this site to a single family dwelling; and
d) if construction of the above said building, including the foundation for
the dwelling has not commenced within six months of the transfer of the
property to 600608 N.B. Ltd., the City has an option to repurchase the
subject property within 90 days of the City giving written notice to the
purchaser and that the repurchase of the said property shall be for
$3,500.00.
3. That the Mayor and Common Clerk be authorized to sign any necessary
documents required to finalize this transaction.
Respectfully submitted,
Jim R. Baird, MCIP
Commissioner
Planning and Development
Terrence Totten, FCA
City Manager
April 21, 2006
Your Worship and Councillors:
SUBJECT: Proposed Subdivision - Palmer Subdivision
The Planning Advisory Committee considered the attached report at its April 18,
2006 meeting. This letter deals with the proposed subdivision of the subject site.
The applicant, Mr. Bob Darling, of North Star Holdings Limited, attended the
meeting and expressed agreement with the staff recommendation. No other
persons attended the meeting however three letters were received (attached).
After considering the matter, the Committee adopted a revised recommendation
clarify that the proposed street extension will be shown as a “public street” for its
entire length.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That Common Council assent to the submitted photo-reduced Huxtable
Subdivision tentative subdivision plan illustrating the extension as a public
street, as well as any necessary municipal services and public utility
easements on the condition that any new driveway entrance on the proposed
Cottonwood Court be limited to the portion of the street surfaced with asphalt
and a note to this effect be placed on the final subdivision plan.
2. That Common Council authorize the preparation and execution of one or more
City/Developer Subdivision Agreements to ensure provision of the required
work and facilities, including detailed site and drainage plans for the approval
of the Chief City Engineer.
3. That the Planning Advisory Committee approve the street name of
Cottonwood Court.
Respectfully submitted,
Philip Hovey
Chairman
PF
Attachments
DATE: APRIL 13, 2006
TO: PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
FOR: MEETING OF APRIL 18, 2006
Patrick Foran
Planning Officer
SUBJECT:
Name of Applicant: Kierstead Quigley and Roberts Ltd.
Name of Owner: North Star Holdings Limited
Location: Palmer Street
PID: 55159917
Municipal Plan: Low Density Residential
Zoning: “RS-2” One and Two Family Suburban Residential
Proposal: To subdivide a property in order to create three residential
building lots and two parcels.
Type of Application: Subdivision.
JURISDICTION OF COMMITTEE:
The Community Planning Act authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to give its views to
Common Council concerning the location of public and future streets, municipal services and
North Star Holdings Limited Page 2
Palmer Street April 13, 2006
public utility easements, and land for public purposes (or acceptance of cash-in-lieu ) dedications
in conjunction with the subdivision of land.
The Subdivision By-law authorizes the Planning Advisory Committee to approve the names of
new streets in conjunction with the subdivision of land.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE:
1. That Common Council assent to the submitted photo-reduced Huxtable Subdivision tentative
subdivision plan illustrating the extension of a public street, as well as any necessary municipal
services and public utility easements on the condition that any new driveway entrance on the
proposed Cottonwood Court be limited to the portion of the street surfaced with asphalt and a
note to this effect be placed on the final subdivision plan.
2. That Common Council authorize the preparation and execution of one or more
City/Developer Subdivision Agreements to ensure provision of the required work and
facilities, including detailed site and drainage plans for the approval of the Chief City
Engineer.
3. That the Planning Advisory Committee approve the street name of Cottonwood Court.
BACKGROUND:
In September of 2001, the Planning Advisory Committee recommended that Common Council
assent to the subdivision of four residential lots with a future street along the eastern side of
Palmer Street. At the time, the Committee also granted a variance from the requirements of the
Subdivision By-law to reduce the minimum lot depth requirements of 30 metres (100 feet) to
depths varying between 25 metres (82 feet) and 29 metres (95 feet) for the proposed lots 01-02 to
01-05.
An amended final plan showing the creation of five lots instead of four was approved by the
Development Officer in December of 2001.
North Star Holdings Limited Page 3
Palmer Street April 13, 2006
INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES:
Municipal Operations and Engineering have indicated that they have no objections to the
subdivision, however the proposed turnaround is not adequate. Although the width of the street
right-of-way is sufficient, they advise that the public street designation be extended all the way to
the rear property line. They require at least a temporary gravel turn around within the 15 metre
(50 foot) right-of-way to enable their equipment to maneuver.
As of the writing of this report, it was not clear where the paved portion of the street would end
and where the gravel-surfaced portion would begin. Consequently, the staff recommendation
includes a condition that the driveway entrances be limited to the section of Cottonwood Court
surfaced with asphalt.
Building and Technical Services has no concerns regarding the application.
Saint John Transit indicates that it offers service to this area nearby on Lakeview Drive. The
area will be serviced by the Champlain Lakewood Route.
Saint John Energy has been forwarded a copy of the application.
Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline advises that this area is all “clear” and that the proposal is not
near the Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline facilities.
ANALYSIS:
Subject Site and Neighbourhood
The subject site is situated between Lensdale Crescent and Charles Street East in Lakewood
Heights (see attached location map). The surrounding area is comprised primarily of one-family
dwellings; however the Lakewood Heights elementary school is opposite the intersection of
Palmer Street and Lensdale Crescent.
Development Proposal
The applicant is proposing to construct the new public street, tentatively called Cottonwood
Court, that branches off of the eastern side of Palmer Street and extend it to allow three new
single-family residential lots to be created. Two parcels will also be created, to be consolidated
with the adjacent lots at 10 and 18-20 Palmer Street.
The area is zoned “RS-2” One and Two Family Suburban Residential and the proposed lots can
satisfy the minimum standards required by the Zoning By-law. The width of the street extension,
15 metres (50 feet), would be in conformity with the Subdivision By-law and the street itself
North Star Holdings Limited Page 4
Palmer Street April 13, 2006
would be paved with asphalt and have concrete curbs installed along both sides of the street.
Municipal services (i.e., sanitary sewer, water) and other utilities would be provided.
The proposed street does not terminate in the usual cul-de-sac bulb. Although the Subdivision By-
law prohibits dead-end streets, only two of the proposed lots would have access from
Cottonwood Court and the developer has proposed a 13.4 metre (44 feet) length of the future
street for snow storage purposes. However, Municipal Operations has recommended that this
proposed future street portion be vested at this time as a public street and include a temporary
gravel turnaround.
The City’s GIS group, which oversees civic addressing and the assignment of street names,
confirms that the proposed name of Cottonwood Court is acceptable as it is not similar in sound
or spelling to any existing streets.
It should be noted that the proposed Lot 06-3 fronts on Lensdale Crescent, which is an
undeveloped public street. Before the final subdivision plan could be approved the developer
would have to make provision to construct the street to the City’s minimum standards.
Subdivision and Servicing
The Subdivision By-law requires that the proposed lots be fully serviced with municipal sanitary
sewer, storm sewer, and water services. The applicant will provide detailed drawings to the
Municipal Operations and Engineering Department outlining the method by which he proposes to
service the lots. The public utility companies have reviewed the proposal and will also be working
with the developer to ensure adequate facilities are also extended.
The recommendation includes the assent of the proposed street extension and to any necessary
municipal services and public utility easements. In addition, the recommendation includes the
authorization and execution for the necessary City/Developer Subdivision Agreement(s) to ensure
provision of the required works and facilities.
Land for Public Purposes
The Subdivision By-law contains a provision which exempts the proposed subdivision from the
Land for Public Purposes requirement.
Future Development
The Subdivision By-law requires that the manner of subdividing land does not prejudice the
convenient further development of a property or adjoining properties. The proposed street,
Cottonwood Court, could be extended further, but the developer does not own the adjacent lands.
Although the possibility to continue the street exists, no plans to do so have been received.
North Star Holdings Limited Page 5
Palmer Street April 13, 2006
CONCLUSION:
When the eastern side of Palmer Street was developed in 2001, a future public street was vested
with the City to allow further subdivision to occur. The proposed Cottonwood Court is the next
phase of development and given its contextual compatibility with the previous subdivision the
development is recommended for approval. The recommendation includes provision for the
necessary assents and Subdivision Agreement.
PF
Project No. 06-099