2006-12-18_Supplemental Agenda Packet--Dossier de l'ordre du jour supplémentaire
City of Saint John
Common Council Meeting
Monday & Tuesday, December 18 & 19, 2006
Location: Common Council Chamber
Supplemental Agenda
5.1 Letter from Paul Zed regarding Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority Budget
5.12 Drury Cove Developments (Recommendation: That Council approve an
amendment in the matter of Drury Cove Developments - Captain's Quarters
Condominiums a portion of which formerly read".. .exterior surface of the gypsum
board", to now read"... the face of the studs in the walls").
Re: 9.2 Proposed Re-zoning 53-75 Leinster Street
City of Saint John
Seance du conseil communal
Le lundi et mardi 18 et 19 decembre, 2006
Emplacement: Salle du conseil communal
L'ordre du jour supph~mentaire
5.1 Lettre de Paul Zed - Budget presente par l'Administration du pont du port de
Saint John
5.12 Drury Cove Developments (Recommandation : Que Ie conseil approuve une
modification relativement a la declaration de Drury Cove Developments concernant Ie
lotissement d'immeubles en copropriete Captain's Quarters Condominiums, qui se lisait
auparavant comme suit << ...surface exterieure de plaque de platre >>, pour se lire
maintenant << ...Ie cote des poteaux aux murs)
Alinea 9.2 Projet de modification de l'arrete sur Ie zonage visant Ie 53-75, rue Leinster
12/18/2005 15:08
5139474574
ft-(
), /
ZED P MP
Paul Zed
Member of Parliament for Saint John, New Brunswick
Date: December 18, 2006
To: Clerk
From:
Paul Zed
Fax Number: (506) 674-4214
Pages: 2 total
Message:
Please see attached letter.
Thank you.
Ottawa Office:
Room 655-0, Centre Block
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
KIA OA6
Tel: (613) 947-2700
Fax: (613) 947-4574
Saint John Office:
90 King Street
Saint John, New Brunswick
E2L 1 G4
Tel: (506) 657-2500
Fax: (506) 657-2504
PAGE 01/02
12/18/2006 15:08
6139474574
ZED P MP
PAGE 02/02
Zed, Paul - M.P.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Zed, Paul - M,P.
Monday, December 18, 200610:06 AM
'norm .mcfarlane@saintjohn.ca'
Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority Budget
Dear Mayor McFarlane:
I am writing to urgently ask that you reject the budget for the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority that will
come before council tonight.
The Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority has called for tolls to double in 2007, and triPI~ by 2011. This was
done without any public consultation, and without due consideration for the impact that this will have on
citizens and businesses in Saint John, particularly West Saint John. I am not in favour of this, and I believe it
is a drastic action that will have many negative consequences for our community.
The Saint John Harbour Bridge has some very serious challenges and a rise in tolls is simply a band-aid
solution. What we really need to consider is fInding a way to operate the bridge without having to make
crushing debt payments. I believe that the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority should ask for the debt to be
forgiven in their budget submission, but the federal government should still continue to own the structure.
The bridge was built at a cost of approximately $18 million, the citizens of Saint John have paid approximately
$23 million towards the bridge, and there is approximately $23 million still owing. There is something
seriously flawed with this model; it is like a mortgage that is impossible to repay and that keeps growing larger.
As you know, the budget for the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority cannot be finalized until it is approved by
Council. We have had discussions about the Bridge in the past and in the spirit of cooperation I would like all
of the community representatives to sit down and discuss long term solutions and strategies for the many issues
that are facing the bridge.
It is for these reasons that I ask that you reject the budget for the Saint John Harbour Bridge Authority so that we
can work together to come up with a solution that allows for repairs that are necessary for the bridge, without
increasing user fees, and without the citizens of Saint John being saddled with debt for generations to come.
. I look forward to hearing from you; I can be reached at my office 657-2500 or on my cell at 636-1555. I view
this as an urgent matter, and I am available to meet at your convenience today to discuss this matter.
Kind regards,
Paul Zed
DEe-18-06 03:32PM FROM-BARRY SPALDING
/,,\J--
~-
+5066334206
T-055 P.001/002 F-935
Barr~
SpaRling
LAWyERS I r\\IClCATI
saint John Office
December 18, 2006
Duane M. McAfee
Direct: 506.633-4203
E~Mail: drrun@barryspalding.com
Mercantile Centre
55 Union Street, Suite 710
Sail'll John. Net
Canada E2l 5B7
Mailing Address:
P_O. Box 6010
RPO Butnswick Square
Saint John, NB
canada E2l4R5
telephone: 506.6:3~,4226
!=ax: 506,633-4206
VIA FACSIMILE 649-7939
www.barryspalding.com
City of Saint John
8th Floor, 15 Market Square
Saint John, NB
Attn: Ma.yor Norm McFarlane and
Members of Common Council
Dear SirsIMadams:
Re: Drury Cove Developments - Captain's Quarters Condominjums
OUT File: 6355-30
We represent Drury Cove Developments Inc., and Captain's Quarters
Condominiums- We have been working with Leo Guy Leblanc, Director of
Condominium Properties for the Province of New Brunswick, and Maureen Mills,
Corporate Council for Service New Brunswick, with the objective of registering
an amendment to the Condominium Declarations for Captain's Quarters
Condominiums prior to year end_ If the amendments are not filed prior to the year
end it will in effect cost our clients tens of thousands of dollars. The amendment
is very minor, it simply changes the outside dimensions of the condo units, it
formerly read "...exterior surface of the gypsum board", it now reads "...the face
of the studs in the walls". This has no effect whatsoever on the City of Saint
John's interest in the property. Documentation is being signed in South Africa
and various places throughout New Brunswick and in Nova Scotia and we will be
in a position to have the documentation registered, however, as we understand this
cannot be signed by the City of Saint John without going to Council prior to the
Mayor and Common Clerk's signing. Given the extraordinary efforts made by a
number of individuals in the Province of New Bnmswick and our client's, we
cannot overstress the importance of having this dealt with at tonight's Council
meeting- Essentially, the only rea,>on the City has to sign is because they are an
encumbrance holder, holding an easement across the property which our clients
granted to the City to allow access for a trail as well the City holds a standard
municipal services easement. "While we appreciate this is a busy time for the City,
it has direct significant financial implications to our clients and it is a matter that
Saint John' MOllcton
DEe-18-06 03:32PM FROM-BARRY SPALDING
d Barry,
p S~~~E:g
+5066334206
T-055 P.002/002 F-935
Page 2
really should have very, very Ininirnal discussion- We tmst you can see the
necessity of having this maner dealt with expeditiously.
Yours very truly,
-'
LAWSON
LAWYERS
Correspondence
POBox 6787, Station A
Saint John NB E2L 4S2
NATHALIE L. GODBOUT
PARTNER
Phone (506) 633-3737
Fax (506) 633-0465
Direct (506) 633-3505
ngodbout@lawsoncreamer.com
Suite 801, Harbour Building
133 Prince William Street
Saint John NB E2L 2B5
info@lawsoncreamer.com
VIA FAX: (5061 632-6120
December 18,2006
Mayor Norm McFarlane
CITY HALL
15 Market Square
P.O. Box 1971
Saint John, NB E2L 4L 1
Mayor McFarlane:
RE: Lelnster Court Project - Common Council December 18, 2006
Our File Number: 2820-006
This evening, Common Council will consider an application for a special zone
applicable to the Leinster Court Project, a four-storey apartment complex to be
located at 53-75 Leinster Street in Saint John, N.B.
Our firm acts on behalf of a group of concerned citizens who are residents or
owners of property in and around the neighbourhood of Leinster Court. We write to
make our written representations to you in advance of tonight's meeting, with the
hope of facilitating the discussion and narrowing the issues.
The Leinster Court Project is a $2.6 million "demonstration development"
intended to provide quality housing options to people of all income levels, including
subsidized units for lower-income housing. In that regard, the Leinster Court Project is
an important project, and is certainly supported by our clients, as well as virtually all of
the residents in the surrounding neighbourhood.
Leinster Court is to be built on a vacant lot at 53-75 Leinster Street. This lot is
surrounded by a number of older homes. Many of our clients own or reside in
properties that abut the lot earmarked for Leinster Court.
Throughout this process, our clients have sought simply to ensure that the
heritage quality of the neighbourhood is maintained, and that the Project IS
constructed and designed in such a fashion that "fits" with surrounding homes.
2
Mayor Norm Mcfarlane
CITY HALL
December 4, 2006
In fact, the discussions between the Developer and the neighbourhood have
significantly improved the design of the Project. Everyone involved should be
commended for this. The Project has benefited from:
~ Mansard-style roof
~ Dormer/gabled windows
~ roof line reduced by 3 feet
~ exterior treatments consistent with heritage neighbourhood
A STAB AT A SOLUTION
While some cosmetic changes have been made to the Leinster Court plans to
accommodate the heritage look of the neighbourhood, one more significant change
needs to be made to sustain the community's unique heritage character.
The applicable Municipal Plan (Medium Density Residential) provides that, while
"it is desirable to have a relatively high density residential concentration
situated as close as possible to the uptown, such a focus should recognize
and preserve the unique heritaQe character of the older central part of
the city... redevelopment for residential uses in the Central Peninsula will
be limited in extent and confined to those locations where it can be
designed in a manner which is compatible with the character, scale,
density, and Quality of existino residential development."
With this in mind, our clients consulted with a highly-skilled and qualified
Municipal Planner, Dr. Robert Shipley, to obtain his comments on the designs
submitted for the Leinster Court Project. Dr. Shipley specializes in the economics of
heritage, heritage tourism (a treasure in Saint John), and the property values of historic
buildings. He is perfectly suited to provide some expert advice in this instance.
While Dr. Shipley was of the view that the current proposal was inappropriate for
the site and surrounding area, he made some constructive comments on how to best
incorporate the Project into the neighbourhood while preserving its historic character.
A number of his recommendations have been adopted by the Developer, with the
exception of the following.
Dr. Shipley recommends - and we are requesting - that the building be
repositioned to the edge of the street in order that it duplicate and align with the urban
3
Mayor Norm McFarlane
CITY HALL
December 4, 2006
pattern in the area (buildings on King and Leisnter Streets sit almost directly on the
street without setbacks).
The rationale behind this recommendation is addressed in Dr. Shipley's reports
dated December 11th (as presented to PAC) and December 18th (received today).
He has reviewed all the existing plans, the last set provided to him by the Developer,
Saint John Non-Profit Housing.
In his latest report, Dr. Shipley speaks to the location of the building on the
property and the proposed set-back contemplated by the Developer. He says,
One of the thinas I noticed immediately in the new plan was the set back
from Kino street and the proiecting winos. These same features are
present in the original design and I had expected in reconsidering the
layout of the building, the developer might have reconsidered these
aspects.. .
... "Urban spaces should be framed by architecture and landscape
desion that celebrate local history, climate, ecolooy, and buildino
practice". In other words, while not necessarily imitating older buildings
we should draw our design inspiration from what has "worked" in our own
communities in the past. What one sees on Kino and Leinster Street
neiahbourhood is buildinas which all sit almost directly on the street
without setbacks. This is the urban pattern in this area of Saint John and
has served well. So, in my opinion, the proposed buildina could be
moved forward to address the street in a oenuine/y urban way like its
neiohbours.
What is the cost of this proposed change to the plan for Leinster Street? Not as
much as one might expect. Indeed, although the construction phase has already
begun on this project (despite a pending appeal on the zoning variances), what has
been done so far can be revised with some modest cost and an actual improvement
to the Proiect itself.
Please find enclosed a brief report from Johnson Engineered Solutions Limited
dated December 16th, 2006. It suggests the following could be accomplished with
little disruption to existing work done:
~ flip the building from back to front, place it as close to the street as the
existing front foundation wall;
4
Mayor Norm McFarlane
CITY HALL
December 4, 2006
~ extend the underground parking level to include the revised footprint of
the building, thereby creatina additional storaae spaces (as the actual
storage area in the current plan is very small for a 52 unit building);
~ extend the roof for the parking garage and storage space.
Cost of this redesign is estimated to be $75,000.00-$90,000.00 (including design changes
by consultants and construction costs). This is reasonable, and certainly not outside
the scope of a $2.6 million dollar project.
FORMAL OBJECTIONS BY OUR CLIENTS
We would be remiss if we failed to document our clients' formal objections to
this application for a Special Zone for the Leinster Court Project. This re-zoning
application should be denied for the following reasons:
1) Size of the building
The Leinster Court Project will sit 56.84 feet tall, as compared to neighbouring
residential properties in the range of 25 to 35 feet tall.
The land in question consists of 2,770 square meters, while the zoning by-laws
require a minimum lots size of 6,540 square meters. Despite this, the Project was
granted a variance of the zoning by-law to allow construction to proceed, for a
building that will essentially be 236% larger than standard, with insufficient
surrounding parking space, and exceeding occupancy rates for such a small
parcel of land.
2) Right of Appeal
The Leinster Court Project was granted a variance of an existing by-law for the
lot in question, to allow construction to proceed. This variance is the subject of an
appeal to the Assessment Planning Appeal Board.
It is also noteworthy that this application for a special zone is essentially the
same as the variances sought previously. Common Council is being asked to
decide the same matter twice.
This application for a "special zone" is redundant, as all variances requested
have been granted. The Applicant stipulates that the special zone is required in
order to "address unique issues surrounding the development" and to "provide
5
December 4, 2006
Mayor Norm McFarlane
CITY HALL
surety on this matter". In essence, this application for a special zone is simply a
mechanism to side-step a pending appeal on the previous zoning variance. If this
is allowed to proceed, all the work done in the previous application will be lost.
We thank you for receiving these comments and appreciate your time and
consideration of this matter.
Yours very truly,
LAWSON & CREAMER
~M~
Nathalie L. Godbout
NLG/cc
cc: Members of Common Council
l\~
f
Johnson Engineered Solutions Limited
323 Mapl6 Row. Saint John, NB E2M 2A4
Telephone (506) 635~4996 Fax (506) 672-5185
E-Mail 6olution@nlmet.nb.ca
December 16, 2006
~
Via Fax 633-0465
I
Mr. Mel Norton
Lawson & Creamer
PO Box 6787. Station A
Saint John. NB E2l4S2
Re: Leinster Court
Dear Sir:
I have reviewed the construction progress on site as well as the outline plans
that you provided for my review. Your heritage consultant has proposed
modifying the structural fonn to move the centre of the building as close to the
street as the east and west wings to provide a unifonn setback similar to the
buildings on Germain Street.
The project is currently partly constructed with the excavation nearly complete,
more than 50% of the footings installed and about 25% of the foundation walls in
place. In order to achieve the heritage consultant's concept. I suggest that a
reasonable approach would be to
1 . flip the building above the parking level from back to front and
place it as close to the street as the existing front foundation wall
2. extend the parking level to encompass the revised footprint of the
building. The areas created on the parking level could become
additional storage spaces.
engineer!? and management con6ultants building brid~es between the pre6ent and the fut.ure
Mel Norton
Re: Leinster Court
December 16, 2006
Page 2 of 2
1. cost of providing an additional :I: 2600 square feet of storage space
2. changes to the design of the roof of the parking structure to
accommodate a revised layout fro the building
3. additional architectural and engineering fees for redesign
The cost of creating the additional storage space in the centre of the building
should be relatively small as three ofthe walls are in the current plans. In
addition to the additional storage space in the centre of the basement, the
storage space on the east side of the structure would need to be enlarged. On
the east side a door would have to be cut into the foundation wall or a modified
foundation system provided where the foundation wall has already been
completed. On the west side of the building the additional storage space could
be easily provided as these walls have not been started.
The additional storage spaces require only a low level of finish. The space
would be useful as the actual area of the proposed storage rooms is very small
for a 52 unit building. Costs in the range of $50,000 to $70,000 should provide
the additional space with littte modification to constructed elements already
installed on the site.
The changes in the design of the roof of the parking garage would appear to be
significant but would not necessarily be very expensive. An allowance of
$10,000 would be reasonable cost to account for changes in this part of the
structure.
Finally, the consultant team would want additional fees to make these changes.
As the major changes have been discussed above and the upper part of the
structure could essentially be flipped front to back, the cost of these design
changes should be modest, probably in the order of $15,000.
If I can be of further assistance, please call.
engineers and management consultants building bridge!> between the present and the future
C\}
r"
Robert Shipley - PhD, MCIP, RPP
2 Ellen Street East
Kitchener, Ontario, N2H 1L4
December 18, 2006
Mr. Mel Norton
Lawson & Creamer
Suite 801
133 Prince William St.
Saint John, New Brunswick, E21 2B5
Dear Me!:
Re: Leinster Court Project 53-57 Leinster Street, Saint John, NB
The following are statements that I hope address your questions.
I) Confirm that I have seen the information provided by Mr. Lawrence...
On December 15,2006 I received a communication from Mr. Lawrence of de Stecher
Appraisals Ltd. which included a "new" set of drawings and plans for the subject building. I
have been able to review these plans.
2) Confirm that I have been to Saint John in the past and to the Leinster Street! King
Street East area. . .
I have visited Saint John on many occasions in the past and at one time, while
considering an offer to work at the Shipyard, I viewed one of the houses on King Street
with a real estate agent. In the event I did not take the job or buy the house but I am
familiar with the area.
3) Provide us with your comments about whether moving the building closer to the
sidewalk would be beneficial in terms of creating a development more in keeping with
the existing buildings. . .
One of the things that I noticed immediately in the new plan was the set back from King
Street and the projecting wings. These same features are present in the original design
and I had expected in reconsidering the layout of the building the developer might have
reconsidered these aspects. I am a strong proponent of what is called "New Urbanism," a
movement officially begun in 1993 by architects such as Peter Katz, Elizabeth Plater-
Zyberk, Andres Duany Peter Calthorpe and others. Although originating in America this
approach to architecture and urban design is now embraced in many places and was
recently the subject of an address given in Toronto by Mr. Hank Dittmar, Chief Executive
of the UK based Prince rif Wales Foundation for the Built Environment.
One of the central statements of the Charter rifNew Urbanism is that "urban places should be
framed by architecture and landscape design that celebrate local history, climate, ecology,
and building practice." In other words, while not necessarily imitating older buildings we
should draw our design inspiration from what has "worked" in our own communities in
the past. What one sees in the King and Leinster Street neighbourhood is buildings which
all sit almost directly on the street without setbacks. That is the urban pattern in this area
of Saint John and has served well. So, in my opinion the proposed building could be
moves forward to address the street in a genuinely urban way like its neighbours.
4) Advise/ re-confirm why, if at all, that would be beneficial to Saint John...
I believe such a design treatment would set a good precedent and further allow the design
of this building to lead the way in contributing to development that is sensitive to and
supportive of Saint John's heritage character.
Yours Sincerely
Robert Shipley